Formation of The Lord's New Church
“For in heaven ... there are also governments both ecclesiastical and civil.”
(New Jerusalem and Its Heavenly Doctrine 7).
“For in heaven ... there are also governments both ecclesiastical and civil.”
(New Jerusalem and Its Heavenly Doctrine 7).
Official Beginning in 1947…
The Lord's New Church Which is Nova Hierosolyma (a.k.a. The Lord's New Church) had its origin in The Hague, Holland, in 1930s. Its first international governmental document, Principles and Plan of Order for the International Government of the Church, was drawn up in 1947 and approved by church members in both Holland and the United States.
The approval by church members of this first document of the Lord’s New Church (Principles and Plan of Order for the International Government of the Church) constituted the official legal beginning of this Church. This international governmental document defined its official twofold governmental structure, which acknowledged the importance of both the Line of the Priesthood (Descending Line – Truths of Life) and the Line of the Members of the Church (Ascending Line – Doctrine of the Church). This twofold governmental structure made it uniquely different than the governmental structure of the General Church , which did not recognize the Line of the Members of the Church (Ascending Line).
In the 1930s, The Hague Society Started Publishing, De Hemelsche Leer (The Heavenly Doctrine)…
Prior to the Church’s 1947 official beginning, a new doctrinal position about the Divine nature of Swedenborg's Theological Writings was developing with priests and lay members in Holland, who were members of the General Church of the New Jerusalem.
Beginning in January of 1930, The Hague Society of the General Church published their doctrinal discussions in a monthly Dutch magazine, De Hemelsche Leer (The Heavenly Doctrine), which was "Devoted to the Doctrine of Genuine Truth out of the Latin Word Revealed by the Lord." The appearance of De Hemelsche Leer’s Three Leading Theses caused a doctrinal debate to emerge in the General Church.
De Hemelsche Leer’s Three Leading Theses in brief are (a.k.a. The Hague Position):
De Hemelsche Leer’s three leading theses in brief are (a.k.a. The Hague position):
Extracts from the 1930 editions of De Hemelsche Leer were translated into English (First Fascicle of De Hemelsche Leer ) and sent to all members of the General Church Council of Clergy before its annual meeting in February 1931.
When presented with these new doctrinal ideas, priests in the General Church were not altogether in agreement. This led to many doctrinal discussions and papers over the course of the next six years with some priests coming to accept and others to oppose De Hemelsche Leer’s three leading theses.
During this same time period, opposition to the "Hague position" among some of the highest priestly leaders in the General Church increased.
In 1937 a New Bishop (Bishop George De Charms) was Appointed Who Opposed "The Hague Position"…
The year 1937 became a turning point for the Dutch Society after a bishop, who opposed "The Hague Position", was appointed as the new leader of the General Church.
This newly appointed bishop (Bishop George De Charms) decided the doctrine of “The Hague Position" was incompatible with General Church thought. He invited the Rev. Pfeiffer to present his ideas as to how ‘The Hague position’ and his differing doctrinal position (principle of human good and human truth) could co-exist in the same Church. This led to some discourse about the importance of freedom in the Church in regard to doctrinal thought.
Since The Hague Society members had always rejected the idea of separating from the General Church on the basis of doctrinal differences, efforts were made during the 1937 meetings with the General Church priestly leaders to keep the two differing doctrinal groups together in one church.
Mr. Groeneveld, the leading layman in The Hague Society and in the understanding of The Hague position, requested a meeting with Bishop George De Charms to discuss all issues with the hope of preventing any separation. Regrettably, this request was rejected by Bishop George De Charms, as it was then generally believed that only Priests could receive enlightenment in doctrinal matters. Mr. Groeneveld as a lay member, not a Priest, was not allowed to meet with Bishop George De Charms to discuss the Bishop’s concerns.
The Hague Pastor’s Name (the Rev. Ernst Pfeiffer) was Removed from the List of Pastors and Members of the General Church.
The Rev. Ernst Pfeiffer was informed on April 7, 1937 that his name had been removed from the list of pastors and members of the General Church by Bishop George De Charms. This was Bishop De Charms’ solution to differing doctrinal principles; the Principles found in The Hague Position and his principle of human good and human truth.
This action of removing the Rev. Ernst Pfeiffer’s name from the General Church membership role caused a large number of the Dutch Society members to resign from the General Church (Link to the Dutch Society resignation letter), and led to the eventual formation of The Lord's New Church which is Nova Hierosolyma (or, The Lord's New Church), which was delayed until 1947 because of World War Two and the massive destruction it caused in Europe.
The Lord's New Church Which is Nova Hierosolyma (a.k.a. The Lord's New Church) had its origin in The Hague, Holland, in 1930s. Its first international governmental document, Principles and Plan of Order for the International Government of the Church, was drawn up in 1947 and approved by church members in both Holland and the United States.
