The Heavenly Role of Men and Women in Marriage, Church, and Society
August 12, 2023
Dreams often inspire me to write articles. One night, around Christmas of 2021, I heard this spoken to me in a dream which inspired me to write an article about it:
“Churches with dedicated ‘dads’ or ‘agents’ end up having problems. It doesn’t work out well.”
The night before hearing this, I’d posed a question in a prayer about the priesthood within the Christian Church as a whole. Prior to asking the question which led to this dream, I’d written another article about the problem of polygamy in the early LDS Church, and I’d asked if there were any other major issues with the LDS Church that I should keep top of mind and that justified my leaving it behind. Although the LDS Church hasn’t practiced polygamy for well over a century, hearing this answer and thinking deeply about it, I understood that what was said about “dedicated ‘dads’ and ‘agents’ end up having problems” is also true for the majority of the “old” Christian Churches, not only including the LDS Church, but also the Catholics, Orthodox, Protestants, Jehovah’s Witnesses, etc. More generally, within what I heard was the idea that any church that holds to a faith-alone teaching is basing their beliefs on a false premise.
The concept that knowledge of doctrine alone will cause salvation for a person, including the idea that achieving salvation requires being affiliated with a specific group or performing certain rituals because of the assumed authority of their male leadership, even if the doctrine of that group isn’t put into practice in a person’s life, is false. And this is, fundamentally, what “doesn’t work out well.” This idea that faith alone leads to salvation is clearly wrong, and contemplating it in this context opened up a new line of thinking for me which I have been expanding upon for the last year and a half as I’ve read through the 1200 pages of the book, Apocalypse Revealed, by Emanuel Swedenborg.
During much of that time, I’m been working to piece together what is and isn’t true about the role of men and women in marriages, churches, and society. The reason is because I know this is a major talking point and a central question in both Christian and secular debate today; and many churches, I now believe, have not been coming to very clear and satisfactory conclusions. The world is going through a metaphorical apocalypse of moral decline surrounding the issue of gender roles and increasing numbers of people are leaving churches and abandoning faith in their organizations, realizing that the old Christian Church doesn’t have very many of the answers that they need.
In my exhaustive study, I’ve come to some solid solutions and explanations based on New Church doctrine and I now want to share my findings with you.
What do I mean by “the church”?
In order that this article doesn’t become too esoteric, it’s important that you understand the context presented here, as well as throughout Swedenborg’s writings and throughout the Word, about the inner meaning of the phrase, “the church.” In its symbolic, inner meaning, “the church” signifies unity between the male and female forces within God. There are actually three levels of symbolic meaning within the Bible: The Literal, The Spiritual, and the Heavenly.
Literal meaning: A church building or religion.
Spiritual meaning: People united in ideas and worship under the same doctrine, regardless of religion.
Heavenly meaning: The unity of love and wisdom within the Lord and within ourselves when we’re united to him.
Goodness and truth, also known as love and wisdom, are the fundamental elements of God.
These male and female forces that are united within God, are known as “goodness” and “truth,” or “love” and “wisdom.” Men are inward forms of love (their heart and soul) and outward forms of wisdom (their body and mind), whereas women are inward forms of wisdom (their heart and soul) and outward forms of love (their body and mind).
By “goodness” we mean that which has an intrinsic usefulness according to form, and by “truth” we mean that which has intrinsic usefulness according to function. The fruit is what is good, but the way in which the tree is planted and grows is what is true — the tree representing a person, not faith itself. Faith, or truth, is merely the method and understanding by which the person acts.
There are always exceptions to these examples, but returning to the general comparison to men and women, women have external forms of goodness that men don’t have (such as the ability to bear children with their reproductive organs) and men have external forms of truth that women don’t have (such as the ability to conceive children with the information contained in their DNA). Additionally, women excel in internal forms of wisdom that men are naturally weaker in, for example, an innate aptitude for social and emotional discernment, and men excel in internal forms of goodness that women are weaker in, for example, an innate aptitude for systematic and rational discernment.
What I just said could trigger sensitive people in the audience, but it is, nonetheless true, remembering that it doesn’t infer that men and women aren’t capable of becoming stronger in both areas with regard to their internal form, which they are, but only with regards to their natural inclination as male or female, which is set from birth and cannot be changed.
These two elements of God, goodness and truth, are like fire and water, passion and understanding, volition and intelligence, and much more. Each person has these two elements within him or herself, to varying degrees, the one or the other being more dominant depending on gender. Additionally, each married couple has these two elements in their marriage. Likewise, so does each community, small to large. So does the whole universe, small to large, from the smallest elements to the largest stars. These elements exist in God’s physical creation, such as the X & Y chromosomes, as well as his spiritual creation, through representations corresponding to all of these things.
So, in the inmost sense, “the church” doesn’t mean a building, or even a group of people; it means a unity of heavenly forces.
When I’m referring to the literal meaning, I’ll use a capitalized proper noun, such as, “The Christian Church,” or “The Catholic Church,” whereas when I’m referring to the spiritual or heavenly symbolic meaning, I’ll simply use, “the church” in context with the surrounding paragraphs.
The Problem with “Dads” and “Agents”
A hat worn by senior Catholic officials called a “miter.”
In The New Jerusalem #316, Swedenborg wrote:
“Priests ought not to claim to themselves any power over the souls of men, because they do not know in what state the interiors of a man are; still less ought they to claim the power of opening and shutting heaven, since that power belongs to the Lord alone.”
Many leaders in the Christian Church movement have claimed this power. Catholics often pray to the Saints with veneration and in search of intersession. The Catholic pope is believed to hold divine authority. There is the belief among Catholics that this authority was passed down directly to the pope via a line of succession from the Lord, then to Peter, and then to each pope in turn.
In a similar way, the LDS prophet is believed to hold divine authority over the people of the LDS Church; except that within the LDS Church, it’s believed that this line of succession was lost and then restored in the 19th century, during a time when they believe Jesus returned to the earth and visited Joseph Smith.
As quoted before, Doctrine and Covenants 132, 45 - 46 states:
“For I have conferred upon you the keys and power of the priesthood, wherein I restore all things, and make known unto you all things in due time.
And verily, verily, I say unto you, that whatsoever you seal on earth shall be sealed in heaven; and whatsoever you bind on earth, in my name and by my word, saith the Lord, it shall be eternally bound in the heavens; and whosoever sins you remit on earth shall be remitted eternally in the heavens; and whosoever sins you retain on earth shall be retained in heaven.”
Other Christian groups have similar ideas.
The idea of them holding this type authority, however, in both cases, is misplaced.
The idea that the Lord passed down keys of divine authority to Peter, which then wound up in the hands of the Catholic pope, as well as the idea that this power could be lost and then restored to someone like Joseph Smith, comes from a misreading of this verse in the New Testament:
And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
Stones represent foundational truth.
