4857. EBB to Euphrasia Fanny Haworth
As published in The Brownings’ Correspondence, 29, 42–46.
Rome– 126 Via Felice
Saturday [27 March 1861] [1]
Ah dearest Fanny, I cant rest without telling you that I am sorry at your receiving such an impression from my letter. [2] May God save me from such a sin as arrogance. I have not generally a temptation to it, through knowing too well what I am myself– At the same time, I do not dispute my belief in what you have so often confessed .. that you dont hold your attainments & opinions sufficiently “irrespectively of persons”– Believing which of you, I said .. “under what new influence”.? —And if I said anything with too much vivacity, forgive me with that sweetness of nature which is at least as characteristic of you as the intellectual impressionability– Really I would not wound you for the world—but I myself perhaps may have been over-excitable, irritable just then .. who knows? .. and, in fact, I was considerably vexed at the moment that from anything said by me, you should infer what was so injurious & unjust to a woman like Mrs Stowe. I named her in this relation because she struck me as a remarkable example of the compatibility of freedom of thought with reverence of sentiment. You generally get one or the other,—the one excluding the other. I never considered her a deep thinker—but singularly large & unshackled considering the associations of her life, she certainly is– When I hinted at her stepping beyond Swedenborg in certain of her ideas, I referred to her belief that the process called “regeneration” may commence in certain cases beyond the grave [3] .. and in her leaning to universal salvation views, which you dont get at through Swedenborg–
For the rest, I dont think, if you will allow of my saying so, that you apprehend Swedenborg’s meaning very accurately always. If Swedenborg saw sin & danger in certain communications for instance, why did he consider it privilege on his own part to live in the world of spirits as he did. True, he spoke of “danger”—but it was to those who, themselves weak & unclean, did not hold “by the Lord”– He distinctly said that in the first unfallen churches, there was incessant communion, & that the “New church,” as it grew, would approximate more & more to that earlier condition. There is a distinct prospect given in Swedenborg of an increasing aptitude in the bodies & souls of men towards communication with the Disembodied. I consider that he forsaw not only what we are seeing (if these manifestations be veritable) but greater & more frequent phenomena of the same class—which does not in any way, exclude considerable danger to some persons in the meanwhile. And do you think I doubt that? No indeed. Unsettled minds, especially when under affliction, will lose their balance at moments—there is danger. It is not the occasion for passion & fanaticism of sentiment .. but for calm & reasonable enquiry into facts. Let us establish the facts first, and then “try the spirits” [4] as the apostle directs—afterwards remains the difficulty of assuring oneself of the personalities. I dont think you should complain of the subject being unsatisfactory to you, because you dont get “a sublime communication,” or a characteristic evidence of some spirit known to you– Much less would satisfy me– But it seemed to me that the consideration of the subject disturbed you, made you uncomfortable, & that you didnt approach any conclusion—& with that impression & not because of “contempt,” be sure, I advised you to let it rest– [5] Why should we beat our heads against an obstacle which we cant walk through? Then your liability to influence is against you here as much, as your attraction towards such high speculation, is in your favour. You have an “open mind,” yes—but you leave all the doors open .. & you let people come in every now & then, & lock them, & keep them locked as long as said people stand by– The teachings of spiritualism are much like the teachings in the world– There are excellent things taught, and iniquitous things taught. Only the sublime communications are, as far as I know, decidedly absent– Swedenborg directs you to give no more weight to what is said by a spirit-man than by a man in the body—& there’s room for the instruction– ‘Heralds of Progress’ on one side, ‘Heralds of Light’ [6] on the other, if a right thing is said, “judge ye”– [7] If infidels are here, there are devout, yes, & very orthodox Christians there.
