Archive for June 2023
READING ECCLESIASTES
PART III
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Ecclesiastes 3:1-6:9
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
3:1-9 may be the most famous portion of the Book of Ecclesiastes. Yet those nine verses depend upon verses 10-15 for context. Therefore, reading 3:1-9 in isolation from 3:1-15 distorts the meaning of 3:1-9. We read a series of opposites in 3:1-9. Then we read that God has established the proper times for everything. Most people cannot determine the proper times God has established, Koheleth argues. The author goes on to contend that we mere mortals, by living in the moment, can enjoy the moment, at least. God, the Book of Ecclesiastes teaches, exceeds human understanding. Awareness and acceptance of this reality lead to awe (“fear”) of God. And awe of God is the beginning of wisdom. So argues Koheleth.
Koheleth (so far), like the Book of Job (until the tacked-on ending of chapter 42), rejects overly simplistic divine retribution theory. The good do not necessarily prosper and the evil do not necessarily perish in this life, we read. So, Koheleth favors living in the moment and rejoicing in one’s works while one can do so. This somber line of reasoning continues into chapter 4, in which we read that the dead are more fortunate than the living, that those not yet born are better than those who have been born, and that toil is
mere breath and herding the wind,
to quote Robert Alter’s translation. Likewise, power is also of limited worth, we read; it is inferior to wisdom. And we will all die.
The Book of Ecclesiastes may be a text wasted on the “young invincibles,” who imagine themselves to be immortal and think that nothing terrible will happen to them. This is also a book wasted on those who are incorrigibly materialistic, in the sense of materialism meaning that those who die with the most toys win. Within my setting, Ecclesiastes is a counter-cultural book. It is also an antidote to the great, popular heresy called Prosperity Theology.
The downbeat advice from Koheleth continues past 4:16. The multiplicity of words before God is folly, but listening to and obeying God is the purpose of worship. Greed is
mere breath,
to quote Robert Alter’s translation. We can–and should–enjoy the good things in live, but (a) they are fleeting, and (b) such enjoyment is of limited value.
Perhaps someone, to relate with spiritual maturity to the Book of Ecclesiastes, must have become disillusioned with materialism and acquainted with death. Then one can read or hear this book and think,
Yes. That matches my experiences.
KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR
JUNE 29, 2023 COMMON ERA
THE FEAST OF SAINTS PETER AND PAUL, APOSTLES AND MARTYRS
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
READING ECCLESIASTES
PART II
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Ecclesiastes 2:1-26
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The beginning of chapter 2 flows directly from 1:14-18. So, O reader, I encourage you to back up into chapter 1 for context.
In what may function as a critique of King Solomon centuries following his death, Qohelet/Qohelet/Koholeth laments the folly of merriment, wealth, and material gain. Foolish and wise people die, and memories of them fade. Conventional piety and wisdom are
herding the wind,
to quote Robert Alter’s translation. One may wonder why Koheleth woke up in the morning. Marvin the Paranoid Android from The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy novels would be more upbeat company than this author.
I, without transforming into a fun-damn-mentalist, assert a truth common to a host of religions: The joys and possessions of this life are transitory. So, we ought not to become too attached to them. To channel St. Augustine of Hippo (354-430), we need to avoid disordered love–loving too much that which deserves less love and loving God too little. Disordered love is the Augustinian definition of sin.
When we are young and feel immortal, we may not understand Ecclesiastes 2. Yet, as we age, the chapter may make more sense to us. As we bury relatives, friends, and significant others, chapter 2 may make sense to us. As we clean out their homes and deliver their possessions to thrift stores, chapter 2 may make sense to us.
Koheleth may have buried some friends and relatives–perhaps even a significant other. He may have cleaned out their homes, too.
KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR
JUNE 28, 2023 COMMON ERA
THE FEAST OF SAINT TERESA MARIA MASTENA, FOUNDER OF THE INSTITUTE OF THE SISTERS OF THE HOLY FACE
THE FEAST OF CLARA LOUISA MAASS, U.S. LUTHERAN NURSE AND MARTYR, 1901
THE FEAST OF SAINTS PLUTARCH, MARCELLA, POTANOMINAENA, AND BASILIDES OF ALEXANDRIA, MARTYRS, 202
THE FEAST OF WILLIAM MUNDY AND JOHN MUNDY, ENGLISH ROMAN CATHOLIC COMPOSERS AND MUSICIANS
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
READING ECCLESIASTES
PART I
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Ecclesiastes 1:1-18
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Hebrew canon of scripture includes voices which dissent from the majority opinion of that canon. The Book of Qohelet/Qoheleth/Koheleth, known in Greek as Ecclesiastes, is one of these dissenting voices. Elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible, YHWH is the covenant God of Israel, and people can know YHWH via divine revelation. Elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible, divine commandments define ethics. Yet Qohelet/Qoheleth/Koheleth–the author of this book–rejects those theological understandings and writes from a perspective of disillusionment. God is remote and unknowable, according to Qohelet/Qoheleth/Koheleth. And ethics flow from necessary moderation and caution. Furthermore, being alive is the sole satisfaction available to people.
