The Intercourses of Divine Love Betwixt Christ and His Church
The source for this document is https://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/eebo/A69777.0001.001
Project Note
This is licensed under Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND. This license allows reusers to copy and distribute the material in any medium or format in unadapted form only, for noncommercial purposes only, and only so long as attribution is given to the creator.
The source of this document is the Early English Books Online (EEBO-TCP) website. Those books were transcribed in a character for character manner and can be very cumbersome to read since there was no standard spelling during that time. Many spelling variations such as "unlesse", "vnlesse", and "vnles" regularly appear.
This project was conceived to clean up those books as much as possible and make them more accessible to the interested reader, leading to the creation of a massive list of variant spellings and their corrections. This was used to clean up the text, but is of course only as complete as the list itself. Because of the nature of the original transcription, some words have missing characters or places where the original language (e.g., Greek) was not transcribed. This effort does not change that. Be aware that the original transcription can also be faulty and in some cases entire sentences may be missing.
Although this is no substitute for a properly compared, proofed, and scholarly edition, I believe that the result is a document which is far more accessible, particularly for searching for terms using standard spelling. The document has been cleaned and presented in what I hope is a pleasing and useful format for the vast majority of Christian brothers and sisters who just want access to read these spiritually nourishing works.
However, a word of warning: The Puritans were a very diverse group of people and their age was characterized with godliness, but also much upheaval, disputation and strife. They disagreed on many doctrines and some of these works contain less orthodox or Scriptural views than others. The reader is strongly advised to read with discernment, particularly if it is unknown whether author is trustworthy.
This project took a huge amount of time and skill to bring to fruition. I would particularly like to thank David Jonescue for the initial list of Puritans he found on EEBO and the concept behind this project as well as the continuous, unceasing efforts toward seeing this complete. Without his labor, this would not be available. Alex Sarrouf was invaluable in providing the initial list of over 7,000 spelling variations he had identified and corrected, as well as continuing to review more than 16,000 additions to that list for any typos.
Logan West
(with David Jonescue and Alex Sarrouf)
www.puritansearch.org
THE INTERCOURSES OF DIVINE LOVE BETWIXT Christ and his Church, OR The Particular Believing Soul.
Metaphorically expressed by Solomon in the first Chapter of the Canticles, or Song of Songs.
Opened and Applied in several Sermons, upon that whole Chapter.
In which the Excellencies of Christ, the yernings of his bowels towards Believers, under various circumstances, the workings of their hearts towards, and in, communion with him, with many other Gospel Propositions of great import to Souls, are handled.
By John Collinges, D. D.
Solomon divinitus inspiratus, Christi, & Ecclesiae laudes & aeterni Connubii cecinit Sacramenta, simul{que} expressit sanctae desiderium animae, & Epithalamii carmen exultans in spiritu jucundo composuit Elogio, figurato tamen. Nimirum velabat & ipse instar Moysis faciem suam, non minus forsitan in hâc parte fulgentem, to quod illo adhuc in tempore, nemo, aut rarus erat, qui revelatà facie, gloriam illam speculari sufficeret. Bernardus 1 Serm. in Cantica.
London, Printed by T. Snowden, for Edward Giles Bookseller in Norwich, near the Market-place. 1683.
To the Lady Ann Knightley.
Madam,
AMongst the many Spiritual mercies by which within these fifty years last past, England hath been exalted to heaven (as our Savior said of Capernaum) the plenty of good Books hath not been the least, so as there is hardly any point in Divinity, which hath not been judiciously handled, both dogmatically, polemically, and practically, and discourses upon it published in our own Tongue. The things hid in times of Popery, yea and for many years in the beginning of our Reformation, have been made known; the things covered have been revealed; what was at first spoken in darkness, hath been told in the light, preached upon the house tops, and so published, that all those who would might read, and understand. Certainly no Nation under Heaven (of which we have any record) was ever blessed with the Means of Grace to that degree; none ever had more judicious Interpretations of the Word of God, nor more serious and faithful Applications of it to the Consciences of men and women; so as if either the Doctrine or Duty of the Gospel be yet hid to any, it is much to be feared that it is to such only who shall perish. But of all good Books we have been exalted in none more than those which have been wrote on practical Subjects, Books of all others to be most highly valued, as more immediately serving the great end of man, in showing him the way of Salvation, directing his coming to Christ, and walking with him, of which we have had such plenty, as indeed there would be no more need of writing on such Subjects, if the Vanity of our Natures did not more incline us to a discourse upon the same Argument newly wrote, than to what hath been written as well some years since, by which means, the multiplying of good Books doth not a little contribute to the much reading of good Books, and that I am sure contributes much both to knowledge and practice (the two great ends that every Preacher ought to aim at;) so as I cannot be of their mind who would have no more written of this nature, because so much hath been already wrote, anymore than I can be of theirs, who think there is now no such need of Preaching, because formerly there hath been so much. So long as there are any Souls in the World, who know not Christ, and live not up to the Rules of his Gospel, there will be need both of the one and of the other; nay, were there none such, there would be need of it, to keep up the Grace of God bestowed upon men in its warm exercise. Nor me thinks should there be one Preacher of the Gospel who should not publish the glad tidings of it, and leave some Record to the Ages to come, of his faithfulness in that work. The Riches of Divine Grace can never be too much published, we can never enough declare his love, who for our sakes became poor, that we through his poverty might be made rich. Such like thoughts as these, Madam, have brought these Discourses into a more public light: They were composed many years since, soon after my entrance into the public Ministry. I am willing they should be a Testimony to the world, what Doctrine I then Preached, and see no cause yet to be ashamed of, and what scope or design I have always propounded to myself: The Gospel of the Kingdom; Christ; The faithsul saying, worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jes •• came into the world to save sinners, 1. Tim. 1. 15. The Apostle Doctrine, Acts, 4. 12. That there is no Salvation in any other then in Christ, for there is no other name under Heaven given amongst men whereby we must be saved, were the great things, I took myself concerned as a Preacher to publish to the world. Together with what our Savior hath taught us, That he who believeth him i not condemned: But he that believeth not is condemned already—shall not see life, but the wrath of God abideth on him, Joh. 3. 18. 36, and that Faith without works is dead. These were the grea • things I had in my eye, to open, explain, and apply to people. My apprehension that I saw much of these things revealed in the Song of Solomon (though clouded under Metaphorical expressions) was that which led me to the study of that difficult portion of holy Writ; than which undoubtedly there is no portion of the Old Testament more Evangelical, according to the common Hypothesis agreed by the most valuable Divines in all Ages, viz. That it contains a Dialogue between Christ and his Church, or particular believing Souls in it. If any think I might have chosen plainer Texts from which to discourse these things, I freely yield it as to many of them. But shall this excellent Book, always acknowledged a sacred portion of holy Writ, by the wisest man upon earth styled the Song os Songs (that is, the most excellent Song) lie by us as the Vision of a Book that is sealed, or be bound up in our Bibles for nothing? Or can there be any work more worthy of a Divine, than to attempt the clearing of so incomparable a piece of Divine Revelation from that darkness which it pleased God to clothe it with in a time, when the most which he spake concerning Christ, was in Types 〈◊〉 Prophecies, or Metaphors. Time, together with the Sermons of • hrist and his Apostles, have expounded the Types and Prophecies of Christ. Is it not a work worthy of us to explain the Metaphors, that we might have a Christ wholly unveiled? There's no great fear of any dangerous erring in the case, if he that explaineth taketh care, that his Explication agreeth with plainer Revelations. Madam, I think I may further say, that there is no portion of holy Writ so copiously as this, expressing the infinite love, and transcendent excellencies of the Lord Jesus Christ. None that more copiously instructs us, what he will be to us, or what we should be toward him, and consequently none more worthy of the pains of any who desires to Preach Christ. My Meditations upon the second Chap •• r composed in my maturer years, were published some years •• nce: Those upon this Chapter have (being done in my younger time) staid, till I could get some leisure to peruse them myself, and correct some things in the style, especially (our juvenile fancies, seldom pleasing us in our maturer years.) You will, I hope, Madam, pardon my Dedication of them to your Ladyship: Your •• lf knows how great Obligations you have laid upon me: I cannot answer them: These are all the Requitals we can make our Friends for their kindnesses. Silver and gold I have none, but what I have I humbly present your Ladyship with; nor shall I have been wholly unserviceable to your Ladyship in your highest concerns, if anything in these Discourses shall help further to inflame your Soul with love to him who is the chiefest of ten thousand, and contribute to the sending of your Soul to Heaven in the admiration of your Beloved, where you shall see him as he is, whom these Discourses will but show you as in a glass darkly. Now the God of Peace, that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great Shepherd of the Sheep, through the blood of the everlasting Covenant, make you perfect in every good work to do his will, working in you that which is well pleasing in his sight, through Jesus Christ, to whom be glory forever and ever. Amen.
April 3. 1683.
Your Ladyship's most humble Servant, JOHN COLLINGES.
TO THE READER.
SOme few years since, I was prevailed with to publish some discourses upon the Second Chapter of this excellent Song. I had then by me these upon the first Chapter, but they being composed in my younger years, I was desirous first to peruse them, before I suffered them to come forth into the World, since which time I have had so little rest that the perusal of them hath taken up much longer time than I then thought upon. The publishing of my discourses upon the Second Chapter first obliged me to take something out of these discourses, to make those as intelligible as I could, concerning the Penman, of the Book, and the Nature form, and style of it, which I have here restored to their due place with some advantage (all those things falling in to the handling of the first verse) I am not, upon the persual of notes composed so many years since, myself much pleased with the largeness of my discourses upon the five or six first verses, occasioned from the variety of Propositions raised from them, but there are couched in those verses some very great points, and my consulting so many expositors as I did, together with my proneness to suspect my own judgment rather then those whom I had reason to prefer before myself, was the cause of that. Nor did I think it much material, if I saw a Proposition offered me by any valuable interpreter as feunded on one of those verses, which I saw was a Proposition of truth, and justifiable from other Scripture, whether it were certainly there founded or no, for he pretends to too much skill, that will be too positive in giving the sense of a metaphor in this or that Text. It is enough for a modest Interpreter to give a probable sense of such expressions, and to prove it from a plainer Revelation. I hope thou wilt be so charitable to me, as to think that I troubled not a Popular auditory, with all that thou wilt find here in the opening of the several verses. I bless God I was never so idle as to make up discourses to people of what I knew they did not understand. What I found in my notes put in for my own Satisfaction I have let go, not knowing but my book might fall into the hands of some Scholar, who might be able to judge from what Satisfied me, upon what grounds I formed such Propositions of truth as I did from the several verses so preparing the matter of more Popular, and practical discourse. I bless God I always looked upon the work of the ministry, as the most grave, and serious employment under Heaven, whether the Minister speaks with reference to explication or application. In the first he acts as an Interpreter, making the words of the eternal God, more plain, and intelligible to the infirm capacityes of his people. How great is that work to be the Lord's Interpreter? In the latter he acts as an Ambassador, persuading, and offering terms of peace between God, and man, and using all his art in entreating men to be reconciled to God. Who is sufficient for these things? As to the former we have no more accommodate means, then searching the Original texts, comparing the usage of words in one Text with the usage of them in others, consulting Interpreters who have gone before us, then using our own judgments, as to what they have said, or our own thoughts shall further suggest to us; thou wilt discern that this is the method I have used, and if in anything I have been mistaken, I have erred neither willfully nor singly. When I had examined the several verses, my work was to raise Propositions from them so interpreted, to open them, to justify them to be divine truths from other places of plainer Revelation. For my method, and style, it is what I judged most accommodate to the end of my work. No man discourseth to any length upon a subject without a method, some use a Cryptick method, which is only for their own conduct, others a plainer method for the advantage of others, the former may do well enough in the Schools, where the end is only to raise some subitaneous affections; I never thought it proper for the Pulpit, where the Preachers end is or should be, to inform his People in the great things of God, and to affect their hearts, and in order to it he is bound to speak with the best advantage both for their memories and understandings, thou wilt find I have kept to the ordinary plain method of explication, confirmation, and application. No man having drank old wine desireth new, for he saith, the old is better. In the proof of Propositions I have rather studied the evidence of holy writ, and Scriptural reason, then other more incertain Topics, knowing it the duty of Ministers to take care, that the faith of their people, may not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God. One plain Text of holy Writ more confirms a Proposition of Divine truth to an understanding Christian, then an hundred rational arguments. For my style it was the least of my study, my Opinion always was that what Augustine calls diligens negligentia, was the best diligence as to that; while I was yet a very young man I had learned out of him, that it was no Solecism in a Preacher to use ossum for os, for (saith he) an Iron key is better then one made of gold, if it will better open the door, for that is all the use of the key. I had learned out of Jerome, that a gaudry of phrases, and words in a Pulpit is but Signum insipientiae. The words of a Preacher; saith he, ought pungere, non palpare, to prick the heart, not to smooth and coax. The work of an Orator is too precarious for a Minister of the Gospel. Gregory observed that our Savior hath not styled us the sugar but the salt of the Earth, and Augustine observeth, that though Cyprian in one Epistle shown much of a florid Orator, to show he could do it, yet he never would do so anymore, to show he would not. The study of words, the right placing of them for their better chiming, &c. I always thought a puerile, and pedantic thing, fitter for a School boy, then a minister of the Gospel. Honest Souls when they come to hear the word do not come to see Reeds shaken with the wind of Ostentation and Vain-glory, nor yet to see men clothed with the soft raiment of fine expressions and phrases, (which for the most part like such clothes have least efficacy to warm a Soul, or to keep it in any Religious heat) they come to hear a Prophet, yea more then a Prophet, a man that shall reveal the mind and will of God to them. To me the most tunable tongues in Pulpits, always ring most awke. It is beneath the gravity of a Preacher to tickle a wanton Ear. The end of all words is but to convey to our minds the knowledge of things, and those are the best words that do that best, grandia granditer dicenda. I never thought myself further concerned as to words, then to speak intelligibly, and so as through no rudeness or indecency of phrase to make Persons nauseate my discourse who had a just Reverence for divine things. Words will always follow matter, but matter doth not always attend words. I bless God I early discerned and avoided this trifling, rather desiring to humble that style which was at my tongues end, then to strain my tongue to a dialect which I either thought my People understood not, or was beneath the greatness of the subjects of my discourse. If any think the portion of Scripture undertaken in these discourses not fit for a Preacher, they should do well to consider, whether it be not a portion of holy writ, and such a portion as the eminentest Divines in all ages, and of all persuasions have thought worthy their pains to inquire the sense of. Having thus far Apologized for the following discourses I leave them to thy candor and judgment, begging God's blessing upon them to thy Souls advantage,
April 3. 1683.