The way that the Catholic Church interprets this verse is that “rock” means Peter. They then follow the logic of the verse based on that, thinking that Peter received the keys of authority over the Christian Church. However, there is a fundamental problem with this reading: “rock” never meant Peter as an individual, rather, it meant Divine Truth, as a concept. Divine Truth originates from the Lord and the Lord alone, and because of this, Divine Truth is the Lord; it then follows that the rock referred to in the above Bible verse refers to the Lord, not Peter.
The Lord corrected this misperception by the Old Churches about what “rock” means in Swedenborg’s book on True Christianity:
The Lord said this after Peter had made the admission that Christ was the Son of the living God (Matthew 16:16). It is this truth which is meant in that passage by rock; for a rock throughout the Word means the Lord in respect of Divine Truth.
A church that has divine truths from the Lord has power over the hells. This is the church the Lord was talking about when he said to Peter, "On this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it" (Matthew 16:18). The Lord said these words after Peter proclaimed that Christ was the Son of the living God (Matthew 16:16). The "rock" in this passage means this very truth. In fact, everywhere in the Word a "rock" means the Lord's divine truth.
In other words, the inner meaning of what the Lord said to Peter, could be paraphrased as: “I’ll build the church on the truth you just stated, which in essence, is me and my authority.” Not, “I’ll build this church on your authority.” (True Christianity #342) Over the centuries since, the Catholic Church and others have assumed authority was given by the Lord to their leaders, giving them the power to preside over peoples’ souls, and this false assumption was also made by every one of the other Christian Churches that split apart from the Roman Catholic Church (including the LDS Church, as was discussed in my other article about it).
An important distinction to understand is that authority is given to male priesthood of Christian Churches with regard to ministering and maintaining order, but not with regard to salvation, the forgiveness of sins, or admission into heaven.
Swedenborg wrote
As for priests, their duty is to teach people the way to heaven, and also to guide them. They must teach them in accordance with the teaching their church derives from the Word, and guide them to live in accordance with it. Priests who teach truths and by their means guide people to lead good lives, and so bring them to the Lord, are good shepherds. Those, however, who teach, but do not guide people to lead good lives, and so bring them to the Lord, are bad shepherds.
…Priests must be given status and honors because of their sacred functions. But those of them who are wise ascribe the honors to the Lord from whom what is holy comes, and not to themselves. Priests, however, who are unwise attribute the honors to themselves, and so take them away from the Lord. Those who attribute honours to themselves because of their sacred functions, set honours and gain above the salvation of souls, which should be their care. Those, however, who ascribe honors to the Lord and not to themselves set the salvation of souls above honors and gain. None of the honors attaching to any office depends upon the person, but they are assigned to him in proportion to the level of government he undertakes; and what is assigned does not belong to the person himself, and is taken away when he gives up the office. Personal honours are those of wisdom and the fear of the Lord.
Swedenborg wrote that there is a clear need for ministering and maintaining order. There is a role for civil governance and a role for heavenly administration, but the role for heavenly administration is not intrinsic to the priest himself, but is rather an office he holds, because the value of heavenly authority belongs to the Lord alone.
The result of this misinterpretation about the presumed succession of spiritual power towards priests is that there have been lines of false-succession within each church spanning centuries, by Christian patriarchs, who claim to have additional spiritual authority that only the Lord himself holds. They set themselves up as “dads” and “agents,” that is, spiritual intermediaries, between the people of the church and the Lord himself. When this occurs, they make themselves into presumed gods with the same authority as the Lord. But the reality is that to hold the same authority as the Lord himself is impossible, and to claim such power is destructive to the spiritual components of the Christian church, in its inner sense. Both men and women are merely human: fallible, weak, broken, often selfish, and capable of nothing without the breath of life from God. The only source of true goodness is the Lord himself, and so when men or women set themselves up as equal to the Lord in regard to spiritual and heavenly matters, they don’t spread good into the world as they might imagine, but only their own ambitious evil.
In the article I wrote about Mother Mary, I mentioned that we should never call the pope, “Holy Father,” because only the Lord is our Holy Father. And if we call our preacher our “pastor” we should only do so in the temporal sense, not the eternal sense, because only the Lord is our eternal Pastor. Likewise, we shouldn’t call anyone our, “Founding Father,” in a spiritual sense; neither of our church or our country, because only the Lord alone is the Founding Father of all.
George Washington
In much of world history, kings were assumed to have divine authority over people. A typical example was the Pharaoh of Egypt, who set himself up to be worshiped as if he was God. In each case of this, it was a serious misstep.
The first President of the United States, George Washington, understood this truth. After the United States government was established, some members of the government wanted to give him the title of, “His Highness,” which he refused, instead preferring the simple title of, “Mr. President.” Why? Because even the President of the United States — now the most powerful office in the world — is merely a man, with no authority whatsoever except for what is given to him by the Lord.
In this matter, Washington was an example of a true leader.
The law which is justice ought to be passed by the wise and God-fearing lawyers in the kingdom, and thereafter both the king and his subjects ought to live in accordance with it. A king who lives in accordance with a law that has been passed, and in this sets his subjects an example, is truly king.
What About the Keys that Were Given to Peter?
To hold a key means to hold the truth — the function of a key unlocks a door just as the function of wisdom unlocks love. The idea behind Peter being given the keys of truth was that he was supposed to share the wisdom that the Lord had given him with others, not to act as a spiritual agent between the Lord and his people.
The Lord made this very clear to Peter by repeating to him three times:
“If you love me, feed my sheep.”
It was the Holy Spirit that Peter held within him that would do the binding and loosing, not him as a person.
Swedenborg wrote:
I talked with some Catholics about the keys that were given to Peter, and asked whether they believed that the Lord’s power over heaven and hell was actually transferred to Peter. Since this was a fundamental principle of their religious system, they vehemently insisted on it, saying that there was no doubt whatever about it because Scripture clearly said so. However, when they were asked whether they were aware that there is a spiritual meaning within the details of the Word, which is the meaning that the Word has in heaven, at first they said that they were not aware of this. Later, though, they said that they would look into it; and when they did, they were taught that within the details of the Word there is a spiritual meaning that differs from the literal meaning the way anything spiritual differs from what is earthly. They were also taught that no individual who is mentioned by name in the Word is mentioned by name in heaven, but that instead of the name something spiritual is indicated. Then they were told that “Peter” in the Word means the truth of the church’s faith that teaches good actions done out of caring. “The rock” that is mentioned there in connection with Peter has the same meaning, since it says, “You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church” (Matthew 16:18 and following). This does not mean that power was given to Peter but that power belongs to the truth that serves the doing of good, since all power in the heavens belongs to truth acting on behalf of what is good, or to goodness acting through the agency of truth. Further, since everything good and everything true comes from the Lord and none of it from us, we can see that all power belongs to the Lord.