Nevertheless, in 1875, Franz Delitzsch described Ecclesiastes as
the quintessence of piety.
1:1 identifies the author as
Qohelet son of David, king of Israel.
This superscription is problematic.
- Linguistic evidence dates the book to the Persian period, six centuries after the time of King Solomon.
- One Jewish tradition dates this book toward the end of Solomon’s life. Yet the Biblical accounts of Solomon at the end of his life do not indicate that he was ever in this mode at that time.
Qohelet is the feminine participle of the Hebrew word q-h-l, derived from the noun qāhāl, which means,
a gathering, an assembly, a congregation.
Therefore, Qohelet means,
one who assembles a congregation or company.
This Hebrew term is a proper noun referring to a teacher of wisdom. The familiar English translation,
the Preacher,
misses the mark by a mile.
This book’s contradiction of conventional Hebrew Biblical piety may evade the notice of anyone who experiences Ecclesiastes solely or primarily via Christian lectionaries for Sundays and holy days. The Revised Common Lectionary (RCL), for example, cherry picks famous passages and avoids difficult ones from Koheleth. The sole appearance of this book on the RCL consists of ten verses from chapters 1 and 2, on Proper 13, Year C. The Roman Catholic Lectionary for Mass (1998/2002 U.S.A. Edition) ignores most of Ecclesiastes, too. Four verses selected from chapters 1 and 2 are on the schedule for the Eighteenth Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year C. Furthermore, reading even those few verses (four or ten, depending on the lectionary) outside of their context within the Book of Ecclesiastes distorts their meaning. Yet I will blog about the entire book and keep context in mind as I do so.
For the sake of completeness, I acknowledge that denominational daily lectionaries cover Ecclesiastes better than those for Sundays and holy days. However, how many people follow these daily lectionaries?
Before I launch into the first chapter, I state where I stand:
- That the Hebrew Bible contains dissenting voices speaks well of the breadth of that canon.
- Doubt and disillusionment are crucial aspects of healthy faith.
- Mechanistic, transactional views of God which feature a simplistic punishment-reward theory of justice are inaccurate and inadequate. God is not like a vending machine.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
A vapor of vapors! (says Qoheleth).
Thinnest of vapors! All is vapor!
++++++++++
Merest breath, said Qohelet, merest breath. All is breath. All is mere breath.
–Ecclesiastes 1:2, Robert Alter (2019)
++++++++++
Utter futility!–said Koheleth–
Utter futility! All is futile!
–Ecclesiastes 1:2, TANAKH: The Holy Scriptures (1985, 1999)
++++++++++
Vanity of Vanity, says Qoheleth,
vanity of vanities! All things are vanity!
–Ecclesiastes 1:2, The New American Bible–Revised Edition (2011)
++++++++++
Koheleth argued that the universe is cyclical, predetermined, and futile. Within this context, he wrote:
…all is mere breath, and herding the wind.
–Ecclesiastes 1:14, Robert Alter
Koheleth also rejected the basic assumption of Hebrew Biblical wisdom literature–that, by practicing devotion, one would find the sole path to the fulfilled, good life. He wrote:
For in wisdom is much worry, and he who adds wisdom adds pain.
–Ecclesiastes 1:18, Robert Alter
This dour theme begins with the second verse. Most translations of 1:2 use the formula “_____ of _____s,” a literary form indicating a superlative. One may think readily of “Song of Songs,” “King of Kings,” Lord of Lords,” and “Holy of Holies,” as well as “Vanity of Vanities.” Of the translations which employ this formula, though, I prefer “A vapor of vapors,” which carries more force than “vanity of vanities.”
St. Gregory of Nyssa (335-394) defined vanity, in this context, in two ways. The first was:
…something which lacks existence but exists only in the utterance of the word.
The other form of vanity, according to the late Bishop of Nyssa, was:
…persons who zealously accumulate objects with no goal in mind.