JOHN COLLINGES.
The First Chapter of the Song of Solomon paraphrased, and turned into English Meeter, so as it may be Sung in the Ordinary Tunes, in which the English Psalms are sung.
CHAP. II.
A Prefatory Discourse UPON THE SONG of SOLOMON.
HAving undertaken this excellent portion of Holy Writ, for the Subject of these Exercises, it is reasonable I should (according to the usual, and commendable order of Interpreters,) discourse a little, concerning the Divine Authority of it; concerning the Subject matter of it; the Penman, the time, and occasion of the writing of it, and concerning the form, especially considering, that as to some or all of these, there are some difficulties to be assoiled, more than concerning other portions of Scripture, and concerning some of them, some things more peculiar to this, than any other Book.
The first Verse of the Song (which I have now read to you) gives me a sufficient foundation for the most of my discourse of this nature, if in any part of it I swerve from my Text, I shall yet keep to my business, which is by these previous exercises, to prepare you for clearer understanding of the sacred contents of this Spiritual Song.
The Text affords us these three propositions.
1 Prop. That this Book was Solomon's.
2 Prop. That it is a Song.
3. Prop. That it is a Song of Songs.
The first will lead us to a discourse of the Penman, and that, to a modest Enquiry after the time, and occasion of his writing it, and (that well known) we shall easily determine the Author, and both from that advantage, and the auxiliary help of other Arguments conclude concerning its Divine Authority against all opposers.
The second leads me to the consideration of the form of the writing, being Metrical and Dramatical. What else occurreth concerning that, shall be there added.
The third will lead me to the consideration of the Matter and Scope. I begin with the first of these.
1 Prop. The Book of Canticles was Solomon's.
This is so plainly asserted in the Hebrew Text, (where this is the first verse) that it cannot well be denied, without the denial of the other matter contained in it; the only ground of scruple is because of the particle ל prefixed in the Original, which is oft a note of the Dative or Accusative Case, as if it were rather dedicated to Solomon, then written by him: But to clear this, we need not Christopolitanus his fancy, that it is to show us, that Solomon here sang not of himself, but to the true Solomon Jesus Christ, nor yet Delrio 's fancy, that it signifies as much as secundum, The Song of Songs according to Solomon, as we say that the Gospel according to Matthew, which was wrote by Matthew: for the instances in the Titles of David's Psalms, are sufficient to evidence the Grammar good enough, in making ל a note of the Genitive Case sometimes.
Taking that therefore upon the Credit of the Hebrew Text. Let us more particularly inquire;
1. Who this Solomon was.
2. At what time he wrote this Sacred Book, and what (probably) gave him the occasion of it.
Solomon was the Son of David: the King of Israel.
The Son of David by Bathsheba, the Wife of Uriah, born in Jerusalem, 2 Sam. 5. 14. So named by his Father David, 2 Sam 12. 24. at his Birth, it is said, The Lord loved him. Upon which, v. 25. David sent by Nathan, and called his name Jedidiah. i. e. beloved of God. (Abulensis thinks it was not his proper name, nor was he afterward (that we read of) called by it.) Solomon signifies Peaceable, he was so named before he was born, by Nathan, 1 Chron. 22. 9. and that with respect to the peace, and quietness of Israel in his days. God there Covenanted with David for him, that he should be his Son, and that he would be a Father to him, and the Covenant recorded, Psal. 89. (made with David) had a special relation unto him. v. 25. 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34. He succeeded his Father in the Kingdom by his Fathers appointment, 1 Kings 1. 32. and reigned with such an affluence of Divine Blessings, as none might compare with him. He loved the Lord, 1 Kings 3. 3. and walked in the Statutes of his Father. God in Gibeon appeared to him, saying, Ask what shall I give thee, v. 9. He asks a wise and understanding heart, to judge his people, and to discern good and bad asunder; which saying, so pleased the Lord, that the Lord not only granted what he asked, v. 10. 11, 12, 13. but also riches, and honor, so as there was none like unto him all his days. He built the Temple, and the Lord again graciously appears to him upon his Prayer at the Dedication of the Temple, 1 Kings, ch. 9. The Queen of Sheba, came to admire his wisdom, for he exceeded all the Kings of the Earth, in Riches, and Honor, 1 Kings 10. 23. Now of this Solomon it is said, That he loved many strange Women, together with the Daughter of Pharaoh: Women of the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Sidonians, and Hitties, &c. and v. 6. They turned away his heart from God, when he was old, and v. 5. he went after Ashtaroth, and Milcom, and built high places, for Chemosh, and for Molech, v. 7. And here ariseth a Question, to which it is reasonable that I should speak something in this place, because this Song is judged to relate much to that action of Solomon's life.
Qu. Whether Solomon sinned in marrying of Pharaoh's Daughter, or whether that first match of his was lawful?
Theodoret and Soudas conclude that he did sin, and prove it from 1 Kings 11. 1. where this Marriage of his, together with his later Marriages with the Daughters of the Canaa • etes, seem to be condemned; besides that the law of God seems to have been against all such Marriages, Deut. 7. 3. and Ezra. ch. 9. 1. reckons it up as the sin of the people that they had taken to wife the Daughters of the Egyptians, &c.
Bellarmine, Cajetan, Soto, Abulensis and others, think, That he did not sin in this Marriage, to prove which, they produce, 1 Kings 3. 1. where Solomon's making affinity with Pharaoh, and taking of his Daughter is mentioned, and afterward v. 3. it is said. Solomon loved the Lord, I walked in the Statutes of David his Father. Certain it is (allowing no transpositions) after this, God made his signal appearances to him in Gibeon, and upon the dedication of the Temple. Besides, they urge the Friendship between David, and the King of Egypt, and the probability of David's contracting this Marriage for his Son before his death. They further say, that the Law, Deut. 7. 3. did not simply, and universally forbid Marriages, with the Daughters of Idolaters. Joseph Married Potiphar 's Daughter, Gen. 41. 45. Moses Married Jethru 's Daughter, Exo. 2. 1. Boaz Married Ruth a Moabitess. Ruth 2. and Sampson a Daughter of the Philistines, and David, the King of Geshurt 's Daughter, 2 Sam. 3. 2. And there was a particular law directing the formality of such Marriages, when any were taken captive. Deut. 21. 10, 11. Besides there are that observe a wonderful council of God in it, both to reconcile these two contiguous Nations, in a politick alliance: and also in regard that Solomon was to be a Type of Christ, who was to reconcile Jews, and Gentiles unto God. Others think that the Law, Deut. 7. only respected the Canaanites Daughters, who by God's command were to be blotted out, but that is of no value, for Deut. 21. 10, 11. they might marry Captives. They therefore think that he sinned not in his marriage of her, but 1. In his multiplying of Wives expressly contrary to the Law. 2. In his excessive love to and fondness of her. 3. In his following her to Apostasy.
I think Pineda 's opinion is truest: That it was not by any law given to the Jews simply forbidden, to marry the Daughter of an Idolater, provided, that she was first proselyted to the Jewish Religion: which was the term which you know the Sons of Jacob put upon Hamor in the case of Dinah, viz. That his People should be Circumcised. Thus some of the Jewish Rabbies interpret those precepts, Deut. 7. 3. and Exod. 23. 3. Thus the precept, Deut. 21. 10, 11. is easily reconcilable to that, Deut. 7. 3. Hence it is very probably concluded that Pharaohs Daughter, upon her marriage, subjected herself to the Jewish Religion, and that of the Psalmist, Psal. 44. 10. favors this opinion.— Forget also thine own people, and thy Fathers House—so shall the King desire thy beauty. Hence we conclude, that Solomon's marriage with Pharaohs Daughter, was lawful: and contracted by him in his best state, in the beginning of his Reign: but it afterwards proved inexpedient: we read nothing of Solomon's defection, nor the ill influence of this match till he was old, 1 Kings 11. 1. 4. She, and his other Wives, turned away his heart from God, that it was not perfect, as was the heart of his Father David. He grossly fell away, so foully, that some question whether he ever had a truth of grace: others think his failure, a sufficient foundation for their slippery Doctrine of Total, and final Apostasy, and conclude him damned; it is something to our purpose to examine that Question also.
Qu. Whether Solomon's Apostasy was total, and final?
The Arminians say he fell away Totally, but not finally.) Some amongst the Papists, have suspended their Judgment concerning his final Apostasy, witness the Arch-Bishop of Toledo, who had Heaven and Hell pictured in his Chapel, and Solomon half in the one, half in the other. Of this mind are Jansen, Barradius, Torniellus, Pamelius, Feuardentius, Hostiensis, &c. and amongst the Ancients, Tertullian and Cyprian; to whom also amongst the Protestants, Zanchi, and Peter Martyr seem to incline. Amongst the Ancients, Augustine, Prosper, Basil, and Theodoret (to whom Pineda reckons Cyprian and Gregory) are thought to favor the more severe opinion of Solomon's total; and final Apostasy. Abulensis, Tostatus, Vega, Pererius, and Belarmine, conclude it. The Ancient Jewish Writers, and (amongst the Ancients of the Christian Church) Irenaeus, Gregor. Neocaesar: Hilary, Jerome, Ambrose, Cyril of Jerusalem, and others: amongst the Papists themselves, Aquinas, Bonaventure, Hugo Cardinalis, Comestor, Paulus Burgensis, Dionis. Carthus. Genebrard, Damianus, Pineda, Delrio, Serarius, and Lorinus. And with these the generality of Protestants, conclude he was no reprobate, nor did fall away finally, nor (say the Protestants) totally. Solomon saw a great evil under the Sun, Princes going on foot, while Servants rode on Horseback. De-La Champius observeth a greater Evil than this, in the impudent Jesuits, whose consciences will serve them to reprobate Solomon, and Canonize Traitors, and other open Servants of Lusts; and (as he noteth) what Dr. Willet long since observed, is in this instance verified concerning Bellarmine, That it is ordinary with him, when he finds his own Doctors divided to take in with the worser part of them.
We conclude for Solomon, that he was a true Child of God, and that although he fell, yet his fall was neither total, nor yet final, but he was restored by repentance.
And for this assertion, we conceive we have sufficient Evidence from Scripture, besides the Authorities of men already cited, declaring their sentiments, from several convictions.
Jerome, Cyril, and Pineda urge that Text, Prov. 24. 30. where they conceive Solomon speaking in his own Person, and saying. I went by the field of the slothful, and by the Vineyard of the man void of understanding: and loe it was all grown over with Thorns, and Nettles had covered the face thereof, and the Stone-wall thereof was broken down, v. 32. This I saw, and considered it well, I looked upon it, and received Instruction. To which Pineda joins, Prov. 30. 1, 2. which (if with the Jewish Rabbin's, we could conclude that unknown Agur to have been Solomon) would give some auxiliary strength to that in the 24th Chap. to advantage which, Pineda's observation of the (ancient) Septuagint, mixing the 24. and 29. and these words of the 30th Chap. together as if all were spake by the same man, and of himself, may be worthy of consideration.
Bachiarius, Serarius, and De-La Champius urge a 2d Argument, from 1 Kings 11. 43. and 2 Chron. 9. 31. where it is said, that when he died he was buried, with the Kings of Israel, which they think strengthened by their observation, that the Scripture mentions the the burial of Ammon, Joram, and Joash. (3 Wicked Princes) elsewhere. But we must have better Arguments than this, for we are told, that Abiam, 1 Kings 15 8. was buried in the City of David. so was Amaziah, 2 Chron. 25. 8. and Rehoboam, 2 Chron. 12. 1. when on the other side, Manasseh, (though reconciled to God before his death,) yet had not the honor of that burial. As the wisdom of divine providence, hath left the surface of the Earth, for a common walk, both for the just and unjust: so nothing appears, but that the will of God, hath left the bosom of it in any part thereof, a common bed for them; nor do I find any sufficient evidence of any consecrated burial-places so early in the world, which had there been, and had we found Solomon's Tomb there, it would have told us no more than the Churches opinion of him, and that usually to Princes, is very charitable, and questionless would have been so to him who was the greatest Prince which the Earth ever saw.
