[Having announced in the Introduction to the "Swedenborg Library," that the series would embrace the occasional publication of articles and tracts, from different sources, bearing collaterally on the general theme of Swedenborg's doctrines, I have been induced, at the suggestion of several of my friends, to give place to the following Lecture, delivered in the Odeon, at Boston, on the evening of January 16, 1846.* It was prepared as a reply to Mr. Ralph Waldo Emerson's Lecture on Swedenborg, delivered a short time previous, in the same place. Mr. E.'s general estimate of Swedenborg, among the great men of all ages, is evidently very high; and I can most sincerely absolve him, in my own judgment, from all purpose of detracting aught from the superlative merits, as a philosophical seer, which he, in common with many others who have scanned his character without acceding to his revelations, habitually ascribes to him. Indeed, I am confident, that far more justice would be done to Swedenborg's memory, were it generally held in a reverence equal to that of Mr. E. Still, the theological stand-point from which Mr. E. surveys the apostle of the New Church, must inevitably present the whole system of his doctrines and disclosures in a light toto cœlo different from that in which it is viewed by those who receive it as a veritable exposè of the truths of Revelation, and of the facts and phenomena of the other life. The objections which he urges, therefore, are of necessity such as would be prompted by the position he occupies at the entirely opposite pole, not of Swedenborg's sphere only, but of that of every one who yields faith to a divinely dictated Revelation-one written under an afflatus utterly and ineffably higher than anything which is to be recognized in the most gifted productions of what some schools would term the Inspiration of Genius, than which they apparently know no other.

It may possibly have been deemed more proper that I should meet Mr. E. on his own ground, and endeavor to show, that the very primary principles of his theosophy--of which his objections are an outbirth—are unsound. This, however, I have not assumed to do. I care not to enter into transcendental discussions. I propose to encounter his strictures on the humble plane of that common sense and common sentiment which, though doubtless created or modified by the prevalent belief in Christianity as an objective revelation, is yet a fair and competent tribunal before which to try their force. I do not perceive that * As all matter of this description will be paged independent of the regular series, it can be bound up separately when the whole is completed.

the advocate of great moral truths is called to forsake the vantage-ground afforded him by a rational and satisfactory belief in the religion taught in the Christian Scriptures; especially as he finds its voice one with that of the inner oracles of his own mind.

It is, moreover, proper to remark, that my occasional citations are made from the printed report of Mr. E.'s Lecture, published in a daily paper at the time; and though my own ear enables me to testify to its general correctness, yet it is possible that the actual phraseology of the manuscript might in some cases give a shade to the import of particular expressions, which is not fully preserved in the report. It is but justice to the Lecturer that he should be entitled to the advantage of a hypothetical concession on this ground. I could wish that a running allowance might be made in the mind of the reader for the possibility of a wrong construction of his meaning, yet on the leading points I think there is no mistake.

In view of the circumstances under which the following discourse was preparedremote from the leisure and quiet of the study, and while passing from place to place in the delivery of a course of Lectures--I might perhaps, if the fact were stated, be justified in giving it more elaboration and finish, and sending it forth to the world as a specimen of what I could have wished to make it in the first instance, but did not. Several of the items would well bear expansion, and some, perhaps, amendment; but I have concluded, on the whole, to give it almost precisely as it was delivered, simply supplying those portions which I was obliged to omit in the delivery from want of time.

I have only to add, as I remarked on the occasion, that cherishing no other personal feelings towards Mr. E. than those of high regard, I shall entertain the hope, that the freedom with which I have reviewed his opinions will not be construed by himself or others in derogation of the sentiments thus distinctly avowed. I have merely spoken as a Christian where I feel as a friend.]