(The quotes come from Richard McCambly’s translation of St. Gregory of Nyssa’s sermon on Ecclesiastes 1:1-10).
The sainted Bishop of Nyssa–one of the Cappadocian Fathers, upon whose broad theological shoulders we Nicene Christians of today stand–understood “vanity of vanities” to condemn human misuse of what God had entrusted to us, as guardians. According to St. Gregory of Nyssa, one who matures spiritually then reflects on one’s former life. Such a person may label former pursuits as “vanity of vanities.”
The Bishop of Nyssa was partially correct. Indeed, as I consider previous versions of myself, I recognize myself as having frequently been foolish. Yet, as I ponder St. Gregory of Nyssa’s germane sermon, I conclude that he may have been soft-peddling Ecclesiastes 1:2 and minimizing the extent to which the Book of Ecclesiastes refuses to fit in with the mainstream of Hebrew Biblical wisdom literature.
I, as a student of history, understand that history rhymes; it does not repeat itself. Much of this rhyming is hateful, violent, and otherwise unfortunate. Much of this rhyming indicates that people have have failed to learn lessons from their forebears and/or their own pasts. And historical amnesia is a ubiquitous plague. So, as I read 1:9-11, I sadly agree with those verses.
Whatever has been is what will be, and whatever has been done will be done. There is nothing new under the sun. When there is something of which of which one says, “Look now that is new!”, it has been already in the ages before us. As there is no memory of former things, so even of later things which have yet to be there will be no recollection among men of a still later time.
–R. B. Y. Scott’s translation
I agree with St. Gregory of Nyssa insofar as Ecclesiastes condemns people, not God.
Furthermore, evidence proves that, once we mere mortals cease to inhabit and maintain buildings and other structures, nature reasserts itself rapidly. Nature overtakes ruins. Certain materials decay. Explorers in woods may find abandoned, collapsing buildings (if that much) and overgrown cemeteries full of the graves of long-forgotten people. In time, all structures cease to exist and active human memory of most people dies, too. Even great and mighty empires and civilizations collapse, and successors arise in the same regions. The high and the mighty are ultimately the “thinnest of vapors.”
St. Gregory Thaumaturgus (circa 213-268), the Bishop of Neocaesarea, made a cogent point. He wrote that the purpose of Ecclesiastes was:
…to show that all the affairs and pursuits of men are vain and useless, in order to lead us to the contemplation of heavenly things.
If we were not to contemplate heavenly matters after accepting the futility of human pursuits, would we not be likely to fall prey to nihilism?
KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR
JUNE 27, 2023 COMMON ERA
THE FEAST OF CORNELIUS HILL, ONEIDA CHIEF AND EPISCOPAL PRIEST
THE FEAST OF SAINT ARIALDUS OF MILAN, ITALIAN ROMAN CATHOLIC DEACON AND MARTYR, 1066
THE FEAST OF HUGH THOMSON KERR, SR., U.S. PRESBYTERIAN MINISTER AND LITURGIST; AND HIS SON, HUGH THOMSON KERR, JR., U.S. PRESBYTERIAN MINISTER, SCHOLAR, AND THEOLOGIAN
THE FEAST OF JAMES MOFFATT, SCOTTISH PRESBYTERIAN MINISTER, SCHOLAR, AND BIBLE TRANSLATOR
THE FEAST OF SAINT JOHN THE GEORGIAN, ABBOT; AND SAINTS EUTHYMIUS OF ATHOS AND GEORGE OF THE BLACK MOUNTAIN, ABBOTS AND TRANSLATORS
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
READING THE SONG OF SONGS
PART VII
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Song of Songs 7:1-8:14
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
7:1-10 occurs within the context of the female lover dancing. She is beautiful and stately, and her lover desires her. The feeling is mutual (7:11f). Yet 8:1 reminds us that their love is risky:
…and none would despise me.
—The New American Bible–Revised Edition (2011)
8:6-7, unique in the Song of Songs, deals with love as an abstraction. Floods cannot quench it. Rivers cannot drown it. And societal conventions value wealth more than love.
A female and unnamed characters dialogue in 8:8-9. Are these characters her brothers? Yet the female in 8:8-10 is prepubescent. The woman in the Song of Songs has matured physically and sexually. How to interpret these verses is a matter of dispute, for verse 10 may establish verses 8 and 9 as a flashback. If this interpretation is correct, 8:8-9 may indicate that the female lovers’ brothers have long been protective of her sexual virtue, as they perceive that matter.