But certainly for that argument which De-La Champius, and Pineda, both bring from the Covenant, made with David concerning Solomon, mentioned 2 Sam. 7. 14. 1 Chron. 17. 13. and Psal. 89. v. 20, 21, 22, &c. to the 37th v. we may say of it as David of the Sword of Goliath. There is none to it: Let us a little view the Text: In the first you have the words of God spoken to Nathan, going to inquire God's approbation of David's design to build a Temple; the Lord denies David liberty, but takes his offer kindly, and bids the Prophet tell David;
That when his days should be fulfilled, and he should sleep with his Fathers, God would set up his seed after him, which should proceed out of his bowels, and establish his Kingdom, v. 13. I will establish the Throne of his Kingdom forever. v. 14. I will be his Father, and he shall be my Child. If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of Men, and with the stripes of the Children of Men: But my mercy shall not depart from him, as I took it from Saul whom I put away before thee. In the book of Chronicles, 1 Chron. 17. you have the same thing repeated, only there. v. 14. you have: I will settle him in my house. In the 89th Psal. you have a larger account of that covenant, so far as concerns David. v. 20. 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28. v. 29. —His seed also will I make to endure forever, &c. If his Children forsake my law, and walk not in my judgments: Then will I visit theer transgression with the rod, and their iniquity with stripes: Nevertheless, my loving kindness will I not utterly take from him. Nor suffer my faithfulness to fail. My Covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips. Once have I sworn by my Holiness, that I will not lie unto David.
In this Text you plainly discern a Covenant made with David, on the behalf of his Seed, and that Seed of his, that should sit upon his Throne (which was Solomon) as well as on the behalf of himself. Concerning him God saith: 1. I will establish the Throne of his Kingdom. 2. I will be his Father, and he shall be my Child. 3. If he sins, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the Children of men, Psal. 89. I will visit his transgression with a rod, and his iniquity with stripes. 4. My mercy shall not depart from him as from Saul. Psal. 89. Nevertheless my loving kindness, will I not utterly take from him. Nor suffer my faithfulness to fail.
1. God covenants that although Solomon should sin, yet he would not take his mercy from him. The very term of Mercy signifies more, than the continuance of the Crown to him; for (as Tychonius observes) David would have understood little mercy, for his Son to have enjoyed a temporal Kingdom, and lost an eternal inheritance.
2. The punishment which God threatens to him in case of sinning was but a Rod. The Rod of Men: for if we should allow nothing to Pineda's Criticisme, upon the term used [Enoch] to signify men here, which properly signifies a weak old man, who cannot lay on strokes hard, but chastiseth his Child gently, so as the Rod of Men here mentioned, should be opposed to the grounded staff mentioned Isaiah 30. 32. which God makes to rest upon others, yet certainly the termof a Rod; with the adjunct of Men speaks a very gentle chastening, with which eternal punishment is no way consistent.
3. Add to this; That the Holy Ghost, (the most certain Interpreter of Scripture) 1 Cor. 6. 18. Applies the very promise here made to the Children of God, I will be a Father unto you, and you shall be my Sons, and Daughters: I say who so considereth these things must certainly conclude that God's obligation by this Covenant extended further, than the continuance of the temporal dominion in his line, which is also advantaged, by the consideration that Solomon in his life time was chastened with the Rods of Men, 1 Kings 11. God stirred up against him Hadad: Rezin and Jeroboam, He was doubtless chastened of the Lord that he might not be condemned with the world.
Nor can any reasonably think to avoid the dint of the Argument, drawn from these Texts, by telling us, That a greater than Solomon is understood in them, even he of whom Solomon was but a Type.
For although it be true, that divers of the Ancients favored that notion, (amongst whom was Augustine, Ambrose, Tertullian, and Theodoret) and that some passages in the aforementioned Texts seem to be by the Holy Ghost himself applied to Christ, amongst which that eminent part of this Covenant I will be to him a Father, &c. besides that others seem applicable to no other, as where he promiseth to establish his Kingdom forever: yet it is as true, that the promise I will be to him a Father (as I shown before) is also by the Holy Ghost applied to believers, 1 Cor. 6. 18. and those who understand the Hebrew Idiome, know that the term 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 doth often signify less, than Eternity strictly so called, and it is as certain that Jerome, and divers others of the Ancients apply these Texts literally to Solomon. Possibly they compound the business better, who (considering Solomon as a Type of Christ) divide the Covenant made with David, betwixt Solomon and Christ, thinking that part concerneth Solomon, and part concerneth Christ. Sure it is, that Solomon built the material Temple not Christ, and Solomon alone, (not Christ) was in a capacity to forsake the Commandments of God; and for the promissory part, if we say it concerned Solomon in the letter, and Christ in the Mystery and Antitype: I think we shall not much err: nor will this interpretation at all weaken the strength of our argument.
I find a 4th Argument for this eminent Person, brought from 2 Sam. 12. 24, 25. compared with Neb. 13. 26. and 1 Kings 3. 3. from whence De-La Champius observeth 3 things.
1. That it is said God loved him. 2 Sam. 12. 24.— And the Lord loved him. Neh. 13. 26. He was beloved of his God. 2. In token of this love God gave him his name Jedidiah, i. e. beloved of God. 3. The Scripture saith, he loved the Lord. The consideration of the latter makes the plea vain, of those who (to avoid the dint of this Argument) would interpret God's love of that general favor which he extends to every Creature, distinguished from that by which he elevates the Creature to a participation of the Divine Nature: for that love is not so efficacious, as to produce a reciprocal love in the Creature to God again, we therefore love him because he loved us first, which being granted, unless we grant God as mutable as man, and deny what he hath said, that whom he loves, he loves to the End: We must allow that Solomon, notwithstanding his great miscarriages, was yet beloved of God, and died in a state of Grace.
Now to these Arguments, might further be added, as strong presumptions in the case, yielding at least some auxiliary strength. That no Text speaketh so desperȧtely concerning Solomon; that the Scripture, 1 Kings 11. 4. speaking of his falling, seems to hint it a sin of infirmity in his old age, and through the great temptation of his Wives: That he did only tolerate Idolatry, not make it the Religion of the Nation. That he after this (as is at least probably and generally concluded) wrote (in testimony of his repentance) the book of Ecclesiastes. That he was the Sacred Penman of Scripture. These things may much confirm our charitable opinion in the case, for although it be true, that I know no reason to the contrary, but that God, who made use of the Son of Perdition, to preach his everlasting Gospel, might also with consistency enough, to the wisdom of his Providence, make use of a Child of Perdition, to write, and ingross what his holy Spirit first dictated; nor (saith Augustine) hath God less consulted his own glory in it, for now all the good and glory of the truth revealed in those books will be given to God; Beside, it is said that Balaam's Song is also recorded in Scripture, and a piece of holy writ: yet considering that no one book of holy writ was wrote by such a withered hand as that of a reprobates; and that the Scripture fixeth no such mark upon this great Person, who was the Author of three Books there, and that one of these Books, at least appears (let Bellarmine say what he will) to be wrote after the days of his Vanity, and hath in it evident marks of his nauseating his lusts, and former vanities of pleasure, love, riches, &c. Nor have there been wanting some, who have thought so of the other two Books also, viz. the Proverbs, and the Canticles. And to these if we add that he was an eminent Type of our Lord, and Savior Jesus Christ: I say if we lay all these things together, we shall (I think) neither stand in need of the Rabbinical figments, (who tell us formal stories of Solomon's repentance:) Nor yet of that auxiliary help, (in which Pineda much triumpheth) which Petrus de Castro affords; from that Sculpture in leaden Plates, (wrote in ancient Arabic Characters) and first discovered to James the Apostle, afterward, to the aforementioned Bishop of Granada, who sought for them and found them (saith Pineda) per altos Granatensis montis cuniculos, & latebras; in which leaden Plates there should be engraven in Arabic so much concerning Solomon, as in English sounds thus.— And he bewailed his sin with a great lamentation, and it was forgiven him, and he died faithful and in peace. I say there will be no need of these Apocryphal helps, we have a more sure word of Prophecy: and stronger Scripture arguments: engaging us to conclude Solomon 's repentance, and Salvation against some of the Ancients speaking doubtfully; and the more modern Papists, speaking both peremptorily and impudently in the case; and must conclude that Immanuel Thesaurus speaks like a profane Poet, when he tells us concerning Solomon;
Having thus far given you a Character of this great Person, who wrote this sacred Book, and by this digression served my design a little, in showing you that there is no ground from his miscarriages to conclude against his being the Penman, either of this or the other pieces of Sacred Writ, to which the Hebrew Text entituleth him, and which the Ecclesiastical Juries in all ages, have found his. The next thing we have to inquire, is the time and occasion of his writing it, concerning which, the Scriptures silence hath given Writers the greater liberty to abound in their several senses; I see no great prejudice, either to Solomon himself, or to the Divine Authority of this Sacred Book, from the opinion of those, who think that Solomon wrote this Song in the beginning of his Reign, when he first Married Pharaohs Daughter (first proselyted to the Jewish Religion) at which time it is said, 1 Kings 3. 3. Solomon loved the Lord, walking in the Statutes of David his Father, and that his Marriage with Pharaohs Daughter gave him the occasion of this Heavenly Meditation (for which the greatest ground they have, is that passage, ch. 1. v. 9. I have compared thee to a company of Horses in Pharaohs Chariots.) Nor yet from the opinion of those who think that he wrote it in the close of his life, after his return to fellowship, and communion with God. If therefore any shall contend that he wrote the Book of Proverbs first; this Book next, and Ecclesiastes last of all, grounding their conjecture upon 1 Kings 4. 32. where i • is said that he wrote 3000 Proverbs, and his Songs were 1005. Or if others think that he first wrote this Book of Canticles, (which being Poetry, they think best suited his younger years) then the Book of Proverbs, and last of all that of Ecclesiastes, (the matter contained in the Book of Proverbs, seeming to be the mature issue of years, and the matter of Ecclesiastes, speaking a contempt of worldly Vanities, like that which is found with gray hairs, that have learned righteousness) I shall not contend with either. There are some who make an observation upon Solomon 's calling himself in Ecclesiastes, King of Jerusalem; In the Book of Proverbs, King of Israel: In this Book only Solomon; whence they conclude that he wrote this Book in the first of his years, before he was come to the Kingdom. The Book of Proverbs next, before he came to dwell in Jerusalem, and that of Ecclesiastes last, in his more perfect state, but possibly their conjecture is better, who think that Solomon's spiritual contemplation of Christ, (with which his heart seemeth in this Book to be ravished) was the cause why (forgetting his Titles of Honor) he calls himself by no other name, than that of Solomon, and as through all the Book he speaks to and of Christ under no other notion than that of a Beloved, and a friend, so he mentions not himself under any higher notion than Solomon, and a Love, a Spouse, &c. glorying more in being the Spouse, and Friend of Christ, than a great King in Jerusalem. Or finally, if any will assert that he wrote this Book last of all, which seems to be the opinion of Bernard, Delrio, Jerome, Bachiarius, Cyril, &c. I am indifferent to close with either party, only abhorring the opinion which was anciently condemned in Theodorus Mopsuesta, by the Council of Constantinople (saith Delrio) and which Philastrius mentions amongst the Heresies, whose Author he knew not, viz. That it is but a Love-Song, made by Solomon, having relation to Pharaohs Daughter, or the Shulamite, to which opinion also Castalio and Grotius seem to incline, and the Anabaptists in Germany are charged with it by Sixtus Senensis, which opinion indeed, is deservedly rejected, and justly to be abhorred of all sober Christians, and there needs no other witness in the case against it, than the great reverence of this Book which the Church of the Jews had, (to whom (saith the Apostle) were committed the Oracles of God, and who were sufficiently cautelous what they stamped, with that sacred stamp of Scripture Canon) who did not only constantly own this Book, as much as any other, (making it a Dialogue between God and their Church, or betwixt their Church, and some of their Patriarchs) but also barred any from reading of it, until they arrived at their sacerdotal year; whether for fear of a vain interpretation of it, or in regard of the difficulty they justly conceived, as to the expounding the metaphors (with which as with so many Stars it is adorned) or fathoming the mysteries, which they conceived lay couched in it, I shall not in this place determine. Sure I am, as the Authors of the aforementioned gross and unhandsome conceptions, have nothing to give countenance to their wanton fancies, besides the comparison of the Love here mentioned, to a company of Horses in Pharaohs Chariots, and the mention of the Shulamite, Caat. 6. 13. with another or two expressions of that Nature, upon which expressions the Vanity of their hearts only hath hindered them from putting a spiritual interpretation: so even some of these expressions, with divers others in this Sacred Song, make their impure conceptions highly improbable; for (if the Dialect of times be not strangely altered) it was certainly a strange commendation, for so learned and wise a man as Solomon, to give of a Woman whom he loved, to compare her to a company of Horses, her Head to Mount Carmel, and her Eyes to Fish Pools, her Nose to a Tower; her Teeth to a flock of Sheep, &c. all which with divers such (seemingly uncouth) expressions we have in this Song.
After all this we shall find it no difficult thing to determine the Divine Authority of this Book: The Apostle saith that Holy Men wrote the Scriptures as inspired by God, we have evinced, that the Penman of this Book was an Holy Man: both in the former and latter part of his life. That he wrote this Book, is universally agreed, and that he wrote it by a divine inspiration, can be as little questioned by him, who understands aright the Jewish reverence of it, and ranking it equally with other Books of the Canon. Besides that the Churches constant possession of it, requires some force of argument, before it can be rejected; and this hath not yet appeared.
Several witnesses indeed have come against it, but either they have not been agreed, or they have spake nothing Cogent in the cause.
Whereas some object the many amatorious expressions throughout the Song: It signifies little to those who have so far observed the Scriptures, as to take notice, that as the Apostle makes use of the Ordinance of Marriage, to represent the mystical Union between Christ and the Church, Eph. 5. 32. So Christ is expressly called a Bridegroom, his Church, and the believing Soul in particular, the Bride, Joh 3. 29. And that his preparing the Soul for, and uniting the Soul to himself, is called a Betrothing, Hos. 2. 14, 15. and the Church is called the Lambs Wife, Rev. 22. and a pure Virgin, 2 Cor. 11. Yea so far is this from being an argument against the Divine Authority of this sacred Book, that the uncouthness of the same expressions, is an argument, that it is no mere Woman here intended, for besides that (which Mercer noteth out of Ibn-Ezra) that modesty would not have allowed Solomon to have left such expressions (had they been to have been carnally interpreted) upon public record to posterity. Nor was it lawful to the Jews to make their Sisters their Spouses, (yet is it a phrase often used in this Song, My Sister, my Spouse) besides what I noted before of the strange comparisons used, if they were carnally to be interpreted.