They became angry when they heard this and said they wanted to know whether there really was a spiritual meaning in these particular words, so the Word as it exists in heaven was given to them. In that form of the Word there is a spiritual meaning but no meaning that is earthly, because it is for angels, who are spiritual beings (on this as the nature of the Word in heaven, see Heaven and Hell 259, 261). When they read this passage in it, they saw very clearly that instead of Peter it mentioned truth from the Lord that teaches the doing of good. When they saw this they angrily rejected that Word. If it had not been taken away at that moment they might very well have shredded it with their teeth. In this way they were convinced — even though they did not want to be convinced — that only the Lord has that power. No human has it at all, because it is a divine power.
Was Swedenborg Any Different?
Swedenborg wrote that in heaven, people don’t form into communities based on traditions but rather do so based on their internal beliefs. In the spirit world, often there are communities with people who come from various different backgrounds and religions. What drew them together in the end was how they lived their life. The way they lived their life determined what they really believed at their deepest core, not merely what they were born to believe or the rituals they were taught to practice.
Swedenborg wrote that his writings were given to him directly from the Lord in a way similar to that of the prophets of the Bible, and in fact often in a way more clearly received, with full visionary sight as well as auditory hearing. And it’s true that Swedenborg was the Lord’s instrument in founding a new church, similar to the claims of other so-called prophets, such as Joseph Smith. The difference, however, is that Swedenborg made it clear that he was not an authority over anyone’s inner life, as Joseph Smith claimed for himself in the above quote from D&C. Only the Lord has that authority. Swedenborg claimed only to be a messenger and that he didn’t hold any special power to the priesthood that extended beyond that.
How Men Can Properly Lead in the Church
With that said, men are supposed to lead in the church. The difference is that they are not allowed to claim authority over the spiritual matters of people’s souls. As priests, they are meant to act as messengers, preaching about the truth they receive from heaven rather than coming up with their own truth. They are also meant to officiate and enforce order in their community and relationships. When this is done correctly, the Lord’s light is able to shine through them, rather than their egos blocking his light. They are supposed to get their egos out of the way and focus only on service and never act out of self-interest for their own advancement, wealth, or reputation. When done correctly, men don’t act as spiritual agents between the people of the church and the Lord. Rather, they act as spiritual servants, whereby they help turn people directly towards the Lord and away from themselves.
With regard to spiritual matters, one is a position of arrogance, and the other, of humility.
The definition of an “agent” is:
A person who acts on behalf of another person or group.
This is not something men in the church should do with regard to people’s souls (nor women, for that matter). It is a role that only the Lord himself holds:
Jesus said unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
Whereas the definition of a “servant” is:
A person who performs duties for others, especially a person employed in a house on domestic duties or as a personal attendant.
This is true in governments as well. When a government official does his job well, he acts as a servant of the people, not as their dictator.
Whosoever shall receive this child in my name receives me: and whosoever shall receive me receives him that sent me: for he that is least among you all, the same shall be great.
Respecting the Role of Men vs Women in the Church
In Conjugial Love #125, Swedenborg wrote:
“The husband does not represent the Lord and his wife the church, because they both together, husband and wife, make up the church. It is generally said in the church that as the Lord is the head of the church, so the husband is the head of the wife. From this it would follow that the husband would represent the Lord and the wife the church. But the Lord is the head of the church, and human beings, male and female, are the church; and even more so in the case of husband and wife. In this case the church is first planted in the man and by means of the man in the wife, because the man receives its truth in his intellect, and the wife receives it from the man. But if it happens the other way round, this is not in good order. However, this does sometimes happen, but only in the case of men who are no lovers of wisdom, and so not part of the church either, or who in servile fashion hang upon their wives' whims.”
In other words, in spiritual matters, the husband is first only in the sense that truth is implanted in his spirit, mind, and body first by the Lord before it is implanted in the wife. He is the first of his household with regard to this order of reception, not of importance. If he blocks the Lord and puts himself in the way, then he is abusing his authority, but if he is in line with the Lord’s wisdom, he is right to be in the lead. Swedenborg wrote, “On this subject generally see the remark in the Preliminaries” where he refers to a story he recounted about a wedding that he attended in the spirit world. During the wedding the groom was clothed in garments that represented the Lord as the head of the church, and the bride was clothed in garments that represented the body of the church. However, an angel explained to him that this representation lasted only during the wedding, and that during the celebrations after the wedding the representation ended because at that point the two had been united as husband and wife, whereby they both together represent the church in submission to the Lord as one unit.
After studying the above subject, as I came to understand it better, I realized that this idea is what I truly believe at my core — that men and women are spiritually equal before the Lord — and so I was glad that scripture didn’t contradict it as it first appeared to me. However, I had some confusion about where Swedenborg wrote, “It is a common saying in the church that as the Lord is the head of the church, so the husband is the head of the wife. If this were true, it would follow that the husband represents the Lord and the wife the church.” In these sentences, Swedenborg was referring to Ephesians 5: 22 - 24, where the Apostle Paul wrote:
Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.
For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the savior of the body.
Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.
And what Paul wrote here also felt correct to me in another sense. It’s an example of a passage in scripture that has led to a lot of debate and that many people no doubt hate and would like to reject from the Biblical canon, thinking it to be sexist, but I believe it to fundamentally true, simply misunderstood.
I asked the Lord about this as well in a prayer — because Paul did technically say that the husband is the head of the wife — and so was Swedenborg contradicting Paul? I received this answer from the voice of a female angel in a dream, who I believe was sent to me by the Lord or one of his messengers:
“It’s the responsibility of the man, that is, the head or the feet.”
The “feet,” Swedenborg wrote, represent physical elements. Think of how the feet are close to the dirt, the grass, and the field. They’re lowly. They involve toil in the dust. At first glance, nobody really wants to be the feet. It's a difficult job. But somebody has got to do it.
…and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:
And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.
The idea that I gleaned from this was that, yes, wives should obey their husbands, and that it’s the responsibly of the husband to be the leader in a marriage, but not because the husband is greater than the wife, rather, because it is the divine order that the church is implanted in the spirit of the husband, first, by the Lord (as Swedenborg explained).
He will regard himself as the highest in rank of those serving others, and not as “the head,” for the head directs all things of its body from love and wisdom in itself; and Love and Wisdom in itself is the only Lord, by whom he, too, as a servant, will be directed.
Additionally, although a wife is commanded by the Lord to submit to her husband, it is up to her to do so willingly, and she must do so from her own volition in order for the church to be whole; never via force, coercion, or manipulation from her husband or anyone else.
Knowing this, why would she choose to submit?
In short, because she was first loved and given the choice, because of the divine design, and because it is her best path to heaven and new life within herself, so long as her husband is living in wisdom from the Lord. Under those conditions, it is a joy and a pleasure and is her pathway to the greatest happiness and fulfillment.