The Song of Songs concludes with yet another invitation from the woman to her lover. If one interprets the
spice mountains
as in Robert Alter’s translation), the
mountains of spices
(as in The New American Bible–Revised Edition), or the
hills of spices
(as in TANAKH: The Holy Scriptures) as referring to the female lovers’ breasts, one may be correct. The Song of Songs uses natural metaphors for the human body. The garden is one of these metaphors. In 8:13, the woman is also in a garden, poetically. After the on-again, off-again, on-again relationship in the Song of Songs, the lovers remain a loving couple.
The Song of Songs is an edited anthology, for some of the material “changes channels” as one reads the book closely and in order. Allegorical interpretations of these love poems obscure the erotic meaning and ease the embarrassment many people feel upon reading the book. Indeed, love is frequently scandalous and embarrassing. I know from experience that love is irrational. If one goes along for the ride, one may find that ride to be bumpy. But God, who is love, is present in love.
Thank you, O reader, for joining me for this tour of the Song of Songs. I invite you to remain with me for the next destination–Ecclesiastes.
KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR
JUNE 26, 2023 COMMON ERA
THE FEAST OF ISABEL FLORENCE HAPGOOD, U.S. JOURNALIST, TRANSLATOR, AND ECUMENIST
THE FEAST OF SAINT ANDREA GIACINTO LONGHIN, ROMAN CATHOLIC BISHOP OF TREVISO
THE FEAST OF PEARL S. BUCK, U.S. PRESBYTERIAN MISSIONARY, NOVELIST, AND SOCIAL ACTIVIST
THE FEAST OF PHILIP DODDRIDGE, ENGLISH CONGREGATIONALIST MINISTER AND HYMN WRITER
THE FEAST OF THEODORE H. ROBINSON, BRITISH BAPTIST ORIENTALIST AND BIBLICAL SCHOLAR
THE FEAST OF VIRGIL MICHEL, U.S. ROMAN CATHOLIC MONK, ACADEMIC, AND PIONEER OF LITURGICAL RENEWAL
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
READING THE SONG OF SONGS
PART VI
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Song of Songs 5:2-6:12
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The first nighttime episode is in 3:1-4. The second such episode is in 5:2-8.
The imagery of 5:2-8 is initially pleasant and erotic. Then it turns violent. The woman welcomes her lover. They make love. Then he leaves and she longs for him. So, the woman goes outside at night to seek her lover. She also calls for him. She wears a veil. Watchmen, knowing that prostitutes often veil their faces, mistake the female lover for a “working girl.” They beat her and humiliate her by removing her veil. The woman’s longing for her absent lover becomes more intense. In verse 8, she is “swoon,” “faint,” or “sick” with love, depending upon the translation one reads. This is true although she may not be the woman of her lover’s dreams. And he is not the man she had imagined him to be.
The poetic language points to explicit details–the woman’s sexual rejection of her lover, his corresponding lack of sexual intensity, and the gang rape of the woman. And she is lovesick, with the emphasis on “sick.”
The Daughters of Jerusalem, whom the female lover addresses in verse 8, speak in verse 9.
Verses 10-16 are unique. They are the only wasf in the Bible (a) addressed to a third party, and (b) describing the body of the male lover. The third party is the Daughters of Jerusalem. The imagery in the wasf comes from plants, animals, and precious stones and metals. The female lover, despite her sexual rejection of the man, longs intensely for him.
The Daughters of Jerusalem dialogue with the female lover in 6:1-3. The man
has gone down to his garden,
to the beds of spices
to browse in the gardens
and to pick lilies.
In plain English, he and the woman have made love.
Then the man, in language similar to 4:1-5, describes the woman’s body again in 6:4-7. Next, in terms recycled from 2:2-3 and 5:10, he praises the woman in 6:8. The male lover goes on to compare the woman to the breaking dawn or another natural light source in 6:10. I prefer Robert Alter’s translation:
Who is this espied like the dawn,
fair as the moon,
dazzling as the sun,
daunting as what looms on high?
TANAKH: The Holy Scriptures offers a pleasant translation, too:
Who is she that shines through like the dawn,
Beautiful as the moon,
Radiant as the sun,
Awesome as bannered hosts?
The text shifts in verses 11 and 12, a fragment of another poem. The man
goes down to the garden
again. Verse 12 includes the Hebrew ámi-nadiv. So, depending on the translation one prefers, the male lover refers either to
the chariots of Ammi-nadib
(as in TANAKH: The Holy Scriptures) or
the noblest chariot
(as in Robert Alter’s translation). Given the context of 6:11, the chariot may refer to the female lover’s body.
