![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Wrestling with Swedenborg (again)
Feb. 26th, 2004 10:57 amI have the feeling this is going to be a continuing series. . .
( Two Paragraphs of Background Regular Readers Can Skip )
What I'm finding is this: most of what I love about Swedenborg's theology - the bottom-line implications, even if the method of getting there differs - can be found in other theologians. Karl Rahner is my favorite example. He's very Swedenborgian (although I don't think he ever read Swedenborg.) Most of what makes me twitchy about Swedenborg is unique to him. I'm still not sold on the Swedenborgian ideas about redemption, for example.
This is going to be an important semester for me, as I engage in my first formal study of Swedenborgian exegesis, which is all about the hidden correspondences in much (but not all of) the Bible. This method fits into his wider cosmology, and makes perfect sense within his system. There's a lot that I like about his cosmology, but my scepticism kicks in at the intricate, painful detail he goes into. If someone is willing to believe that he had detailed visionary experiences in which these things were revealed to him, it all works. But I haven't been able to take that plunge.
Maybe. . . (and I'm just coming to this as I write) the sticking point for me is that after my personal spiritual experiences I am simply unwilling to base my faith, in such detail, on the specific "revelation" of another human being. Swedenborg bases everything on what has been revealed to him by angels. It's a huge and intricate system, and one that has a great deal of beauty to it. To pick and choose between parts of it sets up intellectual tensions that I find distasteful: I'll accept his authority on matter A, where I agree with him, but not in B, where I think he's wrong. That's possible with other spiritual writers, who do not claim divine authority, but it doesn't work within the Swedenborgian system. Not as I see it, anyway.
Maybe I'll find that it does all work in a satisfying way once I've gone deep enough. Swedenborg wrote a lot, and it takes a lot of effort to read deeply and widely enough to get the whole picture. But this issue of individual authority may be one that transcends what I ultimately come to think about his theological system.
There is much more pondering to do here. . .
( Two Paragraphs of Background Regular Readers Can Skip )
What I'm finding is this: most of what I love about Swedenborg's theology - the bottom-line implications, even if the method of getting there differs - can be found in other theologians. Karl Rahner is my favorite example. He's very Swedenborgian (although I don't think he ever read Swedenborg.) Most of what makes me twitchy about Swedenborg is unique to him. I'm still not sold on the Swedenborgian ideas about redemption, for example.
This is going to be an important semester for me, as I engage in my first formal study of Swedenborgian exegesis, which is all about the hidden correspondences in much (but not all of) the Bible. This method fits into his wider cosmology, and makes perfect sense within his system. There's a lot that I like about his cosmology, but my scepticism kicks in at the intricate, painful detail he goes into. If someone is willing to believe that he had detailed visionary experiences in which these things were revealed to him, it all works. But I haven't been able to take that plunge.
Maybe. . . (and I'm just coming to this as I write) the sticking point for me is that after my personal spiritual experiences I am simply unwilling to base my faith, in such detail, on the specific "revelation" of another human being. Swedenborg bases everything on what has been revealed to him by angels. It's a huge and intricate system, and one that has a great deal of beauty to it. To pick and choose between parts of it sets up intellectual tensions that I find distasteful: I'll accept his authority on matter A, where I agree with him, but not in B, where I think he's wrong. That's possible with other spiritual writers, who do not claim divine authority, but it doesn't work within the Swedenborgian system. Not as I see it, anyway.
Maybe I'll find that it does all work in a satisfying way once I've gone deep enough. Swedenborg wrote a lot, and it takes a lot of effort to read deeply and widely enough to get the whole picture. But this issue of individual authority may be one that transcends what I ultimately come to think about his theological system.
There is much more pondering to do here. . .