Whereas it is objected by others that the name of God is not once mentioned throughout the Book. They might as well (upon this account) quarrel at the Book of Ecclesiastes out of the Canon, or if not that, yet the Book of Esther, which are both subject to the same charge, if any will tell us, that though the name Jehovah be not found in Ecclesiastes, yet other names of God are 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , &c. Besides that neither those names are peculiar to God, nor yet to be found in the Book of Esther. We also say (with Mercer) That there is hardly a verse in this Song, wherein mention is not made of God, and Christ, according to that metaphorical way of expression, in which it pleased the Holy Ghost to dictate this Sacred Song to Solomon: nor was their need of any further mentioning of God, in a discourse composed in this form, than under the notion of a Beloved, &c. in which notion he is frequently mentioned. And certainly, had this objection been of any value, the superstitious Reverence which the Jews had of the name Jehovah, would have engaged them first to have picked this quarrel: which yet it did not. But Bernard gives another reason, (and with him I find Sixtus Senensis Delrio, and others agreeing) which I confess pleaseth me, Amor loquitur qui Dominum nescit, &c. God is not indeed made known to us in this Song, under the names of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , all which speak, Power, Lordship, Sovereignty, Sufficiency, &c. It is love here speaks: Quando vult timeri dominum; quando vult honorari patrem, quando amari sponsum se nominat Dominus. Solomon's design in this Book, is to set out God in Christ, reconciled to his Church, and to the souls of his People, embracing them in the arms of loving kindness. Those other names of God, Jehovah, Elohim, &c. spake the power, and greatness of God, which well suited the first dispensation of the Covenant of Grace, which was more hard, and rigorous, than the latter dispensation of it. So that the not naming of God under those fore-mentioned notions through out this book, only speaks it a more evangelical portion of Scripture, than some other Books of Holy Writ are. Solomon's design in this Book was to set out God in Christ reconciled to the Soul, embracing it in the sweetest arms of loving kindness, and tender mercies: The wisdom of the Holy Ghost therefore directeth Solomon to speak in a dialect, proper to the matter he writeth; nor is there anything more usual in Scripture, than for God's people (going to him for mercies) to give him names expressive of that sufficiency which is in him, and of that suitableness in him, to the necessitous state of his people, and readiness to help him. David praying for Divine Protection, calleth God his Rock, his Shield, his Buckler, his strong Tower: and Christ hath taught God's Children to say unto him Our Father!
Nor thirdly, Is their quarrel against this Sacred Book considerable, who have this to object against it, That no place of it is quoted in the New Testament, for besides that by the same allegation, they may blot out the Book of Judges, Ruth, 2 Sam. 2 Chron. Ecclesiastes, and divers of the small Prophets, out of the Canon of Scripture, I say besides this, there are some phrases in the New Testament, which (in the Judgment of Beza and others,) seem to be borrowed out of this Sacred Song, such as those, Joh. 6. 44 No man cometh to the Son but he whom the Father draweth, compared with Can. 1. 4. Saint Paul tells his Corinthians, that his desire was to present them to Christ as a Chast Virgin, which corresponds with Chap. 5. v. 2. of this Song, where Christ calls his Spouse Undefiled.
From what hath been said appeareth, that although the Penman of this Book was Solomon, yet a greater than Solomon was the Author of it, Solomon (an holy Man) spake in it, as he was inspired by God. I proceed to the 2d Proposition.
2. Prop. That this Book is a Song.
This argues it a piece of Hebrew Poetry: wrote (originally) in Meeter, upon which account it differs from most of the other Books of Holy Writ. But more particularly I shall open this in 4 or 5 particulars: 1. It is I say a Song, one of those which the Apostle, Eph. 5. calls Spiritual Songs, it may be too hard a task for me to determine, why it pleased the Holy Penman of this Scripture to write it in this, rather than in any other form, I shall by and by show you that it was a Song of Love, and (possibly) the holy Penmans design being to discourse the Souls Communion with Christ (here) under that Metaphor might be one cause, (Marriage-Songs being very ancient.) 2. To this I shall only add the observation, which some have made of that singular virtue, which the composing and singing of Songs, hath had to excite and inflame the affections. I remember our Divine Poet tells us, That he was most with God; while he was exercised in his Divine Poetry, Besides, the suitableness that a Song hath unto the natures of others, the same Author observes,
Whether Solomon's consideration of these, or any of these things, might rather incline him to write in this, than in any other form; I shall not undertake to determine.
Secondly, It is a Song of Love. I noted to you before, the ancient custom of singing Songs at Marriages, in praises of the parties so joined together. These Songs were called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 & 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a The Argument of them usually, was the (supposed) mutual desires of the Bridegroom, and Bride; and they were also filled with the respective praises of each of them; with the praises of their Garments, Beds. &c. Solomon guided by the holy Spirit of God (who often resembled the Spiritual and mystical Union between the Church and the believing Soul, and Christ so, of a Marriage) maketh choice of this kind of Song, in this Book; of this Nature is the 45th Psal. and that Song, Isaiah 51, 2, 3. (though the Argument of that differs.)
Thirdly, It is a Spiritual Song. The Loves which are here sang, are no Carnal Loves, but Spiritual, it is not as some profanely fancy, a discourse of Love betwixt Solomon and Pharaohs Daughter: or Solomon and the Shulamite, I have heretofore shown you the vanity of that conceit, it is Sponsa mystica, a mystical Spouse that is here represented to us under that notion; I have said enough before to prove this.
Fourthly, It is Dramatical, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a Song of parts composed after the form of a Dialogue, which was very usual in their Songs of Love; Here are in this Song 3 sorts of Persons, which have their parts. 1. One who is represented under the Notion of a Beloved. 2. Another who is represented under the notion of a Spouse, a Love, a Sister, &c. 3. The third sort are the friends of the Bride-chamber, ordinarily in this Song represented under the notion of the Daughters of Jerusalem: who they are represented under these disguises is matter of our further enquiry.
Abating those (whose profane fancy we have already rejected) who think that Solomon is the beloved here mentioned (making the whole book but a wanton Love-Song) I think the generality of Interpreters are reasonably well agreed, that God himself, or more particularly the Lord Jesus Christ (the 2d Person in the Trinity considered as mediator,) is he who is in this Song set out to us under this notion of the Beloved.
It is almost as universally agreed, that, The Church of God in the general, and the particular Servants of God, Members of that Church, are those here represented to us, under the notion of the Spouse, but whether it were the Church of the Jews, considered distinctly, from the Gospel Church, or the Church of the Gentiles, distinct from the Jewish Church, or the Church, and People of God in all ages, concerning this there are several opinions, according to the particular fancies, and affections of Interpreters, or according to their different notions, and apprehensions, concerning the matter of this book, which some will have to be historical, and make it little more than a Narrative of what God had done for the Church of the Jews, of which mind is the Calder Paraphrast, and the most of the Jewish Doctors. Others will have it prophetical, amongst whom are Luther, Alsted, Brightman, Aquinas, and Mr. Cotton, &c. Others again Doctrinal, instructing us in that near Communion, and Fellowship betwixt Jesus Christ and his Church, and every particular believing Soul, and setting out that nearness of relation, and affection, which is betwixt them, together with their mutual apprehensions each of other; yet it cannot be denied, but there are some particular passages in it, prophetical, and more specially relating to the Church long after Solomon's time.
By the friends of the Bride-chamber called, the Watchmen, the Daughters of Jerusalem, &c. in this Song, are undoubtedly to be understood, the Ministers of the Church in respective ages, with the chorus fidelium, the whole company of Believers, &c.
The last thing which is observable, as to the form of this Song is the figurative dialect in which it is written; Besides the continued Allegory of two lovers, running quite through the Song, the Spiritual mysteries of it are expressed with a greater variety of Metaphors, than are found together in any other part of holy writ; which make it more difficult to be understood, and which possibly might be one reason why the reading of it was restrained in the Jewish Church. This made that devout man long since cry out; Hic panis colestis, quis vero frangit? non equidem mihi istud temere arrogandum, sic expectetis a me, ut non expectetis, nam & ego unus sum de expectantibus. Here is heavenly bread! but who can break it? I cannot rashly arrogate such a faculty to myself expect it from me, as not expecting, for I myself am expecting the revelation of it. And thus much shall serve for the second thing. The third follows.
3. Prop. It is the Song of Songs 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 —
The Song of Songs, (as some think) because it consists of several Songs relating to one and the same Subject, compacted together in one, and the same book.
Or (as others) because it is the most excellent Song; The Hebrews haveseveral ways, by which they express the superlative degree, one is by apposition of Substantives, (as here, the Song of Songs.) putting the latter Substantive in the Genitive Case Plural. So that by the Song of Songs is meant the most excellent Song, now this is so called. (1) Either relating to the other Songs which Solomon made, for 1 Kings 4. 32. he made a Thousand and five; of all his Songs this was the most excellent: Or else (2.) relating to the other Spiritual Songs in Scripture, you read of the Song of Moses; of the Song of Miriam, and Deborah, of the Songs of David, &c. but no Song like this: This is the Song of Songs; of all the other Songs Solomon made in Holy Writ, this is the most excellent, not in respect of the Antiquity of it (as some have fancied) for doubtless the Song of Moses, Aaron, and Miriam, was far more ancient; nor yet because of the noble Author of it, who was the wisest man upon the Earth. But in respect of the Spiritual matter of it. Look (saith Bernard) upon all the other Authors of Songs in Scripture, and their respective Songs.— Sane omnes (ni fallar) cecinisse reperies pro percepto suo, vel suorum commodo.—hic vero divinitus inspiratus Christi, & Ecclesiae laudes, & sacri amoris gratiam, & aeterni connubii cecinit Sacramenta. Other composers of Songs you will find sang them upon receipt of some outward mercy conferred upon them, and theirs: But Solomon (here) inspired by God, sings the praises of the Church, and Christ, he sings concerning the Seals of sacred love, and the Eternal Marriage. Those are the excellent Songs, which set cut the Excellencies of the Lord Jesus Christ. This Book is wholly Evangelical, wholly Spiritual. But I have spoke enough also to this third Proposition. Give me leave to make some application of this discourse.
In the first place, Let me speak to all of you, who shall hear my further discourses concerning any part of this Book, (as once God spake to Moses at the Burning Bush) Put off thy Shoes from off thy Feet, for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground. While I shall be opening those figurative expressions, by which it pleaseth the Holy Ghost (by Solomon) to discourse these Spiritual Loves;—Procul O procul este profani. Saint Paul (to Titus) saith, Unto the pure all things are pure; but unto them that are defiled, and unbelieving; there is nothing pure but even their minds, and consciences are defiled. I am sure it may be said so of every line of holy writ, to the pure heart, every line there is pure: not so to the impure, the reason is because their own minds, and consciences are filthy, and impure. Here is no wantonness in these sacred lines, they contain indeed discourses of loves, but altogether Divine and Spiritual, (though under carnal disguises.) Oh let not your wanton hearts bring hither any unclean thoughts.
Secondly, Methinks much of what I have said, may engage your minds to attention to me, while I shall endeavor to unfold the Spiritual mysteries in this Book.
The Penman of this Book was Solomon. The name of a King, (amongst men) carries with it a great reverence, and authority, but Solomon was no ordinary King, the Lord gave him such a degree of wisdom, that none before or after him, were ever like unto him, 2 Chron. 1. 12. The Queen of Sheba thought it worth her travel to come from the utmost parts of the world, to be his auditor, and went away, admiring his wisdom; nay more, he was one whom the Lord loved, thence he had his name Jedidiah, 2 Sam. 12. 24, 25. we may therefore expect to hear the secrets of the Lord from his mouth, rather than from another man; When the disciples, Joh. 13. 23. were at loss for an interpretation of what Christ said, they beckned to the Disciple whom he loved, to inquire his meaning, and were presently satisfied: further yet, he was an eminent Type of Christ. It is Solomon that speaks, but he speaks as the Organ of Christ, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , saith Greg. Nyssen. Christ useth Solomon as his instrument, and by him speaks to us. But this brings me to a second Consideration as much engaging you to attention, and far more than the former.
A greater than Solomon is here. Solomon speaks in this Song in the Person of Christ, and Christ by him here speaketh unto you: Solomon 's hand holds the Pen, but Christ guides his hand to every letter in this sacred Song.
Nor was this holy Song (as you have heard) composed in Solomon's time of deviation from God, that indeed would have weakened the authority of it; but either in the former part of his life before he went astray from God: or in the latter part, when he was again returned unto him; be it which it will, we are by it strongly engaged to the study, and understanding of it, as it from a great experience informeth a gracious soul, to what degree of communion with God it may arrive, and what sweet intercourses (even in this life) betwixt Christ and a believing Soul are attainable by that Soul that followeth after them, whether in its Virgin State, before it hath more notoriously estranged itself from God, or upon a true repentance after eminent backslidings.