Life is complicated. Human relationships have their ups and downs. Experience confirms this. My decade-long relationship with a woman was joyful and tumultuous. Her mental illnesses made that relationship more challenging than it would have been otherwise. The tension of “come hither,” followed by “go away,” followed by “come hither again,” rings true for me.
The sexual violence in 5:7 is beyond troubling, as it should be. Sadly, such violence–especially in patriarchal cultures–remains endemic and frequently socially-approved. “Rape culture” is as real as it is depraved and evil.
KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR
JUNE 26, 2023 COMMON ERA
THE FEAST OF ISABEL FLORENCE HAPGOOD, U.S. JOURNALIST, TRANSLATOR, AND ECUMENIST
THE FEAST OF SAINT ANDREA GIACINTO LONGHIN, ROMAN CATHOLIC BISHOP OF TREVISO
THE FEAST OF PEARL S. BUCK, U.S. PRESBYTERIAN MISSIONARY, NOVELIST, AND SOCIAL ACTIVIST
THE FEAST OF PHILIP DODDRIDGE, ENGLISH CONGREGATIONALIST MINISTER AND HYMN WRITER
THE FEAST OF THEODORE H. ROBINSON, BRITISH BAPTIST ORIENTALIST AND BIBLICAL SCHOLAR
THE FEAST OF VIRGIL MICHEL, U.S. ROMAN CATHOLIC MONK, ACADEMIC, AND PIONEER OF LITURGICAL RENEWAL
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
READING THE SONG OF SONGS
PART V
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Song of Songs 4:1-5:1
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Poetic descriptions of the beauty of the female body were commonplace in Syrian and Egyptian literature. In this cultural context, the term for that genre was wasfs. Yet Song of Songs 4:1-7 is unique in the Hebrew Bible. When we decode the natural imagery in this wasf, we read a description of the female lover.
- She has wavy hair that flows down her back.
- Her teeth are white and straight.
- She wears a veil.
- The meaning of her brow gleaming like a pomegranate split open is vague. The words may refer to the color or shape of the woman’s brow. Alternatively, the language may indicate the play of light and shadow between her skin and her veil.
- The female, who has a long neck, wears necklaces.
- The physical description terminates with her breasts, soft and smelling like flowers.
- We already know that she is sunburned from having to work in the family vineyard.
When we arrive at verse 12 and keep reading, we read about the woman’s sexuality, described in terms of agricultural plenty. She is like a locked garden. That is, the female lover is inaccessible. She invites the male lover to
come to his garden and enjoy its luscious fruits.
–4:16
The male lover accepts the invitation (5:1).
The lovers in the Song of Songs are committed to each other. The male lover expresses himself:
You have captured my heart
My own, my bride.
You have captured my heart
With one [glance] of your eyes,
With one coil of your necklace.
–4:9, TANAKH: The Holy Scriptures (1999)
Many people can relate to that feeling, in not to all the details in that verse. When another person becomes THE ONE, words cannot adequately express the emotional state. Yet the Song of Songs expresses that feeling more eloquently than most texts on the subject.
KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR
JUNE 22, 2023 COMMON ERA
THE FEAST OF SAINT ALBAN, FIRST BRITISH MARTYR, CIRCA 209 OR 305
THE FEAST OF DESIDERIUS ERASMUS, DUTCH ROMAN CATHOLIC PRIEST, BIBLICAL AND CLASSICAL SCHOLAR, AND CONTROVERSALIST; SAINT JOHN FISHER, ENGLISH ROMAN CATHOLIC CLASSICAL SCHOLAR, BISHOP OF ROCHESTER, CARDINAL, AND MARTYR, 1535; AND SAINT THOMAS MORE, ENGLISH ROMAN CATHOLIC CLASSICAL SCHOLAR, JURIST, THEOLOGIAN, CONTROVERSIALIST, AND MARTYR, 1535
THE FEAST OF GERHARD GIESCHEN, U.S. LUTHERAN MINISTER AND HYMN TRANSLATOR
THE FEAST OF JAMES ARTHUR MACKINNON, CANADIAN ROMAN CATHOLIC PRIEST AND MARTYR IN THE DOMINICAN REPUBLIC, 1965
THE FEAST OF SAINT NICETAS OF REMESIANA, ROMAN CATHOLIC BISHOP
THE FEAST OF SAINT PAULINUS OF NOLA, ROMAN CATHOLIC BISHOP OF NOLA
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
READING THE SONG OF SONGS
PART IV
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Song of Songs 3:1-11
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Some commentaries caution against identifying a narrative in the Song of Songs. They may be correct, but I cannot help but rebel against their advice. If the arrangement of material is logical, we read of an up-and-down romance, a woman who summons her lover then sends him away, subsequently longs for him, and finds refuge from her hostile male siblings with her supportive mother.