This role the husband is given as the first receiver of truth is, indeed, an honor, but it is an honor that is earned via the toil he endures in order to sustain the life of his wife. It doesn’t make the husband better, it simply makes him different. The husband does carry a special role by having the church implanted first in him, but the wife has the special role of being the carrier of life, both in her body and in her spirit — an enormously important task and a great honor. Neither role is superior, but they do have this order; an order, which, according to the divine design, should never be broken.
As mentioned above, “the church,” is the unity of love and wisdom that takes place within a person (or within a marriage or a community) via the diligent study of the Word which makes heaven work as it does and become heaven as it is. Husbands are both the head and the feet because men correspond with truth in the Lord, who is both the first and the last, the top and the bottom, the greatest and the least. The Lord calls himself the, “alpha and omega,” (Revelation 1: 8), which may sound like a grand title, but keep in mind that “alpha” means first and “omega” means last, because they are the first and last letters in the Greek alphabet.
Notice how I said men symbolize truth in the Lord, not husbands. The word, “husband,” brings with it the understanding of a wife coupled to him, and under that context, the symbolism of the groom representing the Lord himself ends once a new church has been established between both the husband and the wife united together. This is symbolized in a marriage after the wedding ceremony when the bride and groom go alone to consummate the marriage with their physical union.
So that they are no more two, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
At that point a new church is born in both the spirit and the body, which is symbolized through the conception and eventual birth of a child. This is why the Lord is both alpha and omega, because this unity symbolizes unity in him, that is, in his spirit, and his spirit flows through all of creation, all the way from his eternal source, step by step into the lowest forms of physical creation, where a child is conceived and then born into a living soul.
Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ.
But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant.
And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.
As we know from the story of the Lord’s life in the Gospels, he followed his own words, by lowering himself, being ridiculed and crucified, and thereby becoming the least. By becoming the least, he then rose and became the greatest in heaven. One of the reasons we love and respect the Lord so much is because he is not only the highest but also the lowest, because within his suffering, humility, and sacrifice was the greatest gift of love and respect towards us.
It’s made clear elsewhere in Paul’s Epistles that he understood this symbolism when he wrote Ephesians 5: 22 - 24, even though many people have since misunderstood him on that point. When a wife submits to the wisdom of her husband, she is, in effect, not submitting to her husband, but to the Lord, since to obey the Lord’s commandments is to love Him, and one of his commandments is for wives to obey their husbands:
Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
I know that some women today hate this fact and wage culture-wars against it. In America and elsewhere, the feminist movement cries for “equality” and an escape from the religious patriarchy from ancient times. But in reality, they don’t understand any of this, and have no idea what true equality really means and that it’s only possible to achieve when given from the Lord. True feminism is about equality of spiritual and heavenly value between men and women, not about equality of material and organizational authority.
That’s not to say that most common feminist arguments are entirely without merit, they simply don’t have the full picture. As I wrote above, men of the church have, since the beginning of Biblical history since the Fall of Man, largely mishandled their authority, as represented in the Genesis story. It’s true, then, that women who are not living in the Lord are under a curse to be placed under their husband’s rule — and that women dislike this is evident to every man who has ever interacted with a secular woman. Generally speaking, secular women hate being ruled over; I think, especially, because their husbands do not respect them and are not living in wisdom in the manner mentioned above.
With regard to the church and women’s marriages, submission to men was a decree from God that they ultimately cannot escape if they want to obtain the greatest joy in their lives. However, it’s important to mention that the key to understanding the above verse in Genesis is in the realization that the curse upon the husband and wife only exists insofar as they have separated themselves from God; from the Garden. Once they find God again, and reestablish their relationship with him, the curse is lifted. This rejoining represents the type of marriage mentioned earlier by Swedenborg, whereby both the husband and the wife are equal in the Lord. In this state, enmity between them is extinguished. The Garden of Eden is then restored. The church is still implanted in the husband first — he is still a man and has the role of a man in the relationship into eternity — but he no longer rules over the wife; he leads her in the Lord such that it is the Lord who truly rules over them both. He is able to do this because she no longer fights against the Lord, and thus, not against her husband, either, bringing the husband true peace with her in heaven. Likewise, in heaven, the wife is not under any state of abuse, because her husband carefully follows the Lord in every aspect of his life.
Not only Eve was cursed in the Garden, but also Adam
And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;
Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field;
In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.
Jesus said, “I am the vine, you are the branches.”
Adam was told he now had his own curse as well. He had to live out his mortal life in toil and sweat. He had to humble himself, that his heel would become bruised near the ground; in the dust, and he’d be considered as no more than it. As men, we know and feel this reality every day. Men are often sent off to war to die. While in some countries women can sign up to serve in the military, they are very rarely, if ever, exposed to conscription.
Men work diligently to provide for their wives for decades, with the risk that they may one day be arbitrarily abandoned as if they are worthless and disposable; their children, home, and half their assets or more taken away or their income garnished by the state.
Jesus and his disciples understood this reality:
“His disciples said unto him, If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry. But he said unto them, All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given. For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb; and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men; and there be eunuchs which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of haven’s sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.”
This spiritual state of marriage in a man is what the Lord called a “eunuch.” (Secrets of Heaven #394). The reason for this was because marriages done out of love didn’t exist back in his time, and so good men may have chosen instead to become celibate during earthy life, or go their own way, rather than get married to the wrong woman and be miserable, with the hope of finding a true wife after death; a dilemma which still exists for many men today — and which was the point his disciples were making when they said, “If so, it’s good not to marry.”
That said, the spiritual meaning of a eunuch doesn’t mean a celibate or castrated man, rather, it means a man who has humbled himself and who acts in wisdom from the Lord — whether married or unmarried. A “spiritual eunuch” undergoes celibacy only when law or circumstance require it, not as a matter of holiness. He is sexually active when he is able to be under the Lord’s law, and lives patiently without sex when he must, because for him, sex isn’t about selfishness, but about love and wisdom. He is ruled by his higher mind rather than his animal instincts, only allowing those instincts to be expressed when they wouldn’t do harm. (Apocalypse Explained #710 [28 - 30])
For the process of marriage to work, the husband has to act in wisdom
When the husband acts against wisdom, it will sever the unity between husband and wife such that they are no longer united in the Lord.
Likewise, when the husband acts in wisdom, but his wife spurns his counsel, she breaks the bond between them in the same way. When both act in accordance with wisdom — the man acting in wisdom and the woman following — then there is heaven between them.
A similar process happens between priests and their parishioners when they do or don’t act in accordance with wisdom, or when they do or don’t set themselves up as spiritual servants rather than spiritual agents. In the story Swedenborg related, above, about the wedding ceremony, just as during the wedding the groom symbolizes the Lord, the bride symbolizes the church. This image of a wedding is a microcosm of the organization of the church in its entirety, and so in like manner, priests symbolize the Lord as well, just as their parishioners do the church.
For this representation to be maintained, the priests of the church must be men, which is one of the reasons women are not allowed to serve in the clergy. But this is not the only reason for a male priesthood.