The exceeding sweetness, and spirituality of the matter, highly commends it to every spiritual heart: There is no part of the Word of God, but is exceedingly sweet, and precious, the historical part of it is so, for if it be pleasant to read the Histories of Nations; and Kingdoms, &c. how much more sweet should it be to every gracious Soul, to read and understand the series of Divine Providences towards that People, whom (above all the Nations of the Earth) he set apart for himself, whom he miraculously conducted, and for them made his holy Arm so eminently bare in the sight of all the Nations of the world: The preceptive part of the Word of God (which we call the Law) is also exceeding precious to a gracious Soul (it was so to David, sweeter than the Honey, or Honey-comb, &c.) and St. Paul (as to his inward man) delighted in it. But of all the portions of holy writ, the Gospel part is most sweet. That which reveals, a God in Christ reconciling the world to himself, which tells you what Christ is in himself, considered as Mediator, God-man, &c. which discovereth the Excellencies and desirableness of him who is Totus desideria; altogether desires. Those parts of Scripture which let us know what Christ is to his poor people, how tender of them, how jealous for them, how condescending, and kind to them, and how dear and precious they are to him: Of all the portions of holy writ Experience speaks those most exceeding sweet to us, where Christ is set out in the pantings of his heart, and yernings of his bowels towards his poor Children. Such is this portion of holy writ: when we shall have taken off the Vail of Metaphors, with which this sacred portion of holy writ is covered, we shall find that there is scarce any portion of holy writ, wherein those sweet, and spiritual mysteries of the Souls union, and Communion with Jesus Christ, are more fully, and affectionately described.
The more special form of it as a Song, doth likewise commend it to our attention, there is a secret virtue in Poetry, engagine Peoples hearts, and affections to attention. If a wanton Love-Song, which discourseth the virtues, and beauty of Creatures, can lay such an hold upon our Ears, and Hearts; what should this Song do! which discourseth the Excellencies of him who is the fairest amongst the Sons of Men, the chiefest of ten thousand, altogether desires, and his particular indearments to the Souls of his Creatures, which have no comeliness but what he puts upon them; certainly the hearing of these discourses must ravish every spiritual heart. This is the Song of Songs.
Finally the Metaphors with which this excellent Song is clothed, must needs give it a great advantage with every ingenuous Soul, which naturally desires the understanding of what is hid from it, we may suppose God therefore to have thus phrased this Spiritual Song, that we might have greater desires kindled in us to understand the mind and will of God revealed in it. The harder the Shell is, the sweeter the Nut will be found, when once the Shell is cracked.
Lastly, What you have heard; may serve you as a Key for the unlocking this whole portion of Scripture, and guide you in the understanding of my future discourses. By the Beloved speaking in this Song, you are to understand the Lord Jesus Christ. By the Spouse (whom he sometimes calleth his love) you may understand the Church, and more particularly every truly believing Soul. By the Watchmen, the Ministers of the Church, whom God hath set to watch for Souls. By the Daughters of Jerusalem (sometimes mentioned) either the Members of the Church, or the Neighbors of it. The two first have the greatest share in the Song, the others sometimes speak, and are sometime spoken to, But this is enough to have spoken by way of preface, 'It is time to leave the threshold, and to enter in to this pleasant House.
Only give me leave as an Epilogue to this discourse to subjoin the Judgment of Ludovicus de Ponte (though a Papist, yet a learned Man) who hath copiously interpreted this Spiritual Song, and (allowing him the Popish Devotion for the Sacred Virgin, which makes them all think they see her in every Text) hath done much in it well. It is prefixed to his Latin Commentary. To this purpose.
The Book of Solomon (which from the nobleness of the Argument is called the Song of Songs) is, a spiritual conference betwixt that God, who is three and yet one, or betwixt Christ who is true God, and Man, and his Church, whether ancient or modern: and every gracious Soul which is a Member of that Church. In which discourse God hath a double part, and personateth two several Persons: The person of a most wise Instructer or Master: delivering to his Disciple the sublime Doctrine of Faith and Holiness. 2. The Person of a most endeared lover, extolling and courting his most beloved Spouse, with wonderful praises; and enriching her with great gifts and favors: The Church also represents a double Person. 1. The Person of a Disciple, or Spouse, towards God, or the Person of a Mistress, or companion towards other Souls which she calls the Daughters of Jerusalem.
The Argument of this Conference, as well became such Persons, is sublime, pleasant, profitable, and abundantly copious, for whatsoever the ancient Prophets sang, whatsoever the Evangelists afterwards related; or the Apostles Preached, whether relating to the mysteries of faith, or to holiness, and Gospel perfection, it is all in this Song comprehended in the style of lovers; (the style being Spiritual not Carnal.) But because the Metaphors and Similitudes, which fill this whole Book, are taken from Carnal Marriages. We must pill off the bark, that the letter might not kill. That being once taken off, the spiritual part lying within, will enlighten the Soul, and quicken, and inflame and perfect it. For according to our Savior's words, it is the Spirit that quickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing: and the words of this Song are Spirit, and life, to those who do sincerely consider them. For as the Ancient Priests of the Jews (as we read in the Book of Maccabees) when they looked for the sacred fire, which they had hidden, found nothing but thick water, which water (to the admiration of all) when the Sun shined out of the Cloud again, was turned into fire: so he who looks upon the Book of Canticles with carnal Eyes, will only find the puddle-water of words, which the outside letter seemeth to show, which will fill his heart with darkness instead of light, with a carnal chilling instead of spiritual heat. But if the divine Sun enlightens, that which seemed puddle water, will become coelestial fire, wonderfully enlightening the understanding, and inflaming the will.—
But although the whole Book of Canticles containeth 8 Chapters, and by Interpreters be divided into three, five, or more parts, yet I believe the first, and second Chapters are a sum, or breviary of all those mysteries of Faith, which are contained in the six other Chapters; which is evidenced from this, that the close of the second and of the last Chap. are much the same, to show us, that the narration of matter is finished in the second Chapter, and that from the third Chapter beginneth a new discourse of the same mysteries under new Metaphors, and Similitudes.
Discourses of Divine Love BETWEEN CHRIST and the CHURCH.
From the first Chap. of the Song of Solomon.
Sermon I.
I Have observed in my prefatory discourse, that some have fancied that this Book is called The Song of Songs, because it contains several Songs in it: It is in our Bibles divided into 8 Chapters, and by Interpreters into several periods, according to their particular fancies. Ludovicus De Ponte conceives, as I shown you, that the two first Chapters contain a Breviary of all the rest: and as an evidence of it, alledgeth the same close both of the second, and eighth Chapter: and from the third Chapter he thinks there begins a repetition of the same spiritual mysteries, under new Metaphors, whether that notion (in the extent of it) be true or no: doubtless the two first Chapters contain much spiritual Doctrine, informing us in the near communion betwixt the Lord Jesus Christ, and the believing Soul. A learned Interpreter distributes this Chapter into two parts, the first he calls Prooemium, a Preface, the second Colloquium, a Conference betwixt the two great Interlocutors in this spiritual discourse.
In the former you have two things. 1. A Prayer. 2. An Apology. The first in v. 1, 2, 3, 4, 7. The second (as a Parenthesis) v, 5, 6. The Prayer consisteth of three Petitions, each of which is urged by suitable arguments. The first petition is v. 2. Let him kiss me with the kisses of his Month. The second, v. 4. Draw me. The 3d is v. 7. Tell me O thou whom my Soul loveth, &c. where thou feedest, where thou makest thy flocks to rest at noon. The further distribution of the Chapter, and the several verses in it, I shall leave, until I come in order to them.
My Text containeth the first Petition, with an argument annexed. The petition in those words. Let him kiss me with the kisses of his Mouth. The argument in the latter words, for his love is better then Wine. For the just understanding of the words, we must consider, 1. Who it is that speaketh. 2. To whom the Speech is directed. 3. what the import of the Petition is.
As to the first our Translation puts it out of doubt, and it is as universally agreed amongst Interpreters, that the Person speaking is she who throughout the whole Song bears the Person of the Spouse, by which (having already rejected the notions of those who understand Pharaohs Daughter, or the Shulamite, as also of those who restrain it to the Jewish Church) must be understood; either the Church in the general, or the believing Soul in particular, who here speaketh.
Either to the Bridegroom [the Lord Jesus Christ] or to God, the Father of this Bridegroom, whose it is to bless us with all spiritual blessings, in and through him. Supposing the latter, the believing Soul directeth her request, as her beloved directeth (when he commands us to pray, saying, Our Father.) If the petition be understood, as directed to the Lord Jesus Christ: Let him kiss me, is as much as, Do thou kiss me. Vicem nominis supplet vis amoris, the force of her love supplieth the omission of his name (saith Lud. de Ponte.) It is a very usual dialect of Scripture, to put the 3d Person for the 2d: so the Psalmist: God be merciful unto us, and bless • us. But
3. Qu. What doth the Spouse mean by Let him kiss me with the kisses of his Mouth?
Some read it, He did kiss me with the kisses of his Mouth. Thus the ancient Chaldee Paraphrast. Blessed be the name of the Lord, who gave us his Law, written by the hand of Moses his Scribe, who wrote it in two Tables of Stone; and spake with us face to face, as a man who kisseth his Companions: through the greatness of his love wherewith he loved us more than threescore, and ten Nations. But the style of the Song is rather pathetical and optative, than historical and narrative: and it is rather referred to Christ as Mediator, than to God the Father, or the Lord Jesus Christ, considered (only) as God over all blessed forever; besides that the Hebrew word (being in the future tense) refers rather to the time to come, than to the time past, and I see no need of inventing a figure.
There is a threefold kiss, of which you read in Scripture. 1. The kiss of the feet. Thus the penitent Woman, Luk. 7. 38. kissed her Savior's feet. 2. The kiss of the hand, Job 31. 27. If my mouth hath kissed my hand. 3. The kiss of the lips. Prov. 24. 26. and so in many other Texts.
The Schoolmen tell us of a seven-fold kiss: a kiss of 1. Love 2. Union. 3. Reverence and Honor. 4. Adoration. 5. Reconciliation and Peace. 6. Treachery, as Joab kissed Abner and Amasa, and Judas kissed Christ. 7. Wantonness.
According to the usages of several Nations, there were several sorts of kisses, distinguished by their objects, and ends, they were wont to kiss the head, lips, cheek, shoulders, hands, backs, feet, of their superiors, inferiors, and equals, and that for several testimonies, which yet (I think) are reducible to two heads:
For a testimony of honor, reverence, and subjection. Thus Parents were kissed by their Children: Jacob came near and kissed Isaac, Gen. 50. 1. Joseph fell upon his Fathers face, and kissed him. Thus Exod. 18. 7. Moses went out to meet his Father in Law, and did obeisance and kissed him, and Orpah kissed her Mother in Law: Thus the Persians were wont (according to the differences of Persons in respect of quality) to give differing kisses. Equals kissed one another's lips, the Person who was but a little inferior, kissed his superiors Cheek. The lower sort fell at their superiors feet, and kissed them: Thus Idolaters shown their reverence to their Idols, and the true Worshipers of God were by this distinguished.— They had not kissed Baal, 1 Kings 19. 28. and the Idolaters in Israel, said. Let the men that sacrifice kiss the Calves, Hos. 13. 2. Thus also we are commanded to kiss the Son: least he be angry, Psal. 2. 12. which Jerome translates: Purely worship the Son. This is now a kiss wherewith we ought to kiss Christ, but this is not the kiss of the Text.
Secondly, Kisses were used for a testimony of love, which sometimes was hypocritical, and so the kissing deceitful, such were the kisses of Joab and Judas, ordinarily real; which might be considered either as continued or interrupted. Kisses were 1. Used in token of continuing love; As appears by the several precepts of the Apostles regulating the use of them, by a law of holiness and chastity, Rom. 16. 16. 1 Cor. 16. 20: &c. Or 2. In token of renewed love and reconciliation. Thus Laban kissed Jacob upon their reconciliation, Esau kissed Jacob, and David kissed Absalom. Beza thus gives the propriety of this testimony in affection, Whereas our life lies in the breath which goeth out of our lips, and our Soul goes away, when our breath at last goes; the joining of the friends lips and mouths, signifies, that they are so dear each to other, that they could willingly unite Souls, (if it could be) and bestow their lives each upon other.
The kiss of the text, must needs be this. In testimonium amoris, for a testimony of love. But still here remains a question: whether she desires the kiss of Reconciliation. 2. Or that which is a pledge of continuing love.
Those who understand the first, confess a breach betwixt God, and his Creatures, which indeed there was made, in the beginning of the world, which breach is (as to the meritorious part) made up by the incarnation, death, and passion of Christ. Indeed there was an ancient Covenant of Grace concerning it, Gen. 3. revealed immediately, but I say it was done (quoad pretium) by the incarnation, and death of Christ according to those Texts, 2 Cor. 5. 18, 19. Col. 1. 21. Eph. 2. 16. according to the prophecy, Dan. 9. 24. And (as to the particular application of that purchase) it is daily done by the Spirit of God, working faith in us, by which we are united to Christ. Now the question is whether the Spouse here beggeth;
1. Christ's coming in the flesh, being incarnate and dying for us, for the fulfilling of the eternal Covenant of Reconciliation, (to which some incline.)
2. Or, the kiss of Justification; the actual reconciliation of the Soul unto Christ, and application of Christ to the Soul by f • rth.
3. Or, The further influences of • Love, as pledges of that, first Grace, and Seals of that Original love of his to the Souls of his People.
