No one can contemplate the dynamic magic of the interior of the atom without experiencing a feeling of awe. Nor is that feeling lessened when the mind begins to grapple with the marvelous timing in the atom, and the incredible velocities, not to mention the interplay of forces so prodigious that the mind is bewildered and the imagination baffled. No timepiece has ever been made that even approximates their precision. Nothing compares with them in durability. Of surpassing beauty of design, thermo- and elec- tro-dynamically perfect, self-contained solar systems in miniature, clocks of uncanny precision, building blocks of the Universe, released by the hand of the Creator some three billion years ago, and still keeping perfect time.
We are greatly impressed with the fact that much is said about the pure intellect in Rational Psychology, but the term is never used in the Writings. And yet, so far as we are aware, there is no notice of this in any collateral New Church literature. Therefore, the question arises as to whether there is any term in the Writings which designates the same thing. This question was asked of a number of the leading ministers in the Church.
The difficulties encountered if we attempt to identify the Pure Intellect spoken of in the Rational Psychology with the “faculties of rationality and liberty” described in the Writings, stem from the fact that the Pure Intellect belongs to the natural mind alone and does not explain the faculties or powers of what that work calls “the Spiritual Mind.” (See R.P. no. 127.) It should be observed that (according to the Rational Psychology) there is formed, between the Spiritual Mind and the Animus, a “rational mind,” also called the “human intellect” and the “mixed intellect” (no. 297 of new ed.). The Animus, or natural mind, begins in the Pure Intellect which gives the rational mind its powers of natural reasoning. But the Animus also includes the life of the sensations.
Among the Letters and Memorials of Emanuel Swedenborg is a letter, dated February 26, 1725, in which Swedenborg’s brother-in- law, Dean Unge, writes: “Let me know, dear brother, what judgment the false King Charles XII has received.” When I first read this, I was at a loss to know who was meant by “the false King”; nor was I able to get any enlightenment from any of the sources available to me. I referred the matter to Dr. Bring, Librarian in the Upsala University Library, who had already shown me much kindness. In reply, Dr. Bring, to my great surprise and satisfaction, sent me a pamphlet of forty-six pages which he himself had written, entitled “Benjamin Duster, En Falsk Karl XII, Lund, 1918.” * Here Dr. Bring has presented from original sources all available information concerning the false king.