As Swedenborg explains in his book, Divine Love and Wisdom, “goodness” takes its external form in that of women and “truth” in that of men, and there is a divine pattern — which can never be changed — in which these two divine elements work together to form unity with each other. By “external,” he meant not only the body but also the mind and the way each of us thinks and operates in the world. Because these are the central, fundamental elements of God, the purpose and use of them, and the corresponding symbolism of them reaches all the way down into the material world, even into the bodies and minds of male and female human beings.
Adam and Eve are expelled from the Garden of Eden.
Swedenborg explained in Secrets of Heaven that from the beginning of creation, when God created human beings, the pattern of his design was such that a person would perceive what was good and what was evil and that by choosing goodness he would be led into truth, knowledge, and all of the blessings of wisdom. However, human beings chose so much evil that there was the risk that God’s entire creation would be lost and destroyed, which God would not allow. As such, he modified the way the plan would apparently be implemented, a new form of the same plan, but a alternate approach, a temporary Version B, if you will, in order to set earth back into divine order. Under Version B, after the Fall of Mankind (represented by the Fall in the Garden), no longer would mankind’s ability to perceive good take the apparent lead (represented by Eve who ate of the fruit of the wrong tree) but now mankind’s ability to acquire truth would take the apparent lead, represented by Adam, who nonetheless needed to make restitution, along with Eve, by beginning a new life.
The new plan was that people would first learn the truth, pray and meditate on it, and through that process, the Lord would then lead them gradually into the perception of what was good and evil, as if on their own, through trial and suffering brought on by the harshness of the physical world and events within it which were outside of their control. After all, this was the “tree,” that is, the life, that they both chose. In order to implement this new plan, he invented writing, and the first written word, known today as the Word, including the version of it we have today (the Bible) as the means through which mankind would receive the Lord’s truth and thus be led into the perception of what is good once again. Through this plan, the Lord was able to carefully keep evil at bay, without the risk of evil people running amok and murdering everyone with total abandon as they had prior. If people were not progressing from truth into goodness as they should, their ability to understand the inner truths from the Word would be withheld until they repented — so that they would no longer infect the whole of humanity with the the same level of vitriol and poison as people were capable of prior to the Flood. Lots of evil could and would still occur, as we know from our modern history books, but at least humanity would be set on the right path again, a path that would eventually lead them back to salvation, and which would protect them from far worse forms of profanation than what occurred in the Garden.
The Essential Role of Women in the Church
Women have the natural ability to soften the heart of others that men usually lack without their help.
The bottom line is this: God’s plan for women and men today is that truth should take the apparent lead and that men should be the primary receivers of that truth, in order that, together, they can both be led back into the Lord’s presence, back to the Garden of Eden, which symbolically represents a state of love and peace between them.
This means that women should not, and cannot, become ordained priests, nor become the primary receivers or preachers of truth in the church, or in their marriages. Note that this doesn’t mean that women are less-than or unequal with men, it simply means they have a different role; no less important, simply different. The equal importance of women’s role in God’s plan cannot be understated. Because women are outward forms of goodness, the earth cannot once again become like heaven without them. They are essential. “Truth” alone is useless.
Swedenborg mentions this concept time and time again throughout his books, except, instead of using the term, “truth-alone,” he normally uses the term, “faith-alone,” since faith corresponds to the underlying truth in God.
Swedenborg wrote an example of what truth is like when it’s not married to goodness:
In the Word, truth, without love and kindness, is symbolized by a belligerent donkey. Or, in common speech, “an ass.”
People whose rational minds are such that they devote themselves exclusively to truth — even religious truth — and not at the same time to neighborly kindness are exactly like [a wild donkey]. Such a person is a peevish, intolerant, universally belligerent man. He sees all others as wrongheaded, leaps to blame and criticize and punish them, lacks pity, and refuses to bother learning how to turn their minds gently in a better direction. This is because he views everything in terms of truth and never in terms of goodness. In short, such people are harsh.
The only thing that can soften their hardness is a goodness born of neighborly love. The soul of truth is goodness, and when goodness draws close to truth and works its way in, truth changes so radically that it can hardly be recognized.
I’ve heard many men say that their wives help soften their approach to others, such that they are able to move the hearts of their children, friends, and community more effectively after speaking to their wives, or when their wives are present. The ability to lead with empathy and to, “turn their minds gently in a better direction,” is something women are naturally good at. Women have the ability to open people up and make them feel accepted and loved. Whereas men can introduce children and converts into the truths of the doctrine of the church, women can introduce them into the social community, and can soften their hearts to accept the truths that men preach. Men in the church are the gatekeepers of the mind, but women of the church are the gatekeepers of the heart.
This was why Adam needed Eve:
Then the Lord God said, “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him.”
Sometimes leadership roles require enforcing discipline, which requires a little belligerence, when the cause is just. Since men are naturally suited to this, it’s a role given to them so that law and order is maintained in the church.
Swedenborg wrote that both men and women can cultivate both goodness and truth inside of them. Women can become as wise as they want in doctrine, and men, as empathetic as they want. That said, even as they cultivate both, a woman remains a woman and a man remains a man: their gender gives them an inclination and strength in the one or the other, and for the sake of maintaining order in the church, a line is drawn regarding service roles.
Should Women Be “Silent In The Church”?
This question comes in response to the Apostle Paul, where he wrote:
The women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says. If there is anything they desire to learn, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church.
He says more or less the same thing in Timothy as well:
I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet.
I imagine many married men in our current culture would shrink at the thought of quoting this scripture to their wives for fear of being sent to sleep on the couch.
But all of that aside, Paul was rather adamant about it, chapter 14 goes on to read:
What? Came the word of God out from you? Or came it unto you only? Or was it from you that the word of God came? Or are you the only ones it has reached? If anyone thinks that he is a prophet, or spiritual, he should acknowledge that the things I am writing to you are a command of the Lord. If anyone does not recognize this, he is not recognized.
That’s rather definitive and doesn’t leave room for reinterpretation.
The Word of God that he is speaking about comes from Genesis 3: 16, which I quoted above, so Paul is not without judgement here by underscoring it.
Many people today simply ignore what Paul has written on this point, or believe it is outdated.
But is it truly outdated, or should this teaching remain a doctrine of modern Christianity?
From my study, both of the Bible and of Swedenborg’s writings, the answer is, yes, it should remain as Paul wrote. However, there is more to the story here than meets the eye. Not everyone has correctly interpreted all of Paul’s writings because they’ve overlooked the spirit of male and female unity based on voluntary submission to the Lord, as spoken about above. As well, Paul goes on to explain the responsibility that men have to love their wives and not treat them harshly (Colossians 3: 19).
