Article

There is some similarity between the story of the birth of Samson and the story of

the birth of Samuel, heightened by the fact that they seem to be the last two of the

judges. In each case, we are told of a mother who was barren, and in each case, the

son who is born by the grace of God and is devoted to the service of God. It is

almost as though Samson were a trial run, a precursor to the judge who would pave the

). In preparation for this, she herself is to drink neither wine nor strong drink,

and to eat no unclean food.

The Nazirite vow is recorded in the sixth chapter of Numbers, in part as follows:

When either men or women shall separate themselves to vow a Nazirite vow, to separate

themselves to the Lord, they shall separate themselves from wine and strong drink and

shall drink no vinegar of wine or vinegar of strong drink, nor shall they drink any

juice of grapes or eat either moist or dried grapes.]-the period of Naziriteship must

be ended, with prescribed sacrifices for the cleansing of the defilement.

When it says in Judges that the child is to be a Nazirite to God "from the womb,"

then, it evidently means it quite literally. The Nazirite vow is unique in being

applicable to women as well as to men, and Samson's mother is to be a Nazirite

throughout her pregnancy, making the child in her womb a Nazirite as well. We should

also note that while the vow could be for a limited time only-"until the days have

been fulfilled of their separation to the Lord"-Samson's, which was not at his own

behest, seems to have been lifelong, from his conception to his death.

Swedenborg takes the two main features of the vow correspondentially in an intriguing

fashion. The vine, grapes, and wine are familiar symbols for spiritual truth; and in

Arcana Coelestia 2187² Swedenborg explains that the abstinence from the vine

indicates that "the Nazirite represented the celestial/hea heavenly person, and as

long as he had hair, he referred to the natural of such people, who are in such

powerful and sturdy truth" (Arcana Coelestia 3301⁴).

I'd like to spend the next section of this talk translating this terminology in a

general way, then take a quick look at the figure of Samson, and spend the last part

living up to the title of the talk, at what it would mean to be a "Swedenborgian

Samson."

In general, then, "celestial" or "heavenly" people are people who live spontaneously

from their feelings. In the spiritual world, they constitute the highest heaven and

the lowest hell because our loves are central to our being. Whatever "celestial"

people are, they are totally, without reserve. When it says in Arcana Coelestia that

"a heavenly person is by nature unwilling even to mention spiritual things," it means

that such people are not the least bit interested in pondering the pros and cons of

an issue. Reality is the way they see it. In the words of Tevye in Fiddler on the

Roof, "There is no other hand."

Little children are like this-totally affectionate or totally miserable. I presume

most of you are familiar with the poem about the little girl who had a little curl,

right in the middle of her forehead. "When she was good, she was very, very good; but

when she was bad she was horrid." The process of growing up involves a separation of

will and understanding that allows us to be guided by the truths we are taught rather

than by our impulses; and the process of regeneration, carried to its fulfillment,

brings us to a state where we have accepted a new will from the Lord and can now

truly afford to be guided by our impulses. We have left behind the innocence of

ignorance and have arrived at the innocence of wisdom. We are again whole. We are our

love in action.

There is kind of psychological test developed along Jungian lines, the Meyers-Briggs

Personality Index, that is more concerned to understand than to judn, is impulsive.

His heart is on his sleeve. Whatever he does, he does all out, without stopping to

think. There is no guile, no hidden agenda.

The "natural" of this kind of person is, I believe, pretty much what we would now

call the "behavioral" level. That is, the focus of attention is not on motives or on

concepts but on actions. Don't turn to this kind of person for empathy or insight,

turn to this person for concrete help. Characteristically, if you tell such people

your troubles, their whole focus will be on what they can do to make things better.

They will hear you asking for action. If you tell them that all you want is a

sympathetic hearing, they either won't understand you or won't believe you. What's

the point of talking about it if all you can do is talk? Now the conversation is

over, and nothing has changed.

When you have people who put themselves wholly into whatever they do and who are

focused on action, you have some very strong and active people. While the rest of us

art trying women shall separate themselves to vow a Nazirite vow, to separate

themselves to the Lord, they shall separate themselves from wine and strong drink . .

. . All the days of their separation they shall eat nothing that comes from the vine,

from the seeds to the skins.

All the days of their separation no razor shall come upon their heads until the days

have been fulfilled of their separation to the Lord.

The word translated "Nazirite" (******) could in fact be translated, "one who is

separated or set apart," and there is clearly a sense in which this is true of "the

celestial-natural" person. These are the people who march to a different drummer, the

people who seem to have some inner compass, some internal guidance system that

generates its own signals. You're never quite sure what will be coming next. All you

know is that it will be emphatic and totally sincere.

All this seems to me to fit Samson admirably. In every episode he has his own agenda,

which he follows whether others approve or not. He challenges the Philistines on the

one hand, and wants a Philistine wife on the other, in each case violating the

pragmatic prohibition against getting involved with the oppressor. In his challenge

of the Philistines he stands in the tradition of the promise to Abram that Israel

should become a great nation. In his pursuit of Delilah he runs counter to that

tradition. When he is challenged, he does not rally the troops but tackles the

problem solo. Above all, he acts, evidently without counting the cost. Ultimately, he

gives away the secret of his strength because it solves the immediate problem of

Delilah's persistence, and only after it is too late does he discover the full

implications of his self-betrayal.