Cultural context is crucial to understanding texts. If one reads a text from a different culture, one must read widely and deeply enough not to misconstrue that text. That description of the royal wedding procession bears the marks of Second Temple Judaism. The Jewish Study Bible, Second Edition (2014) informs me that, during the Second Temple period, grooms wore crowns. That source also informs me that this practice did not survive the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 C.E. Furthermore, Robert Alter suggests that verse 7, with King Solomon quaking in bed while surrounded by armed guards, is satirical. The image contrasts with the bold woman, fearless in seeking her lover, whom she has sent away. And why would the presence of sixty warriors in the royal bedroom be necessary? Mortal danger, which the Song of Songs has already mentioned, answers that question. But sixty warriors? Their quantity seems to indicate satirical hyperbole, to which the Hebrew Bible is no stranger. (See the Book of Esther, for example, O reader.)
I choose not to explain all details, within their cultural setting, in this post? No, I opt to remain focused and shift that focus onto one important detail from 3:6-10. Those verses indicate that the author probably had Psalm 45 in mind. Psalm 45, a psalm about a royal wedding–perhaps that of King Ahab to Queen Jezebel–praises the monarch, not God. In that respect, Psalm 45 is unique in the Psalter. So, if our selected verses from Song of Songs contain satire, we have a counterpoint to Psalm 45. That issue interests me more than particulars of chairs or of padding in cloth woven with gold thread.
Another detail which interests me more than chairs and upholstery is the role of the bride’s mother. Sources tell me that mothers instructed daughters in sexual matters prior to the wedding day. However, based on chapters 1 and 2, and assuming a narrative in the Song of Songs, the young woman needed no maternal instruction in chapter 3. Sources also tell me that the mother presided at the wedding ceremony.
Finally, chapter 3 contains the only mention of marriage in the Song of Songs.
KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR
JUNE 21, 2023 COMMON ERA
THE FEAST OF SAINT ALOYSIUS GONZAGA, JESUIT
THE FEAST OF CARL BERNHARD GARVE, GERMAN MORAVIAN MINISTER, LITURGIST, AND HYMN WRITER
THE FEAST OF CHARITIE LEES SMITH BANCROFT DE CHENEZ, HYMN WRITER
THE FEAST OF SAINTS JOHN JAMES AND JOHN RIGBY, ROMAN CATHOLIC MARTYRS, 1598 AND 1600
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
READING THE SONG OF SONGS
PART III
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Song of Songs 2:8-17
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2:8-13 is the only portion of the Song of Songs which the Revised Common Lectionary (RCL) includes. The RCL schedules those verses for Propers 9A and 17B.
The image of the male lover–not the female lover–indoors, at home, and peering through the lattice is unusual, in cultural terms. However, the preceding image of male freedom of movement (2:8) is consistent with cultural norms.
The literally flowery language (“grazing among the lilies”) is poetic and sensual. The love is mutual:
My lover is mine, and I am his….
–Verse 16a, Robert Alter
Thus, we read an egalitarian note in a patriarchal culture. This is a motif. In the Song of Songs, each lover addresses the other with the pronoun “my.” In this reading, for example, he calls her “my friend” (verses 10 and 13), “my fair one” (verses 10 and 13), and “my dove” (verse 14). One may reasonably speculate that this points to an already established point, the forbidden nature of this love relationship. Yet the lovers love each other exclusively in their romantic way.
The enigmatic desires of the female lover lead to an unexpected conclusion. The male lover summons her to spend the night with him. When the pair are parted, the female lover seeks out her partner. Then she sends him away until later.
The Song of Songs does indicate the marital status of the lovers; they are not yet married. It also makes clear their commitment to each other. The lovers do not seek casual sex or take their relationship lightly.
KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR
JUNE 19, 2023 COMMON ERA
THE FEAST OF JOHN DALBERG ACTON, ENGLISH ROMAN CATHOLIC HISTORIAN, PHILOSOPHER, AND SOCIAL CRITIC
THE FEAST OF ADELAIDE TEAGUE CASE, EPISCOPAL PROFESSOR OF CHRISTIAN EDUCATION, AND ADVOCATE FOR PEACE
THE FEAST OF MICHEL-RICHARD DELALANDE, FRENCH ROMAN CATHOLIC COMPOSER
THE FEAST OF WILLIAM PIERSON MERRILL, U.S. PRESBYTERIAN MINISTER, SOCIAL REFORMER, AND HYMN WRITER
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
READING THE SONG OF SONGS
PART II
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Song of Songs 1:7-2:7
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The vibrant and evocative language of these verses often speaks of a lover’s absence. The lover speaking in a particular verse wishes that this absence would end. The mutual attraction is that strong.
Hugh Thomson Kerr (Sr. and Jr.) wrote:
(The Bible is not prudish literature; it is fully aware of sex and lust.) The Song of Songs was regarded by Jews and Christians as part of the canon of scripture not because it was composed of striking language but because it celebrated physical love, important and necessary as that may be.
—The Interpreter’s Bible, Vol. 5 (1956), 110
Yet prudishness–even embarrassment over the human body–combined with a misguided sense of entitlement, afflicts my culture. I recall a recent news story about the principal of a charter school in Florida who had to resign following parental complaints regarding the inclusion of Michelangelo Buonarroti’s statue of David being part of a classical curriculum, used with permission by a famous, conservative college. I also recall that the college, which understands the difference between pornography and great art, responded to this controversy by denying that charter school the right to use their curriculum after that academic year. These parents, in their own words, cannot distinguish between pornography and great art. I wonder if they would describe the Song of Songs as pornographic.
This dialogue of the lovers is more about physical intimacy than anything else. Although relatives strive to obstruct that intimacy, they cannot succeed all the time. Such a deep bond between two people is crucial to both of them. And God is present in it.
The Song of Songs lacks any mention of God, literally. Esther (in its Hebrew text) is the other book of the Bible with this distinction. (The Greek additions to the Book of Esther add God to the text. They also muddle the story-telling.) Although God is absent from the text of the Song of Songs, God is present in spirit. For,
Bidden or not, God is present.
KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR
JUNE 16, 2023 COMMON ERA
THE FEAST OF GEORGE BERKELEY, IRISH ANGLICAN BISHOP AND PHILOSOPHER; AND JOSEPH BUTLER, ANGLICAN BISHOP AND THEOLOGIAN
THE FEAST OF FRANCIS J. UPLEGGER, GERMAN-AMERICAN LUTHERAN MINISTER AND MISSIONARY; “OLD MAN MISSIONARY”
THE FEAST OF SAINT JOHN FRANCIS REGIS, ROMAN CATHOLIC PRIEST
THE FEAST OF NORMAN MACLEOD, SCOTTISH PRESBYTERIAN MINISTER AND HYMN WRITER; AND HIS COUSIN, JOHN MACLEOD, SCOTTISH PRESBYTERIAN MINISTER, LITURGIST, AND HYMN WRITER
THE FEAST OF RUFUS JONES, U.S. QUAKER THEOLOGIAN AND CO-FOUNDER OF THE AMERICAN FRIENDS SERVICE COMMITTEE
THE FEAST OF WILLIAM HIRAM FOULKES, U.S. PRESBYTERIAN MINISTER AND HYMN WRITER
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
READING THE SONG OF SONGS
PART I
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Song of Songs 1:1-6
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The frank eroticism of this poem, rare among the biblical books, suggests that the Bible’s sexual mores can include sex outside of marriage. The Song of Songs, perhaps more than any other biblical book, refuses to be limited by common notions of “family values.” Instead, this book celebrates pleasure for pleasure’s sake.
–Jennifer Wright Knust, Unprotected Texts: The Bible’s Surprising Contradictions about Sex and Desire (2011), 25
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Song of Songs–alternatively the Canticle of Canticles or the Song of Solomon–is a work which much of the Christian Church spiritualizes and sidelines. Spiritualizing this text,
the holy of holies,
as Rabbi Akiva described it, is both a Jewish and a Christian tradition. The Song of Songs is allegedly about the relationship between YHWH and Israel or the relationship between Jesus and the Church or the relationship between Israel and the land. The Song of Songs is allegedly about a range of topics other than the obvious topic–the romantic and sexual relationship between a man and a woman, who are not married to each other, at least not at the beginning of the book. And, although Jews recite or sing the Song of Songs at Passover, Christian lectionaries ignore most of the book.