Swedenborg was not a fan of Paul’s character as an individual (he met him in the spirit world), and said that Paul’s writings were often misinterpreted, but he never directly refuted what Paul wrote, stating that his writings were true (Letters #2) so long as it was understood correctly, in conjunction with the Lord’s message of love in the Gospels (Spiritual Experiences #4824).
Swedenborg wrote that Paul thought that his deeds alone would save him, even though his intent was selfish (which may explain why Paul covered the topics of faith and works so extensively, while struggling with it, Spiritual Experiences #4413). Swedenborg explained that goodness is attributed to a person by the Lord based on their intent. Faith alone is evil because it lacks good intent, but good deeds done with the wrong intent aren’t actually good either for the same reason. The triad of the Trinity is made up of love, faith, and action — all working at once within a person. If any piece is missing, neither is complete.
According to Jesus’ words, we’re still supposed to follow what Paul taught, and just not be selfish in doing so, because faith and charity must go together:
Then spoke Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, saying, the scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat: All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.
Let’s explore for a moment more of what Swedenborg wrote, noting that his words here are from the Lord in heaven as well as Paul’s are, but that Swedenborg was given even greater insights into the third, highest heaven, where love reigns supreme. Paul wrote about being taken to the third heaven, but didn’t write many details about it other than that it was ineffable. (2 Corinthians 12)
As a quick recap, Swedenborg describes that heaven as a whole is made up of different levels: both continuous levels and discrete levels. The continuous levels are made up of an infinite variety of communities, as vast as the stars of heaven; however, there are only three discrete levels: the “natural” level, the “spiritual” level, and the “celestial” level, (which has also been translated as the “heavenly” level). These discrete levels of heaven correspond with the structures of our brains and how they work, like multiple dimensions that fold upon each other, such that angels cannot easily move between them without the Lord’s permission. The reason for this separation between these discrete kingdoms is because each kingdom contains angels who are motivated by different things, and if they mixed together, it would make them uncomfortable and would interfere with their level of happiness and progress.
The celestial angels are motivated by a passion for doing good things for its own sake because they believe in and love good things. They are passionate about love itself, and thus about the Lord. The spiritual angels, on the other hand, are motivated by the need for order and overall peace and stability. They love the Lord as sort of a secondhand effect of a desire for his peace within their family and community.
Read this quote from Swedenborg where he is writing about a verse from Exodus 21 about the symbolism of menservants and maidservants, which touches upon the subject of women speaking in church. While doing so, keep in mind that “spiritual perception” corresponds with the thoughts of angels of the spiritual kingdom, whereas “heavenly perception” corresponds with the thoughts of angels of the celestial kingdom:
The affection for knowledge of truth is common among men; hence, those who are in spiritual perception love women who are affected by truths. Moreover, they do not love women who are involved in the sciences. For according to divine order, it is for men to be in the sciences and for women only in affections, and thus they do not love themselves because of their knowledge but love men, from which conjugial love comes. It is also from this that it was said by the ancients that women should be silent in the Church. Because this is the case, knowledge and understanding are represented by men, while affections are represented by women; here, affections of truth which arise from the delights of natural loves are represented by maidservants. Since these are of a completely different nature than those who are affected by sciences, it is entirely different with maidservants than with male servants; this is what is meant by the saying “the maidservant shall not go out according to the going out of the male servants.” But it should be known that such is the case with those who are from the Lord’s spiritual kingdom, whereas the reverse is true for those who are from the celestial kingdom: in the latter, husbands are in affection, and likewise, wives are in cognitions of good and truth; and from this comes conjugial love among them.
From my study of Swedenborg, this doesn’t mean that the roles of men and women are reversed in the celestial kingdom. After all, he said that the roles of men and women are, “in keeping with divine order.” Rather, because in the celestial kingdom couples are so unified, they act (and sometimes even appear) as one person, and are able to be fully genuine. Deep down, men want to be affectionate and women want to have deeper understanding, and this is possible in their unity in that heaven because of their emotional closeness.
The way I understand it, you can think of the wisdom of the heavens structured like Russian dolls. The celestial heaven, being the innermost, has the deepest wisdom, a wisdom not comparable with the outer heavens, but that is encompassed by what they have, including them but with far more than them. Likewise, the spiritual heaven is encompassed by everything within the natural heaven, with a deeper application of wisdom than what they have.
Angels of the celestial kingdom, being in the deepest wisdom, don’t have the need for preaching from an authoritarian perspective because they have already fully submitted to the Lord’s Law, having it written in the loving way they live their lives (Heaven and Hell #225). Considering that everything spiritual they assert is common knowledge (since they’re encompassed by what’s spiritual) there is no question of authority, since they are already in complete unity, and consider truths to be obvious that others may debate, and so accept them immediately (Secrets of Heaven #10786).
With this in mind, I suspect women in the celestial kingdom are more “submissive” — submissive not being the best term — to their husbands than those of the spiritual kingdom because their trust in their husbands is greater because their wisdom is greater, and because they each have more fully opted-in to the Lord’s way of life, which is gentle and lives under no fear of compulsion.
What they’re truly submissive to is not their husbands but the wisdom from the Lord that they see in their husbands.
Swedenborg described the celestial heaven as being like the warmth of the sun in Springtime or in warmer climates vs the spiritual heaven as being like the light of the Moon in colder regions, lacking in the same warmth. The manner of the New Church on earth, then, when it is connected to the celestial heaven, would be one whereby men and women are in unity from love rather than mere obedience. It’s a state that each partner wants and joyfully chooses in full freedom.
From Swedenborg, Charity #210:
Paul therefore says also that the flesh is against the spirit; and that the flesh must be crucified, with its lusts; and that the man thus becomes spiritual, and a new creature.
….
Anyone, from the principle that it is Christian not to do evil to the neighbor, also does not do it. He, however, who from that principle only does not do evil to the neighbor and does good to him, still does not love him. It is from obedience to the Divine laws that he does not do evil to him, and not from an affection of love towards the neighbor. No one knows anything of this affection but he who shuns evils as sins, that is, who does not love evils. Such a man comes into the affection of that love.
For it is one thing not to do evil but good from obedience, and another not to do evil but good to him from an affection of love towards the neighbor. The difference is as between nocturnal heat and light from the moon and stars, and the heat and light of day, from the sun. Neither the warmth of that love nor the light of it is in obedience, but in affection. For affection of love is warmth. And therefore they that do good from obedience are in the lowest parts of heaven, and in light and heat as of the moon. Even the light of their understanding is as shade. They do not see any spiritual truths in the light.
There is also the difference that they who do good from obedience do it from fear of penalty, and so likewise do they abstain from doing evils; while they that do good from affection do not do it from any fear of penalty…
And they that do good from obedience are those that are being reformed, the state which precedes; while they that do good from affection are being regenerated, which state follows the other in order.
