tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1189937177878540494.post6579908136214576075..comments2023-05-12T06:35:04.507-07:00Comments on Amen to Joy: Prenatal HumanityUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1189937177878540494.post-17365009948196633702011-03-07T12:19:10.871-08:002011-03-07T12:19:10.871-08:00I enjoyed Emily Jane Lemole's essay. Summed th...I enjoyed Emily Jane Lemole's essay. Summed the whole thing up well.<br />In the words of her wise Uncle George: "This is not my view," he said, handing it to me. "But it may be what you are looking for." Generous Uncle George.<br /><br />This is one of those times it's fine to think backwards - to draw a conclusion first and then develop a line of reasoning backward to Swedenborg. After all, it was Sw who encouraged us to have minds flexible enough to read a Bible from two different frameworks. Reasoning is the slave of truth and not vice versa. And as Rose implies in an article above Lemole's (REFLECTIONS ON THE DIVINE PROVIDENCE), we are each working with a slightly different truth:<br /> "People are allowed to go deeply into the true things of faith and the good things of charity only to the extent that they can be kept in them until the end of their lives" (DP 221).<br /><br />And, Glenn, it's so wonderful that that couple went on to have twins!Suenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1189937177878540494.post-67366077478192408202011-03-06T21:15:50.769-08:002011-03-06T21:15:50.769-08:00Dear Glenn
You mention:
If this is the case, th...Dear Glenn<br /><br />You mention:<br /><br /><i> If this is the case, then I have to say that it was possibly misleading to express a disagreement with a statement, by the New Church clergy, about fetuses, persons, souls and/or spirits when the (so-called) counter position really hasn't anything to do with them. </i><br /><br />The alternate position did have to do with fetuses, <i>essences</i>, <i>potential</i> persons, <i>potential</i> souls, <i>potential</i> spirits. My attempt was to show that this position, which I espouse, is not counter-Swedenborgian. In layman's terms, it posits that the baby that died in the womb will be born into the physical universe and will have the same chance as the rest of us to choose heaven or hell.<br /><br />Thanks for posting the links! I am going to read the material carefully.<br /><br />Best regards, RogerRoger Keithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18048294908244148929noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1189937177878540494.post-32417597167382414512011-03-06T19:45:20.381-08:002011-03-06T19:45:20.381-08:00The promised links. For each link, once the page l...The promised links. For each link, once the page loads, edit/find can be used to locate the specific article.<br /><br /><a href="http://heavenlydoctrines.org/New%20Church%20Life/1990_HTML.htm" rel="nofollow">Eternal Life Of The Embryo</a><br />Rev. B. David Holm<br />New Church Life 1990<br /><br />Excerpt: <i>It might also be good to add in the beginning that, while this point of doctrine here considered is regarded as most interesting, still it is not considered as vital. But this does not take away from the fact that it is felt that the conclusions here drawn from the teachings of the Writings are accurate. For while it is true that nowhere in the Writings is there a plain statement saying that the embryo or foetus which miscarries or is stillborn does enjoy eternal life, still it is felt that this is strongly implied in many passages which, when considered together, give confirmation to the conclusions drawn.</i><br /><br /><br /><a href="http://heavenlydoctrines.org/New%20Church%20Life/2000_HTML.htm" rel="nofollow">Fate Of The Unborn</a><br />Emily Jane A. Lemole<br />New Church Life 2000<br /><br />Excerpt 1: <i>In [an] article which asks about the fate of the unborn, Rev. Erik Sandstrom, Sr. replies: "Not only is this a delicate question, but also it is one where it cannot be said that the Word--in any of its three forms--gives a direct and unequivocal answer. We should nevertheless 'search the Scriptures.' Men and women have come to different conclusions, and our ministers have come to different conclusions[.]"</i><br /><br />Excerpt 2: <i>There is a commonly held belief in the New Church regarding the fate of the unborn. Without a breath taken to ground it to the natural world, the unborn forfeits, or does not gain, spiritual life. The pre-born is not human until this stage is reached. So if by accident or design the breath is not taken, this unborn or pre-born entity, either at conception or stillborn, goes to nothing. This is the concept I learned in elementary school, high school and college. Later, however, I discovered that there are different views and various interpretations drawn from the Writings that do not conclude that the embryo/fetus has no spiritual life or eternal home. My dear wise Uncle George de Charms patiently answered my questions on this subject for the hundredth time, walked into his library and took a book down from the shelf. He put into my hand a slim green volume entitled The Soul and Its Representatives by Dr. Eldred Iungerich. "This is not my view," he said, handing it to me. "But it may be what you are looking for."</i>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1189937177878540494.post-89484950305023188942011-03-06T19:42:44.065-08:002011-03-06T19:42:44.065-08:00Roger,
It has been acknowledged that it has been ...Roger,<br /><br />It has been acknowledged that it has been shown that the New Church clergy view is not inconsistent with Swedenborg's writings. I hope it is also to be acknowledged (in spirit; no words are needed) that, "What [was] not going on [was] an attempt to say that Roger's alternative position is wrong, incorrect or invalid."<br /><br />One sister-in-law had a miscarriage many years ago. Though she was distraught, my brother was inconsolable--to the point that some of us were alarmed. I asked him if he believed that Daniel, as he was to be named, was in heaven. He said that he did. I then said, "Well, if he's in heaven, then he's with God. And he got there before we did--assuming either of us will be going there. Why not be happy for him that he's with God?" He wasn't ready, however, to be anything but inconsolable. (They since have had twins, a boy and a girl.)<br /><br />I posed the questions that I did because I was hoping that responses to them might better enlighten me as to what it is that you have been saying. I'm not sure I'm quite there yet, though it seems that it isn't really a fetus that is being talked about, nor a person, soul or spirit, but something that belongs to God or the Lord, and through which it is that fetuses, persons, souls and/or spirits come into being.<br /><br />If this is the case, then I have to say that it was possibly misleading to express a disagreement with a statement, by the New Church clergy, about fetuses, persons, souls and/or spirits when the (so-called) counter position really hasn't anything to do with them.<br /><br />Whatever the case may be, I made an attempt to find out just what this teaching is that the New Church clergy is said to hold to, and I discovered two things.<br /><br />The first thing I found, which isn't likely to be of much interest to you, is that the thread I was following wasn't too far off the mark.<br /><br />And the second thing I find is that individual members of the clergy are not unanimous in their stance on the point in question.<br /><br />Below are links to two articles that may be of interest to you. In fact, I can well imagine that you'll find much therein to agree with.<br /><br />The articles are from a publication of the New Church, and that you'll find in these articles support for you position goes a long way, I would think, towards breathing easier in regard to the New Church's tolerance for diverse opinions.<br /><br />Though I wasn't planning on saying anything more--in fact, I had planned on not saying anything more--I thought it inappropriate not to share what was found.<br /><br />Glenn<br /><br />o <i>That which can thus be conjoined to the Divine, can never die, for the Divine is with it, and conjoins it to Himself.</i> LJ 25<br /><br />(cont.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com