The approval by church members of this first document of the Lord’s New Church (Principles and Plan of Order for the International Government of the Church) constituted the official legal beginning of this Church. This international governmental document defined its official twofold governmental structure, which acknowledged the importance of both the Line of the Priesthood (Descending Line – Truths of Life) and the Line of the Members of the Church (Ascending Line – Doctrine of the Church). This twofold governmental structure made it uniquely different than the governmental structure of the General Church , which did not recognize the Line of the Members of the Church (Ascending Line).
In the 1930s, The Hague Society Started Publishing, De Hemelsche Leer (The Heavenly Doctrine)…
Prior to the Church’s 1947 official beginning, a new doctrinal position about the Divine nature of Swedenborg's Theological Writings was developing with priests and lay members in Holland, who were members of the General Church of the New Jerusalem.
Beginning in January of 1930, The Hague Society of the General Church published their doctrinal discussions in a monthly Dutch magazine, De Hemelsche Leer (The Heavenly Doctrine), which was "Devoted to the Doctrine of Genuine Truth out of the Latin Word Revealed by the Lord." The appearance of De Hemelsche Leer’s Three Leading Theses caused a doctrinal debate to emerge in the General Church.
De Hemelsche Leer’s Three Leading Theses in brief are (a.k.a. The Hague Position):
De Hemelsche Leer’s three leading theses in brief are (a.k.a. The Hague position):
- The Writings of Emanuel Swedenborg are the Third Testament of the Word of the Lord. The DOCTRINE OF THE NEW JERUSALEM CONCERNING THE SACRED SCRIPTURE must be applied to the three Testaments alike [cf A.C. 10325, NJHD 266, W.H. 16 ]
- The Latin Word without Doctrine is as a candlestick without light, and those who read the Latin Word without Doctrine, or who do not acquire for themselves a Doctrine from the Latin Word, are in darkness as to all truth (cf. S. S. 50-61).
- The genuine Doctrine of the Church is spiritual out of celestial origin, but not out of rational origin. The Lord is that Doctrine itself (cf. A. C. 2496, 2497, 2510, 2516, 2533, 2859; A. E. 19).
Extracts from the 1930 editions of De Hemelsche Leer were translated into English (First Fascicle of De Hemelsche Leer ) and sent to all members of the General Church Council of Clergy before its annual meeting in February 1931.
When presented with these new doctrinal ideas, priests in the General Church were not altogether in agreement. This led to many doctrinal discussions and papers over the course of the next six years with some priests coming to accept and others to oppose De Hemelsche Leer’s three leading theses.
During this same time period, opposition to the "Hague position" among some of the highest priestly leaders in the General Church increased.
In 1937 a New Bishop (Bishop George De Charms) was Appointed Who Opposed "The Hague Position"…
The year 1937 became a turning point for the Dutch Society after a bishop, who opposed "The Hague Position", was appointed as the new leader of the General Church.
This newly appointed bishop (Bishop George De Charms) decided the doctrine of “The Hague Position" was incompatible with General Church thought. He invited the Rev. Pfeiffer to present his ideas as to how ‘The Hague position’ and his differing doctrinal position (principle of human good and human truth) could co-exist in the same Church. This led to some discourse about the importance of freedom in the Church in regard to doctrinal thought.
Since The Hague Society members had always rejected the idea of separating from the General Church on the basis of doctrinal differences, efforts were made during the 1937 meetings with the General Church priestly leaders to keep the two differing doctrinal groups together in one church.
Mr. Groeneveld, the leading layman in The Hague Society and in the understanding of The Hague position, requested a meeting with Bishop George De Charms to discuss all issues with the hope of preventing any separation. Regrettably, this request was rejected by Bishop George De Charms, as it was then generally believed that only Priests could receive enlightenment in doctrinal matters. Mr. Groeneveld as a lay member, not a Priest, was not allowed to meet with Bishop George De Charms to discuss the Bishop’s concerns.
The Hague Pastor’s Name (the Rev. Ernst Pfeiffer) was Removed from the List of Pastors and Members of the General Church.
The Rev. Ernst Pfeiffer was informed on April 7, 1937 that his name had been removed from the list of pastors and members of the General Church by Bishop George De Charms. This was Bishop De Charms’ solution to differing doctrinal principles; the Principles found in The Hague Position and his principle of human good and human truth.
This action of removing the Rev. Ernst Pfeiffer’s name from the General Church membership role caused a large number of the Dutch Society members to resign from the General Church (Link to the Dutch Society resignation letter), and led to the eventual formation of The Lord's New Church which is Nova Hierosolyma (or, The Lord's New Church), which was delayed until 1947 because of World War Two and the massive destruction it caused in Europe.