All who believe that man is saved by faith alone, if they live as Christians, confessing that they are sinners, and who do not examine themselves, do good from obedience and not from affection. But they know nothing about faith, nor about love, nor about God, except what they hear from a preacher; yet they do good. They that do good from obedience take the lead in acts of benevolence, such as giving to the poor, assisting the needy, and endowing temples and hospitals. And they cannot but place merit in these things; nor do they understand the Word otherwise, where it says that they shall have their reward. They do not know that the affection of good itself with its delights, is itself the reward.
The Problem with Women in Authority
A lot is often said in the media in the modern world about the evil things men do and think, and about the oppression of the patriarchy (a criticism which has merit on many grounds, as spoken about above). However, little is often said about the evil that women do and are capable of doing.
Swedenborg describes it, in Secrets of Heaven, #831:
There are women who lived a life of indulgence, focusing their energies on themselves and the world and centering their whole lives and all the pleasure of life on external decorum. As a result polite society valued them more than others. From practice and habit they learned to behave in socially acceptable ways in order to tap into others' desires and sensual pleasures. This they did under a pretense of respectability but with the desire to control. Consequently their lives became a sham and a lie. They attended church just as others did, but for no reason except to appear honorable and devout. Furthermore, they lacked any conscience and were very much drawn to immoral and adulterous conduct, so far as it could be kept hidden.
Their thinking remains the same in the next life. What a conscience is they do not know, and they scoff at people who use the word. They get inside others' feelings, whatever those may be, simulating honesty, piety, mercy, and innocence, and using these as covers for deception. Whenever outward restraints are removed from them, they plunge into the most criminal obscenities.
In the other life, these women become sorceresses or witches, some of whom are called sirens. There they eagerly take up arts unknown in the world. They are like sponges that soak up wicked and cunning methods, for which they have such a talent that they put them directly into practice. The stratagems unknown in this world that they learn there are these:
They can throw their voices, so that it seems as though the sound were coming from good spirits somewhere else.
They can seem to be with several people at once, convincing others that they are present almost everywhere.
They can speak as though they were many people talking simultaneously and in many places at once.
They can deflect what flows in from good spirits and even from angelic ones and immediately twist it to their own advantage in a variety of ways.
They can impersonate another by seizing on the person's patterns of thought and mimicking them.
They can induce affection for themselves in anyone by worming their way into the actual emotions the person is feeling.
They can suddenly drop out of sight and turn invisible.
They can create the appearance of a dazzling white flame — the sign of an angel — around their head, and this in front of a large number of spirits.
They have different ways of pretending innocence, even causing babies to appear and kissing them.
And they inspire the people they hate to kill them (since they know they cannot die) and then publicly accuse them of being murderers.
In my case, using consummate skill they dredged up out of my memory everything bad that I had ever thought or done. While I was sleeping, they talked to others exactly as if I were speaking, managing to dupe those spirits; and what they said was false and lewd. They have many other devices as well.
Their nature is so persuasive that not a trace of hesitation can be detected in it. For this reason their thoughts are not shared generally, as other spirits' thoughts are. Their eyes are like snakes' eyes, as people say, looking everywhere and projecting mental images in all directions.
These witches or sirens are punished severely, some in Gehenna, some surrounded by snakes in a kind of assembly hall. The punishment of some consists in being torn apart and buffeted in various ways, with the greatest pain and anguish. After a while they are ostracized and turn into seeming skeletons from head to toe.
Doesn’t it sound like Swedenborg just described Hollywood culture in a nutshell?
Many of these descriptions of sirens in the spiritual world sound eerily familiar to the tactics that some women use today, especially with the use of social media and cell phones. There is also a reason why many of the above tactics are symbols presented in our modern horror movies. Our psyche recognizes the spiritual evil and perhaps we find it fascinating so that we can learn about it and avoid it when it happens in real life, albeit in real life it’s veiled behind what appears pleasant, but which inwardly is ghastly.
Hollywood paints a false ideal whereby women in authority are lauded as morally progressive, while missing the point of love, family, and purpose.
For example, “They can suddenly drop out of sight and turn invisible” — we call this online “ghosting” today.
Or how about, “They can deflect what flows in from good spirits and even from angelic ones and immediately twist it to their own advantage in a variety of ways” — this is what we metaphorically call, “gaslighting.”
“From practice and habit they learned to behave in socially acceptable ways in order to tap into others' desires and sensual pleasures. This they did under a pretense of respectability but with the desire to control,” which, because so many women practice this ploy with social media today, has more or less become the norm, and in an even worse form whereby women lure men into paying for virtual sex with websites like OnlyFans.
A lot has been said about the evil that men have perpetrated over the centuries, but it’s easy to forget that we notice the evil done by men more often than the evil done by women because men are often more visible, being situated at the top of government, the workplace, and families. Those evils are not excusable, but what’s often overlooked is that throughout history women have acted just as evil, albeit in more hidden and artful ways.
Swedenborg didn’t write a lot about the subject of career women in his official publications, likely because it wasn’t as much of an issue in the 18th century as it is today. But he did write some strong words about it in his journal of spiritual experiences, which mirrors the statements of the Apostle Paul.
Like’s Paul’s statements, some readers may find Swedenborg’s words sexist and difficult to accept. But keep in mind the points that were made by Paul, above. Regardless of our current culture, this is a matter of God’s design and a matter of wisdom, and as Paul said, not a matter of debate. We may think we know better, but we don’t. God, after all, was the designer of men and women, not us.
Here are Swedenborg’s words from his journal of spiritual experiences:
Women who think like men about religious matters and talk a great deal about them, and the more if they preach in congregations, lose their feminine nature, which is one of affection, a result of which is that they need husbands beside them, and they become materialistic, so that affection perishes and the inward regions are closed. They also become deranged in their thinking because affection then having been ruined causes their intellect to be deranged. Outwardly of course they can still appear like other women. In a word they become sensual in the highest degree. She belongs at home and is different where she is preaching.
Notice that Swedenborg didn’t say, “women who think about religious matters,” but rather, “women who think like men about religious matters.” And also, that he didn’t say, “women who talk about them,” but “women who talk a great deal about them.” In my experience, the reason for this is because women who are like this are not as likely to be motivated by the truth, but rather to use their own version of it in order to usurp authority over their husbands, men of the church, or in politics, sometimes injecting their own ideological and religious tones into the corporate and media spheres.
That the wife cannot enter into the offices proper to the man, nor, on the other hand, the man into the offices proper to the wife, is because they differ as do wisdom and the love thereof, or thought and its affection, or the intellect and its will. In the offices proper to men, understanding, thought, and wisdom play the leading part, but in the offices proper to wives, the leading part is played by will, affection, and love; and the wife performs her offices from the latter, and the man performs his from the former. Therefore, by their very nature their offices are divergent, yet in their successive series they are conjunctive.
It is thought by many that women can perform the offices of men if only they are initiated into them from their earliest age, as are boys. They can indeed be initiated into the exercise of them, but not into the judgment on which the right performance of the offices inwardly depends. Therefore, in matters of judgment, women who have been initiated into the offices of men are constrained to consult men; and then, if they are in the enjoyment of their own right, they choose from their counsels what favors their own love.