What, then, would "Swedenborgian Samsons" be like? Let's take the major

characteristics already outlined, and see what emerges.

First of all, they will be whole-hearted. These are warm, open folk with little

subtlety and no guile whatever-which may sometimes come across as a lack of tact.

They are likely to find it hard to understand points of view that differ from their

own because what they see is so obvious to them. They will reach conclusions quickly

and hold them passionately.

As to doctrine, their favorite passages will be the ones that state simple principles

in absolute terms. They will prefer, for example, the statement in § 4637² of Arcana

Coelestia that "the internal sense is in every single thing" in the Word to the more

careful statement in The Doctrine of Sacred Scripture § 3 that "the holiness of the

Word . . . in some places is in the letters themselves." They will have their

favorite Scripture passages that serve as guides to their lives, passages that have

lit up for them with meaning that has never been forgotten.

There may quite possibly be particular people in their lives, parents or teachers or

ministers, who embody for them everything that the church stands for. For them,

religion is above all personal rather than intellectual; and while they may have

great respect for doctrinal expertise, it will be a kind of terra incognita for them,

a land that they read about and wonder at but never visit.

Their whole-heartedness will tend to take the form of action. If they have a

"favorite doctrine," it is most likely to be the doctrine of use. Their attention

will gravitate toward those sections that talk about behavior and away from the ones

that talk about questioning and reflection. Given the prospect of a new church

program, for instance, they will be impatient with delays, ready and willing to be

out there doing. They will not be very effective members of study committees,

especially if the matter to be studied is delicate. They will feel out of place and

useless until a decision has been reached and it's time to roll up the sleeves.

Any "new program" they are asked to support has to be one they perceive as in keeping

with the central values of the church. It has to be authentic. They cannot be asked

to do things that don't feel right to them, even though theory may say that these

things will benefit the church. They may feel, for example, that the chancel is a

particularly holy place and not want to read a Scripture lesson for Sunday worship

even though they can sort of understand that lay participation in the worship service

stimulates interest. It's all very well for other lay people to take part-they may

not feel in this case that anyone else is unworthy-but they know themselves too well

to feel that they belong in that space.

They can be wrong, and they can make life difficult for others. Both the

impulsiveness and the focus on externals have their risks. For one thing, they can

cling to the forms that are dear to them and honestly not understand why these same

forms are not equally dear to everyone else. It can be hard or even impossible for

them to recognize that the deeper values which these forms represent for them can be

represented for others by quite different forms; and this means that they may find

themselves allied with people with whom they really have very little in common,

people who have an affection for the same externals for very different reasons. On

matters of crucual import, they may tend to see anyone who disagrees with them as

evil.

I recall an incident some years ago at a workshop that Cal Turley and I were

conducting in Canada. One elderly layman was resisting all this new stuff, these

workshops and discussions that seemed to be displacing the worship services and

reading circles that had meaning for him. Cal helped him explore what lay behind this

attachment, and it turned out to be profound love and respect for his father and an

overpowering feeling that it was his responsibility to maintain the values his father

had embodied.

For another person, though, what would appear to be the same resistance could stem

from a need to maintain status or control or an unwillingness to look deeper than the

external forms. It is quite natural to feel insecure when we are asked to venture

onto unfamiliar ground; and if I am the respected leader and have my ego invested in

that respect, I will want to keep you in my territory.

One standard way of doing this is for me to demean your territory, and this is one

kind of behavior that betrays the weakness of the "Samson." It is in fact a

Philistine reaction, his vulnerability to Delilah-an intellectual smokescreen

designed to conceal the actual need to be in control, or in doctrinal terms, a motion

of faith apart from charity, in the service of a love of dominion from the love of

self.

Samsons can never be wholly secure in a complex and ambiguous world, but their

response to the unfamiliar is often not so much defensiveness as it is bewilderment.

The workings of the Philistine mind confuse them. It is painfully apt that Samson

wound up blinded, unable to perceive what was going on around him.

It is also apt that his final triumph came when he was put in touch with the two

pillars that supported the temple of Dagon. Let this "celestial-natural" person get

back in touch with fundamental issues, and there is no need for the intellectual

clarity symbolized by sight. The feel of the solid issues is enough, and the action

follows inevitably from that certainty.

Let me conclude by recalling that the Samson story is one moderately extended episode

in the vastly larger story of Scripture. It comes fairly early in that larger story,

between the wilderness and the monarchy. I would see its prime application to be to

the mid to late teens, when the pattern of living from crisis to crisis is beginning

to give way and the time is approaching for the individual to identify with

particular personal goals, to become proactive rather than reactive, in current

terminology.

However, we don't all grow up in all respects, an behavior pattern that may show

itself most clearly in adolescence may recur in our adult years and may even remain

as a lifelong predilection for some. Our familiarity with the theology of the second

coming does not automatically make us spiritual people. There is nothing wrong with

being a Swedenborgian Samson, and in fact the church would be far weaker without

them. The hope is that their strengths may be appreciated and exercised and their

needs supplied by other members. If they are the right hand of the church, then they

are sorely needed; but it is abundantly clear that a healthy body cannot be all hand.