Indeed, the Eternal Son of God kissed us (and he stooped much to kiss us) when he took upon him our nature, uniting finite, and infinite, corruptible and incorruptible, when he nothinged himself for us▪ and this was foreseen, and so might be desired ( Abraham saw the day, and rejoiced, Joh. 10. 48. and not only Origen, and Bernard of old, but many modern interpreters, think that the Spouse here, hath a great respect to this matchless testimony of Divine Love: which being granted, the Text is no other, than the breathings and pantings of the Church of God then living, or the particular members of it, after the Incarnation of Christ, which doubtless was a great object of their desires. Kings and Prophets, and Righteous men desired to see the things, which the Disciples saw, and did not see them, &c. Others understand the text of those testimonies of Divine Love which followed the death of Christ, particularly, The sending of the Spirit. It is true this is called The promise of the Father; and was so under the Old Testament, Ezech. 36. &c. and it proceeds from Christ, as the great testimony of his love, nor indeed doth Christ otherwise testify his special love, than by the influences of his Spirit: but I cannot tell why we should restrain it to the particular dispensation in the days of Pentecost. I think Piscator expresseth the sense well by suum erga me amorem patefaciat, let him manifest to me his love: let me know that he loveth me: yet supposing it the Reconciled Believing Soul that speaks: it seems rather to be understood of further grace, than the first grace of regeneration, and reconciliation unto God, the desire seems to be a desire of free familiar communion with Christ. This seems to be the main of her request, the great sum of her desires, the uppermost of her Souls concernments.
But observe yet further. She begs but a kiss, not let him embrace me: but let him kiss me. She asketh modestly, if (saith the woman in the Gospel) I might but touch the Hem of his Garment. Thus the woman of Canaan also. Truth Lord: but the Dogs eat the crumbs. Thus the Spouse. If he would but kiss me: Oh! how precious is the least of Christ to a gracious Soul? It is better to be kissed by him, than to lie in the worlds arms, to be a Door-keeper in the House of God, than to dwell in the tents of wickedness.
But thirdly, The word is plural. One kiss will not serve the turn. she is not a stranger, but a Spouse. The plural number either imports, 1. Various dispensations of Grace, Or 2dly, Repeated influences of the same Grace. 1. It may be understood, as denoting various dispensations of Grace: Beza saith the Lord kissed the Soul thrice: 1. In this life, when he is by faith united to it. 2. In the day of death, when the Soul is taken up into the enjoyment of God. 3. In the Resurrection, when Body and Soul shall be united, and together glorified. Another reckons up 7 kisses with which the Lord kisseth his Peoples Souls. The Grace of 1. Incarnation. 2. The descending of the Holy Ghost. 3. The preaching of the Gospel. 4. Reconciliation to God. 5. Sanctification. 6. Divine Consolations. 7. The kiss of Glory. And the same Author makes the Spouses petition comprehensive of all these; certain it is, there are various dispensations of Grace, there is quickening, strengthening, comforting Grace: and there may be frequent repetitions of these to the Soul, according to its particular wants, and God's favor towards it, and you may indifferently understand the Text in either sense.
Fourthly, The Spouse here doth not only desire kisses, but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the kisses of Christ's mouth: concerning which observe these 2 things.
1. The kiss of the mouth, was the highest kiss. This was the kiss of Love, the kiss of Reconciliation, Osculum pacis, the kiss of the Hand, Feet, &c. was a kiss of honor and reverence, and subjection: the kiss of the mouth, was the kiss of love and friendship, of peace, and reconciliation.
2. I find most Interpreters hinting by this expression, something yet more special, viz. Communion with Christ in his word. The word indeed is the fruit of the lips, and cometh out of the mouth, and God may seem (in some propriety of speech) to kiss the Soul with the kisses of his mouth, when he speaks to it in his word: The Lord will speak peace to his people, (saith the Psalmist) and I create the fruit of the lips, peace, peace, (saith the Lord by his Prophet Isaiah) some expositors to further this notion have observed that the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifies sometimes to instruct, but I cannot find that usage of it in holy writ. Grace is poured forth upon Christ's lips; she desires those kisses, some drive the notion higher; observing the difference between the Doctrine of the Law, and that of the Gospel: the first is terrible, the second sweet, and comfortable: holding forth nothing but the love of God in Jesus Christ, reconciling the world to himself, not imputing their sins: hence the Gospel is called The word of reconciliation.
Lastly. She saith Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth. She desires not only to hear the Doctrine of the gospel, but that Christ should speak it to her. The Preacher speaks to the Ear, Christ to the heart: Quoties ergo in cord nostro, quod de divinis dogmatibus, sensibus{que} quaerimus, abs{que} monitoribers invenimus, toties oscula nobis, á Sponso esse data verbo Dei credimus (saith Origen) so often as we find God by his word Speaking to our hearts, so often doth our beloved kiss us with the kisses of his mouth.
This is sufficient to have spoken for the Explication of the matter of the Text. There only remains something more circumstantial to be observed.
The words are Vox Sponsae. The Voice of the Spouse. According to the civil usage of our Country, (and I think most others) the Lover speaks first. Here the Spouse begins; It is so betwixt God and the soul; Christ speaks first. He is found of those that seek him not and of those that inquire not after him. He first loves us, and our Love to him proceedeth from his Love first manifested to us: But you must not understand her that speaks as one that is a stranger, and in a state of disunion, with her beloved: but as one that is already espoused; and made a Spiritual Bride: not desiring first grace: but further grace, which she needeth as well as the first grace, for he giveth both to will, and to do, he is both the author and the finisher of faith, and other grace.
Secondly, The words are Vox Volentis. The Language of a willing Soul, Willing that Christ should come near unto it, and take it up into fellowship, and communion with himself. God's people are a willing people. They are indeed made so by a divine power. Psal. 101. 2. But Certum est nos velle cum volumus (saith Aug.) It is God who makes us of unwilling, Willing▪ When he hath had his first work upon our wills, and subdued that strong hold unto himself: Then we are willing. Nay more;
Thirdly, They are Vox cupientis. The voice of a panting Soul, not barely content that Christ should kiss it, but passionately desiring his kisses. They are as much as, Oh! that he would kiss me. Every gracious Soul passionately desireth fellowship, and Communion with Jesus Christ: Oh! (saith holy David) when wilt thou come to me? Neither is this all, the words are not only to be considered as a good wish, or passionate desire, but as a fervent prayer.
Lastly therefore, they are Vox supplicantis. the Language of a praying soul, where observe,
What she begs: Not riches, not honor, not pleasures, not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , not the good things of fortune: but the riches of grace: her Petition is like that of David, Lord lift thou up the light of thy Countenance upon me, Psal. 4. 6. Let others take the ring; let her have but the kiss, and it is sufficient for her; but single influences of Grace will not serve her turn, every look of grace is sweet, and frequent influences of Grace are necessary for her.
Secondly, Observe How she begs: 1. Reverently. Let him kiss me. Thus we ought to draw nigh to God, with Reverence, and Godly fear. Reverence becomes the great Majesty of Heaven and Earth, those that come without it towards God, understand not his greatness. 2. She begs humbly. But a kiss. The crumbs that fall from the Lord's Table, the touch of the Hem of his Garment, anything of Jesus Christ, that may but argue distinguishing love. 3. She asketh boldly, not rudely but boldly. Thus we ought to come to the Throne of Grace with an holy boldness, the boldness of faith, the word is in the future tense, and may be translated. He shall kiss me, or he will kiss me. His Majesty requires reverence. His promise gives boldness and confidence. 4. Lastly, she asketh fervently. There is a bluntness discernible in the form, [Let him kiss me,] which speaketh the Souls fervency. Besides the trina repetitio, repeating the same thing by three terms, denotes (as Lud. de Ponte observes) flagrantissimum cordis affectum. The most flagrant, earnest desire of the Spouses heart.
I have thus far opened to you the Spouses first Petition, in which the believing Soul, with a Reverent, holy, humble boldness, yet with all possible fervency, begs of the Lord Jesus Christ, [her Spiritual Husband] some special distinguishing token of his love, more especially a near fellowship with him, in his ordinances, and the sealing up of his love to her soul, in Gospel Doctrines.
This first petition she presseth with a double Argument. 1. The first drawn from the Excellency of his love. This she sets out, per modum comparationis: comparing it with Wine, and preferring it before it. 2. Comparing the name of Christ with Ointment, and that not shut up in a box, but poured out. Thy name is as an Ointment poured forth, v. 3.
Her 2d Argument is drawn from her Love to her. Beloved; in the close of the third v. The Virgins love thee, and the cause of this love is expressed to be the savor of his good Ointments, Because of the savor, &c.
Let me open the terms by which these Arguments are expressed:
〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉We translate it, because thy loves are better than Wine: what we translate Loves, the Septuagint translate 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , whom the Vulg. Lat. and the Arab. Interp. follow. [Thy Breasts] the Syriac translate it Bowels, otherwise there is no difference in the Translations.
Delrio tells us that Alanus (an Ancient Interpreter) makes these words, not the continued speech of the Spouse, pressing her Petition by an Argument, but the reply of her beloved to her, assuring her of his love, and that he valued her Breasts, above all things: That which (probably) led him into this mistake, was his interpreting the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 as if it were 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Breasts, and not understanding how in any propriety of Speech, the Spouse could commend the Breasts of her beloved, they being parts, from which usually, the woman, not the man is commended (in ordinary Speech) but as the whole stream of Interpreters runs another way: so this seemeth to be no constraining argument, to enforce us to acknowledge such a sudden and a subitam, & abruptam verborum commutationem, (as Delrio calls it) abrupt change of words, as this interpreta • io • must necessarily infer. For • .
Though it be true that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifies a breast, Ezek. 23. 3. v. 21. yet 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifies beloved: And loves in the Abstract, and so it is translated, Ezek. 16. 8. it was a time of love.
Suppose we should allow more authority to the Septuagint, than to our Hebrew Text (for which there is no reason) yet it is not improper to assert these the words, of the Spouse speaking to her beloved: for although the God of Nature, intending the woman for the Nurse hath provided that sex with larger breasts: yet the man hath breasts also, and such (if you will believe the Philosopher) as may have milk in them.
However, he who runs, may read the expression figurative. Amoris sedes est in cord, & in uberibus quae, cordi adhaerescunt. The heart is the seat of love, and the Breasts are nigh to the heart, and this evidenceth the difference of Interpreters, as to the translation of the word, as to this Text, to be but a word-bate for Ubera tua, and Amorestui, Thy Breasts, or thy loves, are much the same thing in signification.
Neither lastly is this the only Text in Scripture, where the breasts of men are mentioned (if we should be constrained to that sense, Isaiah 60. 16. Thou shalt suck the Breast of Kings, so also God is said to bear his People from the Belly, and to carry them from the Womb. They are Metaphorical expressions, and it is granted on all hands, that if our Interpreters, (with whom concur most modern Interpreters) have not hit the literal signification of the word: yet they have not missed the sense, in translating it, Thy Loves.
By which Interpreters generally understand, either the private influences of Grace, with which God refresheth the particular Souls of his Saints, or: The public ordinances and institutions of the Gospel, by which God expresseth his love to his Church in general, and every believing Soul in particular.
1. Some understand Divine institutions. Ordinances are indeed the Breasts at which Christ suckleth his Children, those means by and through which he conveyeth the streams of his love to them: and there is a great excellency in them. David prefers a day in Christ 's Courts, before a 1000 elsewhere. Origen observes, that in some copies instead of quia ubera tua, &c. it was quia loquelae tuae, thy Speeches are better than Wine, which also excellently suits with the former expression. The kisses of his mouth. This sense in the general notion of it much pleaseth many Interpreters, though something divided in their more particular notions. Origen interprets it, Dogmata tua, thy Doctrines, and seems indifferently to understand it of the Doctrine of the Law, or of the Gospel. The Popish Interpreters reading it Breasts, expound it concerning the two Testaments, so Genebrard, &c. Others interpret it more strictly concerning the sweet Doctrine of the Gospel, which Saint Peter, 1 Pet. 2. 2. compareth unto Milk, which as new born Babes, we ought to desire, and concerning the Apostles and Prophets, which were the first Instruments which God made use of to convey that Doctrine to us: The sweetness of the Gospel (saith Aquinas) is meant here, by which (as with Milk) those who are Babes in Christ are nourished. Mr. Brightman (making this the Speech of the Jewish Church) understands it of the Doctrine of the Law, which also suiteth with David's high commendation of the Law of God, in his 19 Psal. and in the 119. more largely.
2. But (reading it [Loves:]) possibly they may better interpret it, who understand it concerning the Graces of God's Holy Spirit. When we speak of the Grace of Christ, we either understand, that goodness which is essentially in him, as he is the fountain of all Grace; full of Grace and Truth (the fullness of the God-Head dwelling in him) or that goodness which he communicateth to his People, in the free pardon of their sins, and acceptation of their Persons; Or 3 dly. Those fruits of his Spirit which abide and dwell in us, such as faith, love.
I find some Interpreters both ancient, and modern, interpreting the Text of the latter: So Gregorius Mag. That love to thee, and to my Brethren, which thou hast wrought in my heart; But Beza observeth. That it is not usual, to Saints to commend their own graces, and therefore doubtless it is to be understood of that Grace, which is and remains in Christ subjectively, of which we are the Objects; and to this sense agree the most sober, and spiritual Interpreters: making the phrase to signify that sweet pleasure which the Soul takes from the feeling of Christ's love. And possibly this is that Vis lactandi, that suckling virtue, which Delrio mentioneth, which Christ's puts forth, refreshing the Souls of his Saints with his consolations.
The word is in the plural number: by which the Hebrews were wont not only to express a multitude of things, but also the infinite virtues, and dimensions of anything. You must not think (saith Beza) That in the One Essence of God there are more numerical loves No; in him all things are one, and he is one. But his grace is manifold, in respect of our feeling, and apprehension: and he deals out his love to us in different measures according to our different necessities or capacities.
The Chaldee Paraphrast with some of the Heb. Doctors, understand here the Concret, by the Abstract, and interpret God's loves, to be his beloved people of the Jewish Nation; whom he preferreth before Wine, viz. before any other Nations, threescore and ten Nations; to which purpose, by their Cabalistical Art they have found out the numerical letters for 70 in the word which we translate Wine. But I shall not insist upon so fond, and improbable a Notion.