By some it is also supposed that women are equally able to elevate the sight of their understanding into the sphere of light in which men are, and to view things in the same altitude. This opinion has been induced upon them by the writings of some learned authoresses. But in the spiritual world, when these writings were explored in the presence of those authoresses, they were found to be works, not of judgment and wisdom, but of genius and eloquence; and works which proceed from these two, by reason of the elegance and fine style of the verbal composition, appear as though sublime and erudite but only before those who call all ingenuity wisdom.
Whenever you see women speaking or leading in politics, journalism, or the media, if you look closely, you can see that this is the case. For example, if you see a woman online or on YouTube consulting for or performing a manly job, there is almost always a man behind the scenes who is editing or composing the facade, and the woman is a part of the game, in order to catch clickbait.
Swedenborg describes the evil behavior of men as well — and their resulting punishments in the spiritual world — so his words are not without balance. Men and women are different and so their evil arts are different. But, notice how many of the evil arts of the sirens mentioned above have to do with creating an illusion meant to target desire? This is why it was commanded in Genesis that women were to be ruled by men and were not allowed to speak openly in the church. Although men, on average, are not any better than women, the tools of men with malintent are more often targeted towards propagating false ideas, effecting peoples’ minds rather than their hearts. If women with malintent are allowed into authority, it becomes a problem for God’s plan to save as many people as possible because the human will is far more powerful and far more difficult to reform than the human mind, and evil in the will, instigated by women, can propagate across the world in far more devastating ways when it’s allowed free reign.
This was symbolized by Eve’s eating of the fruit of the tree in the Garden of Eden and by the falling away that ended in Noah’s Flood. During any fallen era, when Jezebels and sirens are allowed to speak in the Church, all hell breaks loose, as many of us are now witnessing in the modern world of woke feminism gone awry.
Women with good intent, knowing this potential within themselves, don’t even play with that fire.
As is exemplified in Proverbs 3 and Proverbs 31, a good woman takes honor in her husband, children, and household, not in the world. These are not only the values of a good woman, but also the characteristics of a woman who is truly smart and wise. It’s true intelligence, because as Jesus said, all things of the world will pass away, and knowing this, each person should invest today in those things which are eternal and will follow them into heaven:
Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal: But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal: For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.
Why do so many modern women not treasure their husbands and family and think that money and fame is the answer to their happiness? It’s completely backwards.
In order for heaven to come down to earth, women have to put the Lord first in their lives. Men must lead the way with the example of truth, but women must lead the way with the example of goodness by following the Lord’s plan.
An Image of How it Should Be
In Swedenborg’s book, Conjugial Love, he shared what I believe to be one of the most beautiful stories he’s written. In it, he describes meeting a married couple from the highest heaven. They approached him on a dazzlingly white chariot and wearing colorful clothing. He describes that the immense beauty of their clothing and faces represented their internal beauty and the heavenly alignment between them. About the wife, he said that she shined so brightly that at first he could not even look at her. He wrote:
“The husband appeared to be between adolescence and early manhood in age. From his eyes flashed a light sparkling with the wisdom of love. His face seemed to be inmostly radiant with this light, and because of the radiance from within, outwardly his skin virtually shone. As a result, his whole facial appearance was singularly one of dazzling good looks.
He was dressed in a full-length robe, and under the robe he wore a blue-colored garment, which was tied about the waist with a golden girdle bearing three precious stones, two of them sapphires, one on each side, and a garnet in the middle. His stockings were of shining linen, into which had been woven threads of silver; and his shoes were made entirely of silk.
This was the representational form that conjugial love took in the case of the husband.
In the case of the wife, however, it took the following form. I saw her face, and did not see it. I saw it as the very essence of beauty, and did not see it because the beauty was beyond expression. For there was in her face the bright glow of a blazing light, like the light possessed by angels in the third heaven, and this light dimmed my vision, so that I was simply stupefied by it.
Noticing this, the wife spoke to me, saying, "What do you see?"
I answered, "I see only conjugial love and a picture of it. But I see and do not see.” At this, she turned partly away from her husband, and then I was able to observe her more intently. Her eyes sparkled with the light of her heaven which, as was said, is flame-like and therefore partakes of the love of wisdom; for in that heaven, wives love their husbands from their husband's wisdom and in that wisdom; and husbands love their wives from that love towards themselves and in it. Thus they are united. Hence her beauty--a beauty which no painter can emulate and portray in its form, there being no such sparkle in his colors; nor is such beauty expressible by his art. Her hair was gracefully arranged in correspondence with her beauty, and in it were inserted flowers consisting of diamonds. She wore a necklace of carbuncles, from which hung a rosary of chrysolites; and she had bracelets of pearls. She was arrayed in a flowing robe of scarlet, under which was a stomacher of purple clasped in front with rubies. But what I marveled at, the colors varied according to her aspect towards her husband. According to this aspect, they also sparkled now more, now less, more when they faced each other directly, and less when their glance was somewhat aslant. When I had seen all this, they again spoke with me; and when the husband was speaking, he spoke at the same time as though from his wife, and when the wife, she spoke at the same time as though from her husband, such being the union of the minds from which the speech flowed; and then also I heard the sound of conjugial love, that it was inwardly simultaneous and, moreover, was a sound proceeding from the delights of a state of peace and innocence.”
As you can see, as beautiful as it is, the AI generated painting I found above doesn’t do justice to what Swedenborg described, neither does it depict how the man and woman together formed the beautiful image he beheld. Perhaps an even better depiction could be created, but according to Swedenborg, it would fall far short from what he saw.
Where Swedenborg wrote that in the celestial kingdom men are primarily in affection rather than in knowledge, I don’t believe this means that they are more effeminate or that women there are more masculine. In fact, I think it’s quite the opposite. I understand it to mean that in the celestial kingdom, a man is able to be transparent about his affection for her because he’s able to be so without fear of his wife leaving him, and a woman is able to accept and reciprocate this knowledge from him because she’s able to be so without fear of him leaving her. A man is still a man there, with his masculine strength and character — and the order of truth still flows through him, first, then to her — but such that his inner self, which is affectionate, is able to shine through his wife. They’re both able to be fully sincere and because they are so united, she is able to live in full wisdom with him, and him in full affection with her. This is symbolized by the way that the Word has a literal, intermediate, and inner meaning. Only people who follow the Lord, by loving him more than themselves, are able to see and experience what lies inside this deepest meaning.
It’s also important to note that with everything we just said about wisdom being given by the Lord first to the husband, with a wife who accepts it gracefully, in a celestial marriage, she shines like the sun, so brightly that Swedenborg could barely look at her. She steals the show, in other words, making it obvious that through a heavenly form of submission to her husband, the Lord glorifies her radiance even more.
