[lucerna] aclimatizing to the terminology

Lucerna Discussion lucerna@lists.newearth.org
Fri Jun 9 11:35:18 HST 2006

Well, Brother Gregory, my name is Alan Longstaff, and I have just 
transferred over to LUCERNA from the REFORM website, and I think I need to 
aclimatize myself.

I see that the subject is "The Priesthood," or perhaps the "virtual 
priesthood," and while I am familiar with the terms you are using--eg. 
"Anointed"--I'm not yet sufficiently sure of the terminology--ie. the use 
being made of the terms--to answer your questions. Alan

>Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin 
>To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org
>Subject: Re: [lucerna] Lucerna discussion
>Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 16:30:20 -0400
>On the question of ordination of the priesthood the following is the
>doctrine of the Swedenborgian Churches that recognize that only a "virtual
>priesthood" has been established.This report was authoritatively written by
>Rt. Rev. Elmo Acton on, "The Priesthood" and reported in New Church Life
>The History
>Our subject properly begins with the first New Church ordination or
>inauguration, which took place in London, England, in 1788. A group of men
>who met regularly, beginning in 1783, for the purpose of reading and
>studying the Writings of Emanuel Swedenborg, gradually came to see that
>those Writings revealed the consummation of the former church and the
>beginning of a new dispensation of the church. For the uses of this new
>church to exist in the world, they saw that it would be necessary to form a
>distinct organization, and they began by introducing a new and separate
>worship, with baptism and administration of the Holy Supper. This shortly
>led them to see that for the orderly performance of worship and the
>sacraments a new priesthood was necessary. At first they considered
>requesting ordination from one of the existing churches, but gradually they
>came to see that as the New Jerusalem was the beginning of a new
>dispensation of the church, it must derive its authority immediately from
>the Lord in His second coming. They were enlightened to observe the
>following order. The names of the sixteen men constituting the group were
>placed in a receptacle, and of them twelve were chosen. On one of the lots,
>which were prepared by Robert Hindmarsh, he wrote the word "Ordain." This
>lot was drawn by himself. Then, without the other eleven men knowing this
>fact, Hindmarsh was chosen by them to read the service. The twelve then
>placed their right hands upon the heads of James Hindmarsh and Samuel 
>Robert Hindmarsh reading the service, and ordained them as priests in the
>Lord's New Church. Thus began the priesthood of the New Church.
>The church only gradually came to see fully that Robert Hindmarsh by this
>procedure was the first ordained priest of the New Church. It was not until
>the Conference of 1818, thirty years later, that the following resolution
>was passed:
>". . . in consequence of Mr. R. Hindmarsh having been called by lot to
>ordain the first minister in the New Church, this Conference consider it as
>the most orderly method which could then be adopted and that Mr. R.
>Hindmarsh was virtually ordained by the Divine auspices of heaven; in
>consequence of which this Conference consider Mr. Hindmarsh as one of the
>regular ordaining ministers."
>The question I ask you all is this: Since the name Jesus signifies the
>Divine Goodness and Christ signifies Divine Truth, Is the Divine Truth
>literally true? Is Jesus the Anointed, literally? My study has shown
>conclusively in the Writings that this is affirmatively true. Can you
>confess that Jesus is the Anointed, physically and literally? Are you
>sanctified? Or are you anti-anointed?
>Your brother in the Anointed,
> >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin
> >Word<lucerna@novahierosolyma.org>
> >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org
> >Subject: Re: [lucerna] Lucerna discussion
> >Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 13:09:12 EDT
> >
> >In a message dated 6/9/2006 9:20:01 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> >brothergregory@hotmail.com writes:
> >You are the only one so far to even give me a response. Your
> >reply seems to be from out of your own self intelligence.
> >To say that one is replying out of their "own self intelligence" is 
> >not the best way to encourage anyone to respond to you.
> >
> >Out of whose intelligence are you writing?
> >This whole discussion of 'doctrine drawn out of the Latin Word' is in 
> >according to the Writings.
> >Would you please indicate more precisely from the "Writings" how this 
> >discussion of 'doctrine drawn out of the Latin Word' is in error? Could 
> >please show passages from the "Writings" that lead you to this 
> >
> > > The Word is written in 'Hebrew' and later the Gospel and Revelation is
> >written in Greek.
> >
> >Do you believe that the Word was also later written in Latin?
> >
> >Hugh
> >_______________________________________________
> >lucerna mailing list
> >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org
> >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna
>On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how to
>get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement
>lucerna mailing list

More information about the lucerna mailing list