Having therefore spoken. Enough for the Explication of the Subject, Thy loves; Let us endeavor to understand what is praedicated of this Subject.
〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉They are better then Wine] good before wine, saith the Heb. Text, which is but the same thing in their dialect, who so use (ordinarily) to express the Comparative degree.
1. Good (in the Philosophical notion of it) is whatsoever is the Object of our desire, the nature of it lying in a convenience and suitableness of the thing unto our natures which makes it desirable; which a thing may be either upon the account of pleasure or profit, or nobleness. Accordingly the Heb. word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is variously translated; merry, Esther 1. 10. Beautiful, Ruth 3. 7. Thy loves are more good, i. e. more sweet, pleasant, profitable than Wine.
2. Wine (in its primary signification) is the juice of the Grape, whose proper Effect it is to make the heart of man merry Psal. 104. 15. But this were too low a signification for it in this Text. We must therefore allow a figure. The Hebrews were wont under the notion of wine, to express all other delectable, and pleasant things. Hence Ahasuerus his feast is called A Banquet of Wine; though it cannot be imagined, that Wine was all the guests had for their entertainment. It is an usual Synecdoche, to express all things that fall under a common genus, by some Eminent Species. Some of the ancient Rabbies, understood by Wine here quamcun{que} Laetitiam; whatsoever is pleasant and acceptable. And in that sense Mercer, and the best of modern Interpreters agree. For that other interpretation, which some make of it, who understand by loves, Gospel Doctrine, and by [Wine] the Doctrine and dispensation of the Law though it seemeth to have some advantage, by the use of Wine, in the legal oblations, and it be a truth, That the Doctrine, and dispensation of the Gospel being more sweet and perfect, is better than that of the Law which brought nothing to perfection. Yet I cannot think it the sense of this Text.
Let us conclude then, that the words are the Language Either of the Church of God preferring the enjoyment of God in the Doctrines, and dispensations of his word and Gospel: or the words of the believing Soul preferring the influences of divine grace, before the sweetest of all creatures comforts. And this I take to be the most free and consistent sense, and interpretation of the words.
The particle 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 may be conceived here to have a double use.
Either To give a reason of her former desire, that her beloved should kiss her with the kisses of his mouth; Which she professeth to be like theirs, who desire wine: They desire that because it is good. She desires these because there is a far greater goodness in these heavenly influences, than there is in the best of created comforts▪ by which she shows that she was not carried out to these desires insano quodam affectu, sed prudente consilio (saith Beza by prudent advice, and deliberation; reason dictating to us, the choice and desire of the things, which are most excellent: Not by an heady and misguided passion.
Or else to make an argument which might be advantageous to her for the obtaining of her request; drawn from the Estimate of Christ's love with which her Soul was possessed: Lord I esteem thy favor to me above all created comforts in the world: Therefore let not my Soul want it. And so it suiteth with that of David Psal. 4. 6. Lord lift thou up the light of thy Countenance upon us. Thou hast put gladness into my heart, more than the time that their Corn, and Wine increased. And thus these latter words of the Text contain the Spouses first Argument, by which she urgeth her petition mentioned in the former part of it. She proceedeth v. 3.
V. 3. Because of the Savour of thy Ointments: Thy name is as ointment poured forth; therefore do the Virgins love thee.
The Sept. translate it thus 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
The Vulg. Latin joineth the former part of this verse to the former thus; Thy breasts perfumed with the best ointments are better than Wine.
The difference is not much, nor is it an easy labor, to determine it, because the points and stops which make it, are of no great antiquity, (at least as some think) the Hebrew (translated for a word) seemeth to be thus: To the smell of thy good Ointments. Thy name is as Oil, or Ointment poured out. Therefore do the Virgins love. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 This seemeth to be (in our dialect) an harsh sense, and the connection is not clear. To help it therefore Piscator translateth it Quod attinet ad odorem, &c. As to what belongs to the savor of thy good Ointments, &c. The Tigurine Version make the middle words as a Parenthesis, and translate it thus: For the smell of thy good Ointments (for thy name is as an Ointment poured out.) Therefore do the Virgins love thee.
The only question is whether the Spouses design in these words be to give a reason why her beloved had such an excellent name. viz. because of the savor of his good Ointments. Or to give a reason why the Virgins loved him; or of both these together: I think of both. The words will bear it. But let us come to inquire the import of the words more particularly.
[ 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ] The thing spoken of is Ointments, these are said to be 1. Good, and 2. to have a Smell. The Hebrew word, from which the word [here translated Ointments] 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 cometh, signifies to be fat, Deut. 32. 15. Jeshurun waxed fat. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Jer. 5. 4. This word properly signifieth fatness, and usually signifieth Oil or Ointment, because of the pinguid nature of those things; so Prov. 21. 20. Hos. 2. 5. The word signifieth any kind of fatness, whether caused by Nature or Art. But it is not here to be taken literally; he needs no Oils, nor sweet Ointments, to make him sweet. But you must know that those Eastern Countries abounded with plenty of Spices, and other sweet ingredients, of which several compounds were made, Oils, and Ointments, which were exceedingly grateful to the outward senses; of which they made both a Religious and a Civil use. They made a Religious use of them; 1. In Sacrifices. 2. In Consecrations.
Oil was used in Sacrifices: Especially in such as were Eucharistical. Hence you read of the Oil of gladness, (for it testified joy and gladness.) The first use of it in this kind, of which you read in Scripture was Gen 28. 18. When God had preserved Jacob in the Night, in token of his thankfulness, he took the stone upon which he had slept, and set it up for a pillar, and poured Oil upon it, he did the like again Gen. 35. 14 whether it were done, as a note of the consecration of the place, to the service of God, or an Eucharistical Sacrifice, may possibly be questioned by some, but the latter seemeth to me most probable, considering the subsequent use of Oil (under the law) to this purpose, of which you may read in Leviticus Ch. 2. v. 1. 3. 4. It was not lawful, in offerings which were to bring iniquity to remembrance. Numb. 5. 15. No▪ testimony of Joy might there be shewn.
It was also used in Consecrations of persons; and that either to the Kingly, Priestly, or Prophetical Office. Samuel used Oil in the anointing both of Saul, & David to the Kingly Office. The same you read also in the anointing of Jehu, 2 King. 10. 3. Elisha the Prophet was anointed. So was the High Priest. You have a description of the Oil, and a particular Precept, and direction for the composition of it, Exod. 30. 22. This was called the holy anointing Oil, with which Aaron and his Sons were anointed. The Tabernacle (also) and the Ark, with all things belonging to them, were to be anointed with it, as you will find in that Chapter.
Besides this Sacred use of Oil there was also a civil, and ordinary use of it. Thus they used it either for bodily nourishment; the widow 1 Kings 17. 12. Told the Prophet that she had but a little Oil in the cruse. Or, 2. For delight and pleasure, as we now use our sweet powders, our dry, and liquid perfumes. Joab chargeth the woman of Tekoah (being to personate a mourner) not to anoint herself with Oil. Esther and the other Maids, that were to be brought before Ahasuerus; were (for 6 months) to be perfumed with Oils. Christ complains of Simon that he had not anointed his head with Oil. Mary anointed Christ with Oil, or Ointment, Joh. 11. 2. and the Woman poured out a Box of Ointment, Spikenard upon his head.
Now from this civil and sacred use of Oil, and the effects, the terms of Oil, and Ointment, and Anointing are also used metaph • rically in Scripture. Thus Oil and Ointments in Scripture signify the graces of God's Spirit, and Anointing signifies that gracious Divine Act by which we are made partakers of those graces. To this sense the Psalmist speaketh, God hath anointed thee with the Oil of Gladness above thy fellows, Psal. 45. 7. which the Apostle applieth to Christ, Heb. 1. 9. and St. John expoundeth, saying, The Spirit was not given unto him by measure, which is plainly expressed, Acts 10. 38. God hath anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost, and with power. And as the holy anointing Oil (under the old Law) wetted not Aaron's- head alone, but ran down upon the Skirts of his Garment, so this holy (metaphorical) Oil doth also. Hence as David said, Psal. 92. 10. Thou hast anointed me with fresh Oil; and the People of God then were called the Lord's anointed: So (under the New Testament) the Children of God are said to have an unction, & it is said that this Anointing abideth in them. Thus that of St. John is made good, Of his fullness we have received grace for grace. By Christ's Ointments, we understand then, the Grace that was poured out upon him, and which dwelleth in him: and in this sense I find the generality of sober Expositors agreed.
Now these Ointments are said to be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 good, the signification of which term, I opened to you before, and when I come to the propositions of Doctrine, I shall more particularly show you the goodness of them in every notion of good. But these Ointments, are also said to cast a Savour.— At the savor of thy good Ointments.
A smell or savor is Qualitas olfactu sensibilis, some quality of a thing which we discern by our external sense of smelling, being conveyed to us by the mediation of the Air: By the smell of Christ's Graces, we can understand nothing else, than the Spiritual sense of the love of Christ, which by the mediation, and breathing of the holy Spirit of God is discerned by the Soul. The word in the Hebrew signifies any perception of a thing, it is used, Is. 11. v. 3. where it is said of Christ, that the Spirit of the Lord (resting upon him) shall make him (as we translate it) of a quick understanding in the fear of the Lord: the Hebrew is he shall be smelled, in the fear of the Lord. And Judge. 16. 9. we translate it, when it toucheth the fire, the Hebrew word is the same, when it smelleth the fire; that is, when the fire cometh to it: when it hath any sense of the fire. I conclude then; that as Christ's Ointments are the graces with which he is filled: So the savor of these Ointments, is nothing else than the souls perception, and sense of that Christ, by the mediation of the holy Spirit of God, breathing his grace, and love upon the Souls of his People. And this is sufficient to have spoken for the explication of this first phrase. It follows, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Thy name is as an Ointment poured forth, Job speaking of God saith, what is his name? and what is his Sons name? Let us inquire a little concerning the name of Christ in this Text.
A name is an appellation given to some person, or thing, either to express the nature, and being of it; or to distinguish it from another thing. God cannot properly be said to have a name, because no term can fully explicate to us his divine essence. But yet God is pleased in some little measure to make himself known to us: Now whatsoever God thus makes himself known unto us by, that is his name: More particularly: The second Person in the holy Trinity, considered as our Mediator, and in reference to the great work of man's redemption, had several names: One expressing the two natures which were united in that Divine Person, that was his name Immanuel, which signifieth God with us. Another expressing the great work which he had to do, viz. To save his People from their sins, therefore his name was called Jesus. A third expressing his designation & consecration to his Office; thus he was called Messiah and Christ, both signifying the same thing Anointed. Gregory understands it of the name Christ, and the name Messiah, so doth Lud. de Ponte. Genebrard, Lyra, and others of the name Jesus.
But I know no reason why we should dispute so nicely for the particular name, when as Christ had several names, either expressive of his Divine, or Human nature, or of his personal capacity, as both Natures were united in him: or else expressing the virtues and graces of his Person: or else relating to one or another, or all his sacred Offices; and indeed what is said in the Text, is true concerning every name of Christ as well as another: Each of his names is, As an Ointment poured forth. And besides I see a more comprehensive interpretation of the term equally true with this: Thy name. Whatsoever thou art made known by unto us; thy word, ordinances, grace, gospel, it is all like Oil poured forth, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the word translated poured forth, cometh from the Hebrew Radix 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 he hath emptied, or exhausted. Christ's name is compared to Oil, & to Oil emptied, & poured out.
Oil in the Box is sweet, very sweet, it maketh the Box sweet, but it casts not forth its smell abroad: nor is the sweetness of it so exceeding great and overcoming, as when it is poured forth. It is said of the Ointment, with which Mary anointed our Lord, that when she brake the Box, the savor of it filled the room.
Nor is it said, thy name is as an Ointment dropped out: but as an Ointment poured forth as Ointment 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 emptied, or exhausted, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (saith the Septuagint version.) Take the Lord Jesus Christ, as he is one with the Father, God over all blessed forever; so he is the Fountain and Original of Grace, full of good Ointments: But now look upon him as our Mediator, in which notion, the names of Jesus, Christ, Messias, Immanuel, &c. belong unto him, so he is as Oil poured forth. The grace of the hypostatical union is poured out upon him, he is God with us. The fullness of the God-Head, dwelleth in him 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , bodily. The Revelation of Christ to the world, as the Savior of the Sons of Men, is as an Ointment poured forth, which smells sweet in the Nostrils of all the world, and filleth the whole Creation with a sweet savor. The more special revelation of the Lord Jesus Christ unto the particular souls of the Saints, is as an Ointment poured forth. Christ apprehended, and applied by faith unto the soul is exceeding sweet to it. To you that believe (saith the Apostle) he is precious.
It followeth, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Therefore do the Virgins love thee.
Amongst men, the term Virgin, signifies one who hath not lain with Man, neither as a Wife, nor as a Strumpet. By a metaphor the Servants of God in Scripture are called Virgins, because it is their duty, and will be their care to keep themselves unspotted from the world, from all filthiness, both of Flesh and Spirit (as the Apostle speaketh) the 144000 glorified Saints, mentioned, Rev. 14. 4. are called Virgins. The professors of the Gospel at large, are so called in the parable, Mat. 25. of which, though as to the matter of their own salvation, some were wise some soolish, yet all kept themselves from the Paganish Spiritual Adultery with Devils, Stocks and Stones. God's People of Israel anciently was called a Virgin, Jer. 31. 4. 13. And Saint Paul professeth it his desire, to present the Saints at Corinth—as a chaste Virgin unto Christ, to which purpose he was jealous over them with a godly jealousy, 2 Cor. 11. 2.