I beg to say that when I speak of “old cerements” [8] being put off, I pre-suppose a living body in resurrection. Also I dont call marriage, for instance, an old cerement– We must distinguish– With regard to the common notion of a “hell”, as you ask me, I dont believe in it. I dont believe in any such thing as arbitrary reward or punishment, but in consequences & logical results. That seems to me God’s way of working. The scriptural phrases are simply symbolical, it seems to me—& Swedenborg helps you past the symbol. Then as to the redemption & its mode——let us receive the thing simply– Dr Adam Clarke [9] whose piety was never doubted, used to say, “Vicarious suffering is vicarious nonsense–” Which does not hinder the fact that the suffering of the Lord was necessary, in order that we should not suffer, & that through his work & incarnation, His worlds recovered the possibility of good– It comes to the same thing. The manner in which preachers analyze the Infinite, pass the Divine through a sieve .. has ceased to be endurable to thinking men– You speak of Luther. We all speak of Luther. Did you ever read any of his theological treatises? He was a schoolman of the most scholastic sect,—most offensive, most absurd, .. presenting my idea of “old cerements” to the uttermost. We are entering on a Reformation far more interior than Luther’s,—& the misfortune is, that if we dont enter, we must drop under the lintel. Do you hear of the storms in England about Essays & Reviews? [10] I have seen the book simply by reviews, in abstract & extract. I should agree with the writers in certain things, but certainly not in all. I have no sort of sympathy with what is called ‘rationalism’ .. which is positivism in a form. The vulgar idea of miracles being put into solution, leaves you with the higher law and spiritual causation,—which the rationalists deny, & which you & I hold faithfully. But whatever one holds, free discussion has become necessary. That it is full of danger,—that in consequence of it, many minds will fall into infidelity, doubt, & despair, is certain,—but through this mortal crisis men must pass, or the end will be worse still. That’s my belief– I have seen it coming for years back–
“The hungry flock looks up & is not fed” [11] except with chopped hay of the schools– Go into any church in England, or out of England, and you hear men preaching “in patterns,” walking gingerly, lest a speck of natural moisture touch a stocking,—seeking what’s “sound,” not what’s “true”. Now if only on theology, they must not think, there will be soon a close for theologians– Educated men disbelieve to a degree quite unsuspected– That, I know of knowledge.
No—Swedenborg does not hold the existence of devils in the ordinary meaning. Spiritual temptation comes, he says, through disembodied corrupt spirits, out of this or other earths. The word Satan, remember, he conceives to represent a company of such evil spirits. [12]
Now in what spirit have I written all this? Gently this time, I do hope. If you knew in what an agonized state of humiliation I am sometimes, you would not suspect me of “despising” you? Oh no, indeed. But I am much in earnest & cant “prophecy smooth things” [13] at moments of strong conviction– Who can?
Indeed, indeed, yes– I am very anxious about what passes in Paris. Do you know that Keller’s infamous discourse [14] was corrected by Guizot’s own hand? Mr Pentland (who was with the P. of Wales) knows G., & this. He (P) has just come from Paris. He knows the sommités [15] there, & considers that, though there is danger, yet on the whole the Emperor dominates the situation. Prince N’s speech, in its general outline, was submitted to the E. & had his full sympathy, Persigny said to P. or in his presence. Let no one ever speak ill of Prince N. before me! I read all the 17 columns in the Moniteur, & most magnificent was the discourse. Rome is greatly excited, but hopeful. There may be delay however.
Surely you dont think the large head of Robert bad. Why it is exquisite. Then the two third other [16] —not the smiling one. If you dont like
<…> [17]
I cant read over—& send this scratch that you may pardon me before you go (not to lose the post).
Sarianna says that Squires carries about his own table. In which case, I give him up. Dont you write. [18]
Address: À Mademoiselle / Mlle Fanny Haworth / 49 Avenue Montaigne / Paris.
Publication: LEBB, II, 424–428 (in part, as [ca. January 1861]).
Manuscript: Fitzwilliam Museum.
1. Dating based on a Marseille postmark of 1 April 1861 and EBB’s reference in the third to last paragraph to Joseph Pentland’s recent arrival from Paris. She makes the same reference to him in letter 4854.
3. Swedenborg on regeneration: “There is no determinate period of man’s regeneration in which he may say, I am now perfect; for there are states of evil and of the false in man without end … those, however, who are regenerated in the life of the body, and who have lived in faith towards the Lord and in charity towards their neighbor, are continually being perfected in the other life” (The Heavenly Arcana, New York, 1892, I, section 894, p. 335).
4. I John 4:1.
5. See the fourth paragraph in letter 4839.
6. The Herald of Light (1857–61), a monthly journal associated with the New Church, was founded in New York by Thomas Lake Harris (see letter 3823, note 3). Herald of Progress (1860–64) was a spiritualist newspaper, also published in New York.
7. Cf. Matthew 7:1–2.
8. See the second paragraph in letter 4822.
9. Adam Clarke (1762–1832); see letter 316, note 3.
11. Cf. Ezekiel 34:2–3.
12. In A Treatise Concerning Heaven and Hell (Baltimore, 1812), Swedenborg writes: “The whole of Hell taken collectively, or in its complex, is called the Devil and Satan, as well that Hell which is behind, in which are the evil genii called the Devil, as that Hell which appears in front, in which are the evil spirits called Satan” (section 311, pp. 250–251).
13. Cf. Isaiah 30:10.
15. “Leading lights.”
17. The conclusion, except the following that appears in the margin of the first page, is missing.
18. i.e., attempt automatic writing.
___________________
