421# 由此可以看出，应当如何理解“仁义与善行彼此有别，犹如善愿与行善彼此有别”这句话。也就是说，二者在形式上有别，如同思想与意愿的心智，和心智借以言说与行动的身体彼此有别；但它们在本质上也有别，因为心智本身是有区别的：其较内在的区域是属灵的，较外在的区域是属世的，这一点已在上文说明。
因此，若行为出自属灵心智，它们就是出自属灵心智的善愿，而这善愿就是仁义；反之，若行为出自属世心智，它们就是出自一种善愿，但这种善愿并非仁义。尽管它在外在形式上可能显得像仁义，然而在内在形式上仍不是仁义；仅在外在形式上的仁义，固然呈现仁义的样貌，却不具有仁义的本质。
这一点可以用种子在土中的情形来说明。每一粒种子所长出的幼苗，或有用，或无用，全取决于种子的性质。属灵的种子也是如此，这种种子就是出自圣言的教会真理。由它形成教义；若出自真正的真理，教义就是有用的；若出自被歪曲的真理，教义就是无用的。
仁义由善愿而来，也是同样的道理：不论这种愿意行善是为了自己和世界，还是为了狭义或广义上的邻舍；若是为了自己和世界，它就是虚假的仁义；若是为了邻舍，它就是真正的仁义。
不过，关于这些问题，可参看“论信仰”一章，尤其是其中说明以下内容的条目：仁义就是善愿，善行就是从善愿而来的行善（374节）；以及：仁义与信若不在可能的时候被落实于行为，并在行为中共存，就只是心智中的事物，终将消逝（375，376节）。
421# 由此可见，当如何理解“仁爱和善行就像意愿良善和实行良善一样是截然不同的两回事”；也就是说，它们形式上是不同的，就像进行思考和意愿的心智不同于心智用来说话和行动的身体一样；而它们本质上也是不同的，因为心智本身分为两个区域，一个属灵的内在区域和一个属世的外在区域，如前所述。因此，当作为或行为从属灵心智发出时，它们就从仁爱的善意发出；但当它们从属世心智发出时，它们就从不是仁爱的善意发出。因为甚至当它在外在形式上看起来像仁爱时，它在内在形式上仍不是仁爱。事实上，外在形式上的仁爱只呈现出仁爱的表象，但没有仁爱的本质。这一点可通过对比地里的种子来说明。每一粒种子都会照着种子的性质而产生一株植物，无论有用的还是无用的。属灵的种子，即源于圣言的教会真理，也是如此。教义就是由这种子形成的，它若由真正的真理形成，就是有用的，若由被歪曲的真理形成，就是无用的。源于善意的仁爱也是如此，无论这善意是为了自我和世界，还是为了有限意义或广泛意义上的邻舍。仁爱若是为了自我和世界而行使的，就是虚假的仁爱；但它若是为了邻舍而行使的，就是真正的仁爱。关于这个主题，详情可参看关于信仰的那一章，特别是其中说明“仁爱就是意愿良善，善行就是出于意愿良善而行善”（TCR 374节）；以及“仁爱和信仰只是短暂的心理抽象概念，或是转瞬即逝的，只存在于脑海中，除非当有可能时，它们在作为或行为中实现，或以作为来表达，并共存于其中”（TCR 375-376节）的章节。
VIII. 仁爱本身就是在一个人所从事的职责、业务和工作，以及与人们的往来互动中行事公义而忠实
421. These things enable us to see how we are to understand the statement that goodwill and good works are two distinct things: wishing people well and treating them well. That is, they are formally distinct, like the mind that does the thinking and willing and the body through which the mind speaks and acts. In fact, they are essentially distinct as well, because the mind itself is divided into an inner region that is spiritual and an outer region that is earthly, as I said just above.
Therefore if the things we do come from our spiritual mind, they come from wishing others well, or goodwill. If, however, they come only from our earthly mind, they come from a form of wishing others well that is not genuine goodwill. It can appear to be goodwill in its outer form and yet not be genuine goodwill in its inner form. Goodwill that exists in an outer form alone does indeed present the look of goodwill, but lacks its essence.
This point could be illustrated by an analogy with seeds in the ground. Every type of seed gives rise to a shoot, but those shoots are either useful or useless, depending on their species. The same is true for spiritual seed, that is, for truth in the church that comes from the Word. A body of teaching grows out of this truth - a useful body of teaching if it is made out of genuine truths, a useless one if it is made out of truths that have been falsified. The same thing applies to goodwill that is exercised as the result of wishing our neighbors well, whether we wish them well for our own sake or for a worldly reason or for the sake of our neighbor in a narrower or a broader sense. If we wish our neighbors well for our own sake or for a worldly reason, our goodwill is not genuine. If we wish our neighbors well for their sake, our goodwill is genuine. See many statements that address these topics in the chapter on faith, especially in the discussion showing that "goodwill" is benevolence toward others; that "good works" are good actions that result from benevolence (374); and that goodwill and faith are transient and exist only in our minds unless, when an opportunity occurs, they culminate in actions and become embodied in them (375-376).
421. These points can show how we must understand the assertion that charity and good deeds are as different as willing well and doing good; that is to say, they are formally distinct as is the mind which thinks and wills from the body which the mind uses to speak and act. But there is also an essential distinction, because the mind itself is distinguished into an interior zone which is spiritual, and an exterior which is natural, as was said previously. If therefore deeds come from the spiritual mind, they come from its good will, which is charity; but if they come from the natural mind, they come from good will which is not charity. Even though it may seem in external appearance like charity, it is not charity in its interior appearance. Charity merely in external appearance may indeed look like charity, but it does not possess the essence of charity.