The word here translated virgins cometh from the Heb. root 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which signifies to be hid and covered, either Because the gravity of former times caused Parents to keep their Virgins, as it were hidden, in their Houses, until Marriage. Or else because the modesty of those more innocent times, allowed not Virgins to go without their Vails; as it were hidden from vulgar sight. Rebekah, when she came near unto Isaac, took a Vail, and covered herself; which usage continued a long time after, especially in public Assemblies. Tertullian hath a peculiar Book de velandis Virginibus, concerning the vailing of Virgins, where he bitterly inveigheth against those who had broken those bars of modesty, and calleth them capita nundinatitia, pudorem ostentatitiae Virginitatis, (what would he have said to the bare Necks, and open Breasts of this Age?) But I told you by Virgins here are meant the true Children of God, who are called hidden ones, Psal. 83. 3. such who (being cleansed) have neither spot nor wrinkle, but are holy, and without blemish; thus of old, Origen, and Gregor. magnus, and more lately Beda with the generality of modern Expositors, interpret it. Mercer by Virgins seems to understand the Gentiles, who had not heard of Christ, yet should be also induced to love him, upon the report of his Excellencies, revealed to them in the preaching of the Gospel, but the other Interpretation, is proper enough, and more generally received, to which I shall adhere. These Virgins love Christ 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
The word translated love, is ordinarily used, and so interpreted it hath a great cognation with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 voluit he hath willed, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 desideravit, he hath desired. Love is nothing else, but a willing of good to the object beloved, and desire is the eldest Daughter, and first fruit of love.
For the particles 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 therefore, they show the cause of the believers loving of the Lord Jesus Christ, because of the savor of his good Ointments. The excellencies of grace which are in him, of which it hath a spiritual sense.
This whole verse comprehends a second Argument, by which the Spouse enforceth her first petition, The first was drawn, from that high esteem which her soul had of the love, and grace of Christ. 2. This is drawn, from that particular affection which she had for him (common to all spiritual Virgins) which she shows was not brutish, and irrational; no, it was because he was full of grace; which was more precious, than the most excellent Ointments, and she had received the savor of this grace; for his discovery of himself to the world as a Savior, and more specially to her soul as her Savior, was as an Ointment poured forth.
You may now take the substance of these two verses, and so of the Spouses first and great petition thus:
Oh! That it might please my dearly beloved Savior, who is my Spiritual Bridegroom, to show me some token of special love, and to multiply those tokens to me more specially, in and by the words of his Mouth, in Gospel Doctrines to speak unto my Soul, which doth really prefer the tokens of his love, and influences of his grace, before the most choice of all creature comforts. My beloved is full of grace and love, which is sweet like good Ointment; every discovery of himself is as sweet as Ointment poured forth, therefore doth my Soul love him; and not my Soul only, but the Souls of all those, who are not deflowered by the world, and by lusts.
From the words thus opened, several propositions of truth may be observed.
The mercies which the believing Soul thirsts after, are spiritual distinguishing mercies.
The least of Christ [a kiss] is exceeding precious to a gracious Soul.
Though the least influences of grace be precious to believers: yet they will not be satisfied, without the fullest dispensations of grace, and most frequent repetitions of it.
Believers have special thirstings after the Word of God: The kisses of his Mouth.
The thirst of a true believer will not be satisfied without a Spiritual, inward communion with Christ in his Ordinances. The kisses of his Mouth.
A gracious Soul will be very bold and earnest with God for this spiritual communion with him.
The Lord Jesus Christ hath Loves: A variety of Grace.
The Loves of Christ are better [than Wine] than all created comforts whatsoever.
The believing Souls knowledge of the Excellencies which are in Christ, is the ground of its earnest desire of fellowship, and communion with him.
It is an excellent Argument for a Soul to use with God for the obtaining of favors from him, if it can truly say, that it preferreth his favor before all created goods.
The Lord Jesus Christ hath good Ointments, which cast a savor.
The name of Christ is as an Ointment poured forth.
Virgin Souls love the Lord Jesus Christ, for those excelling graces which they discern in him.
Sermon II.
Canticles 1. v. 1. 2, 3.
I Have (in my former Exercises) opened the Text, and named those propositions of Doctrine which are couched in the words, or rationally to be deduced from them. I come now to the particular handling of them, beginning with the first.
The thirst of a believing Soul is after Spiritual distinguishing mercies.
Nature teacheth everyone to say, who will show us any good? Good is a thing that all the creation is enamored upon. God is the fountain of all goodness; Every good and perfect gift, cometh from above, from him who is the father of lights. Who being not a debtor to the creature, must needs dispense it out freely. Hence that goodness of God which is his goodness of Beneficence, not only dwelling in him as a piece of his divine perfection: But flowing from him, as a stream from the fountain of his liberality, is properly called Mercy, whether it be good to us in respect of its suitableness to our outward and bodily wants, or to our more inward, and Spiritual necessities. Hence the Mercies and savors of God, are either Bodily [respecting out outward Man] or Spiritual [respecting our inward man.] The former (such now, as life, health, peace and prosperity, riches, &c.) are such as God gives to his Enemies, as well as to his Friends; he maketh his Sun to rise upon the evil and the good: And sendeth rain on the just and unjust, Math. 5. 45. Spiritual good things again, are either Gifts of common or of Special Grace. Gifts of common grace, such as knowledge, invention, memory utterance, &c. These are indeed Spiritual gifts, so called by the Apostle, 1 Cor. 12. 1. ch. 14. 1. because given out by the Spirit of God; and tending to innoble the Spiritual part, and they are also called the best gifts. 1, Cor. 12. 31. They are so in their kind, better, than those which only concern the outward man; but St. Paul himself, mentioneth better than these in the very same Text; I show you a more excellent way. Neither are these distinguishing favors, but given in common to wicked as well as to good men: But now there are Spiritual mercies 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 so called: Not only because they come from the Spirit of Grace, and innoble the Spiritual part of man, but because they are suited to the greatest necessities of our inward man. Such are the grace of Justification, Union to and reconciliation with God, pardon of Sin, and the Senses of that pardon, together with all the fruits of the Spirit of regeneration, and Sanctification. These are the distinguishing favors of God, which difference the Child of God from him that is not. Now I say these are those favors which the believing Soul thirsteth after, and longeth for, expressed here under the Metaphor of kisses.
And properly expressed under that notion. Men and women use not to kiss such as they hate but such as they have an affection for. It is a civil usage amongst us so to salute strangers indeed, but frequency of kisses speaks a distinguishing love, and some intimacy of Affection and are not ordinary, unless amongst very intimate Friends, such as is the Husband and Wife, Brethren and Sisters &c. But yet a little further.
When Isaiah the thirstings of gracious Souls are after such distinguishing tokens of divine love. I understand it not Exclusively. The Children of God are made up of flesh and blood, as well as any others, and subject to the same necessities and infirmities; they have in them cravings, and lustings of the flesh. David prayeth hard for his life Psal. 39. ult. and Abraham for a Child, and Job for health. Jonas is fond of a gourd, and Agur beggeth food convenient for him, and although, Rachel may be too importunate for a Child, and Paul for the removal of the Thorn in his flesh, yet there is a lawful desire of the good things of this life allowed, yea, commanded us in that form of Prayer, which our Savior prescribes. We are bid to pray, Give us this day our daily bread. But the Child of God first seeks the Kingdom of God, and the righteousness thereof, according to our Savior's prescript, Mat. 6. 33. I remember David hath such an expression as this, Psal 27. 4. One thing have I desired of the Lord, that will I seek after, that I may dwell in the house of the Lord, all the days of my life, to behold the beauty of the Lord, and to inquire in his holy Temple. If a Child of God had but one thing to ask of God, this should be it, that it might behold the face of God; this is that which it would seek after, and look out for. Yea, this is that which their Souls desire eminenter. These are the things for which they will wrestle with God, and will not let him go until he shall bless them with them. Other things they will beg, but these are the things their Souls will spend their strength in, and lay the stress upon: did you hear the secret pleadings of the awakened Soul with God, you would easily discern the difference between the desires it hath towards outward things, and those which are in it towards Spiritual, and distinguishing mercies, and be easily able to say: Those are the things that this Soul would have, pardon of Sins, sense of God's love, victory over its lusts, and corruptions; strength, and enlargement of heart in the service of God. These are the things which this Soul would have. It asks a Ring, but the kiss is that to which it hath most mind. And all this must be understood of the gracious Soul, when it is itself; not in its fits of passion and infirmity: then Elijah, and Job, and Jonah, and any of the Children of God may speak according to the flesh, the law of their members prevailing against the law of their mind, hath brought them into captivity to the law of Sin. These things being premised for the explication, the truth of the proposition will be abundantly evidenced from the example of the man according to God's own heart (holy David) and that in several Psalms, Psal. 4. 6. Lord lift thou up the light of thy countenance upon me. There be many that say, who will show us any good, but Lord lift thou up the light of thy Countenance upon me. The light of the Sun will please others, but 'tis only the light of thy Countenance, that will please me, Psal. 63. v. 1. 2. My Soul thirsteth for thee, my flesh longeth for thee: in a dry and thirsty land where no water is. To see thy power, and thy glory in the Sanctuary. The sight of the Sanctuary will please another, but nothing will please David, but the sight of God's power, and glory in the Sanctuary. Other-where he prays, that the Lord would show him his way, and unite his heart to fear his name. That God would come unto him, and show himself unto him, &c. Nor is it hard to find out the reason of it, which lies;
In the sanctification of the renewed man, he hath a new heart given unto him. A new heart signifies a new understanding; a new will, and new affections. New, not as to the faculties themselves, but as to the motions and operations of them, in which the soul still follows the dictates of reason, and proceedeth in the method of a rational creature.
1. The Soul is renewed in its understanding; from whence proceedeth a new notion and Judgment concerning things. The old Serpent cheated our first Parent, when he persuaded her that the fruit of the forbidden Tree was to be desired, because in the day she should eat thereof, her Eyes should be opened, and she should be as God, knowing good and evil; for from that day forward she was struck blind, and the Disease, (according to Divine ordination) proved hereditary: All we who are the Children of Adam, are born blind, neither able to take the true notion of good and evil, nor yet to make up a Judgment concerning either, discerning the things that differ: but naturally everyone calleth Evil, good, and good, Evil. The Psalmist saith, that man stood not in honor, but became like the Beast that perisheth. In this much like the Beast indeed, that we are merely led by the conduct of a sensitive appetite, not discerning those things which are truly and spiritually good: and the reason of this is our not understanding ourselves, for the nature of all good lying in a conveniency, and suitableness of the object to us, a knowledge of our own state, and wants, must reasonably be supposed to a right judgment concerning good and Evil. But amongst other Evils accruing to us by the fall, this was one, that we are by nature Blind as to our own State, and Strangers to our own Souls, not understanding that we are by Nature, Children of Wrath, poor, miserable, blind, and naked, but conceiting that we have need of nothing. Hence it is that the Soul is not able to judge of the goodness of Union and Communion with God, pardon of sin, reconciliation with God, &c. Nor indeed doth it come to understand it, until the Eyes of the understanding be opened, by the application of Spiritual Eye-salve, laid on by the Finger of the holy Spirit of God. Till this time, the Soul seeth no beauty in Christ, nothing for which he should be desired. The goodness of Riches, and Pleasures, and Honors, it knows, but as for that transcendent goodness and Excellency which is in Christ, what it is, it doth not understand; Hence it naturally desires, life, health, riches, honors, success in worldly affairs, and such common gifts, as may serve it in the world, with credit, and applause, and reputation. But for spiritual things, for distinguishing tokens of love, it is not able to take the heighth, and length, and depth, and breadth of the love of God in them, nor to discern their conveniency, and suitableness to its undone state and condition; hence (with the Cock in in the Fable) it prefers the Barly Corn before that Pearl of great price, for the purchase of which, the wise Merchant is willing to sell all that he hath. But now the regenerate soul hath its Eyes open, to discern the things that are excellent, and as it is taught by the Spirit of conviction, the truth of its natural and unregenerate Estate, so its Eyes are opened, to see that nothing but the special love of God in Christ is a good suitable to it, or worthy of its caring for: and hence, the soul is taught by it's own reason, to thirst after these manifestations of Divine Goodness, as those which above all others, are proportioned to its wants, and highest necessities.
2. But 2dly. These desires are not the product of an enlightened understanding (only) but of a renewed will also. So woefully depraved is our corrupt nature, that the inferior powers of our Souls, have withdrawn themselves from the command of reason; and whereas it is the method of a reasonable Soul, to embrace or refuse a thing with the will according to the judgment, which is by the understanding given in concerning it: it often falls out otherwise by reason of our Souls disorder.
He that not only knoweth the will of God, but also approveth those things which are most excellent, yet hath no hearthimself to close with them, he is ready to teach another (like the hand of a Statue in a way which directeth a Traveler, but moveth not) he teacheth not himself; hence the renovation of the understanding (although the great wheel of the Soul) is not sufficient to make the Soul to will those things which are spiritually good. Mans Soul is like a Clock broken in pieces, every of whose Wheels must be mended before it will again move truly. But the gracious man is renewed, as well in Spirit as in Body, and in Mind. The day of the Lord's Power is come upon him, and of unwilling, he is made willing. God hath given him to will, Phil. 2. 13. taking away that natural enmity and stubbornness, which was in his heart, and disposing, and enabling him to will those things, which are in themselves most desirable, and which are most pleasing unto God. Now there is nothing more pleasing unto our Heavenly Father, than to see his Children, more sond of their Fathers love, than of anything else which is in his hand to bestow upon them: And this is the true reason of the gracious Souls thirst after spiritual things.
To which may be added (secondly) the Souls assurance, That other things shall be added to it, Mat. 6. 33. If