Some Governmental Principles in The Lord’s New Church
“Freedom in the Church” for Lay Members and Priests…
The Law of 'Freedom in the Church' in The Lord’s New Church teaches that “human freedom is necessary if men are to be led in freedom” and that “within this freedom there must be unanimity of acknowledgment of the presence of an internal sense in the literal sense of the Word of the Third Testament ... that the Second Coming of the Lord may further be fulfilled and the Church may be ever new.... (Freedom in the Church, Handbook, pg. 38).
Governmental Structure based upon the “Circle of Life”…
The governmental structure of the Lord's New Church was defined in 1947 and was based specifically upon the teachings in the Word of the Third Testament about the "Circle of Life", which describes and illustrates the process of man's regeneration (spiritual rebirth) and the glorification of the Lord's Human.
In the Old Testament, the "Circle of Life" is illustrated by the ladder seen in Jacob's dream, upon which Jacob saw "the angels of God ascending and descending on it" (Genesis 28:12) & (Arcana Coelestia 3882).
Just as the "Circle of Life" (or "Circle of Regeneration") and the angels’ actions on the ladder seen in Jacob's dream contains two parts ('Ascending' and 'Descending' part), the Church's governmental structure consists of two governmental bodies representing each of these two parts:
- 'Descending Line' (Priestly Line, the Line of the Priesthood) and
- 'Ascending Line' (Line of the Men [Mankind / Members] of the Church)
In Heaven there are Ecclesiastical and Civil Governments…
Additionally, this twofold structure is also in representative agreement with the Third Testament's teaching about the existence of two governmental bodies in Heaven (“For in heaven ... there are also governments both ecclesiastical and civil.” - New Jerusalem and Its Heavenly Doctrine 7)…:
- Ecclesiastical (Descending Line: Priestly Line/Celestial Kingdom) and
- Civil (Ascending Line: Line of the Men [Mankind / Members] of the Church/Spiritual Kingdom)
The Drawing of Doctrine out of the Word is of the Spiritual Function of All, Not Just the Priesthood…
The Word of the Third Testament teaches that the Lord enlightens the understanding of individuals so that each can see the truths of life out of the Word upon which they are to live according to... Thus the drawing of Doctrine out of the Word is of the spiritual function of all members, not just of the priesthood (See Principles and Plan of Order for the International Government of the Church, Handbook, pg. 19).
Finances of the Church is Divided into Two Parts – “The Internal of Finances” and “The External of the Finances”
In harmony with the defined twofold governmental structure of the Church, the Finances of the Church are also structured as twofold….:
- The Internal of Finances - This is part of the Line of the Priesthood
“In relation to the government of the Church it is seen that the internal of the finances of the Church, that is, the determination of the uses for which funds are to be expended, lies within the function of the priesthood.”
(Principles and Plan of Order for the International Government of the Church; Handbook page 23) - The External of Finances - This is part of the Line of the Lay Members
“The external of the finances, that is, the receiving and investment of money, and the execution of expenditures, is seen to lie in the hands of the laymen, because this function calls for contact with the civil law and order of the world, and also requires specific qualities and abilities lying outside the priestly function. The external of the finances belongs to the civil things of the Church. So it is that the two lines of the Church meet together in the finances, the outmost things, even as they meet in the inmost things.”
(Principles and Plan of Order for the International Government of the Church; Handbook page 23-24)
All New Governmental Laws of the Church Must be Approved by the International Church Membership via an Assembly, in which an Official Vote of All Members is taken after the Proposed Governmental Law(s) is Explained and All Questions are Answered…
From the very beginning of the Lord’s New Church in 1947, all governmental laws were approved by the international church members before they could take effect.
For example, the proposed 1947 International Governmental Laws were explained and submitted to the then two Societies of the Church, the Hague Society, and the Philadelphia Society. This is NOTED in the Church’s Handbook on page 30…:
“(Approved by the Members of the Church in America and in Holland.)”
(Handbook, page 30)
All following new governmental laws of the church or changes in church governmental laws listed in the Handbook contain a note indicating the international membership approved it
The Lord’s New Church's 1947 "Principles and Plan of Order..." created a Twofold Governmental Structure unlike any other found in the 250-year history of the New Church.
Its governmental structure was based upon the teachings in the Third Testament about the “Circle of Life” (the Circle of Regeneration).
Additionally, its governmental structure is in harmony with what exists in Heaven
“In Heaven... there are also governments both ecclesiastical and civil”(NJHD 7).
Just as Heaven has both Ecclesiastical and Civil Governments, so also The Lord's New Church has an Ecclesiastical and Civil Government.