This can be illustrated by a comparison with seeds in the earth. Each separate seed grows into a plant, either useful or useless, depending on what the seed is. The same happens with spiritual seed, which is the truth the church learns from the Word. Doctrine is formed from this, useful doctrine if formed from genuine truths, useless if from falsified truths. It is exactly the same with the formation of charity from willing well, depending whether this is for selfish or worldly reasons, or for the sake of the neighbour, whether this is narrowly or broadly interpreted. If it is for selfish or worldly reasons, it is spurious charity, but if for the sake of the neighbour, it is genuine charity. However, more on this subject may be found in the chapter on faith, in particular in the section where it was shown that charity is having a good will, and that good deeds are doing good from having a good will (374); and that charity and faith are merely unstable mental concepts unless, when possible, they are realised in deeds and come into existence together in them (375-376).
421. From all this it can be seen how it is to be understood that charity and good works are distinct like willing well and doing well; that is to say, formally they are distinct, as the mind, which thinks and wills, is distinct from the body through which the mind speaks and acts; while essentially they are distinct because of the distinction in the mind itself which has an inner region that is spiritual, and an outer that is natural, as said above; so that when works proceed from the spiritual mind, they proceed from its good will, which is charity; but when they proceed from the natural mind, they proceed from a good will that is not charity. For even when it appears in the external form like charity, it is not charity in the internal form. In fact, charity in external form merely presents the show of charity, but does not possess its essence. This may be illustrated by a comparison with seeds in the ground. Each seed produces a plant, whether useful or useless, according to the nature of the seed. So is it with spiritual seed, which is the truth of the church derived from the Word; from this seed doctrine is formed, useful if from genuine truths, useless if from truths falsified. It is the same with charity that springs from good will, whether the good will is for the sake of self and the world or for the sake of the neighbor in a limited or in a broad sense; if for the sake of self and the world, it is spurious charity, but if for the sake of the neighbor, it is genuine charity. But of this more may be seen in the chapter on Faith, especially in the section where it is shown that charity is willing well, and good works are doing well from willing well (n. 374); and that charity and faith are only mental and perishable things unless they are determined to works and coexist in them when possible (n. 375-376).
421. It may thus be seen how it is to be understood that charity and good works are distinct, like willing what is good and doing what is good. They are distinct formally, like the mind which thinks and wills, and the body by which the mind speaks and acts; and as was shown above, they are essentially distinct, the mind itself being divided into two regions, an interior which is spiritual, and an exterior which is natural. If works, therefore, proceed from the spiritual mind they proceed from its will to good which is charity; but if from the natural mind, they proceed from a will to good which is not charity. Externally it may appear like charity, but still it is not charity in its internal form; and that which presents the appearance of charity in external form only does not possess its essence.
This may be illustrated by comparison with seeds sown in the ground. From each seed there sprouts forth a young plant useful or useless, according to the nature of the seed. It is similar with spiritual seed, which is the truth of the Church from the Word. From this is formed doctrine, which is profitable if formed from genuine truth, but unprofitable if formed from perverted truth. So, also, is it with charity from good will, whether it is exercised for the sake of self and the world, or for the sake of the neighbor in either a restricted or in a wide sense. If it is exercised for the sake of self and the world, it is spurious charity; but if for the sake of the neighbor, it is genuine charity. More, however, may be seen on this subject in the chapter on Faith, particularly where it is shown that "Charity consists in willing what is good, and good works consist in doing what is good from willing what is good" 374; and that "Charity and faith are merely fleeting mental abstractions unless, wherever it is possible, they are expressed in works, and exist together in them," 375-376
421. Ex his videri potest, quomodo intelligendum est, quod Charitas et Bona opera distincta sint sicut bene velle et bene facere, videlicet, quod formaliter distincta 1 sint, sicut Mens quae cogitat et vult, et sicut corpus per quod Mens loquitur et agit; at quod essentialiter distincta sint, quia ipsa Mens est distincta, quae quod interior ejus regio sit spiritualis, et exterior naturalis, supra dictum est; quare si opera procedunt ex Mente spirituali, procedunt ex ejus bene velle, quod est Charitas, at 2 vero si ex Mente naturali, procedunt ex bene velle quod non est Charitas, tametsi apparere potest tanquam Charitas in forma externa, et tamen usque non est Charitas in forma interna, et Charitas in sola forma externa, quidem speciem Charitatis praefert, sed non essentiam Charitatis possidet. Hoc illustrari potest per comparationem cum seminibus in terra, ex unoquovis semine enascitur virgultum tam utile quam inutile secundum quale seminis; similiter semen spirituale, quod est verum Ecclesiae ex Verbo, ex hoc formatur Doctrina, utilis si ex genuinis veris, inutilis si ex falsificatis: consimiliter itaque Charitas ex bene velle, 3 sive velle bene sit propter se et mundum, sive sit propter proximum in stricto aut lato sensu; si propter se et mundum, est Charitas spuria, si autem propter proximum, 4 est Charitas genuina. Sed plura de his videantur in Capite de Fide, in specie in Articulo ubi ostensum, 5 Quod Charitas sit bene velle, et quod Bona opera sint benefacere ex bene velle, 374. 6 Et quod Charitas et Fides sint modo res mentales et caducae, nisi dum fieri potest, determinentur in Opera, et in illis coexistant, 375-376.
Footnotes:
1. Prima editio: distIncta.
2. Prima editio: et.
3. Sic Errores Typographici.
4. Sic Errores Typographici.
5. Prima editio: ostensum..
6. Prima editio: 473.