I selected eight commentaries and study Bibles to function as my guides through the Song of Songs. I favored Jewish sources for studying this book of Jewish scripture. I relied primarily upon Robert Alter’s translation (with commentary) and The Jewish Study Bible, Second Edition (2014).
Renita J. Weems, writing in The New Interpreter’s Bible, Vol. 5 (1997), points to an exegetical irony. She notes that Protestant interpretation of the Bible has traditionally avoided allegorical readings of most of sacred writ yet favored allegorical interpretation of the Song of Songs. This point becomes stronger when realizes Weems’s denominational affiliation; she belongs to the African Methodist Episcopal Church. Weems, a Protestant, critiques her own tradition.
I live in the United States of America. My culture, like many others, contains much glaring hypocrisy. For example, depictions of violence and gore are more likely to meet with acceptance than depictions of sexuality. I make no excuses for depictions of violence or sexuality in their exploitative forms. I do, however, criticize the double standard; my culture is more squeamish about the means of creating life than the methods of extinguishing it. That double standard flows from the same attitude which leads to the ecclesiastical taming and sidelining of the Song of Songs.
+++++++++++++++++++++++
Song of Songs 1:1 is a dedication. The text of the Song of Songs postdates the Babylonian Exile, as well as the reign of King of Solomon, obviously. A better translation of “Song of Songs” would be “the Most Excellent of Songs” or “the Most Sublime of Songs.” The formula, “_____ of _____s,” indicates a superlative. One may recall other superlatives which conform to this formula. “Vanity of Vanities,” “Holy of Holies,” “King of Kings,” and “Lord of Lords” come to mind immediately.
The Song of Songs, written by more than one person yet edited only by one, contains three voices: the female lover, the male lover, and the Daughters of Jerusalem. The female lover is the most articulate voice. This woman has a dark complexion; she is swarthy. She also describes herself as “comely” or “desirable,” depending on the translation. She desires the man, who desires her. Song of Songs 5:10 describes fair skin as a sign of masculine attractiveness, but the female lover is dark. Her complexion is most likely due to all the time she spends working outdoors, in the vineyard, where her brothers or half-brothers (her mother’s sons, anyway), who oppose her romance and love affair, force her to labor.
The lovers live in a patriarchal society. Hence, the male lover is “the king,” yet the female lover is not “the queen.” The female lover has not spent as much in the vineyard as her mother’s sons prefer. She is subject to their authority. The female lover has no regrets regarding her love life, despite the punishment she must endure from these male relatives.
As you, O reader, ponder this sunburned woman who likens her complexion to that of a black goat hair tent, I encourage you to follow the advice of Walter Brueggemann and Tod Linafelt. May you approach the Song of Songs as what it is:
…arguably one of the highest achievements of ancient Hebrew poetry.
—An Introduction to the Old Testament: The Canon and Christian Imagination, 3rd. ed. (2020), 350
Read it as poetry, for it is poetry.
I remain undecided regarding how much a plot, if any, to read into the arrangement of texts. Some exegetes whose works I consulted caution against reading any plot into that arrangement. They may be right.
I also encourage you to find God in those details of life in which you may least expect to find God present. You may have more than one reason for imagining that God is absent there. Maybe that aspect of your life is allegedly trivial or “dirty.” But, as an old saying tells us,
Bidden or not, God is present.
+++++++++++++++++++++++
Now I get personal.
Once upon a time, I could not have written this series of posts and done a good job. I could have read, quoted, and paraphrased sources, but I would have produced bland and incredibly dry posts. Living has changed me. Loving has changed me. I loved, struggled with, adored, and stood by a woman for a decade. Then she died terribly, by her own will. On another day, I saw my priest pour my girlfriend’s ashes into a hole in the ground. I have learned viscerally that God is present in human love, with all its pleasures, stresses, and sorrows.
Bonny is never far from my thoughts. I suspect I will think of her on the day I will die, whenever that will be.
Now perhaps I can do justice to the Song of Songs.
KENNETH RANDOLPH TAYLOR
JUNE 15, 2023 COMMON ERA
THE FEAST OF JOHN ELLERTON, ANGLICAN PRIEST AND HYMN WRITER AND TRANSLATOR
THE FEAST OF CARL HEINRICH VON BOGATSKY, HUNGARIAN-GERMAN LUTHERAN HYMN WRITER
THE FEAST OF DOROTHY FRANCES BLOMFIELD GURNEY, ENGLISH POET AND HYMN WRITER
THE FEAST OF EVELYN UNDERHILL, ANGLICAN MYSTIC AND THEOLOGIAN
THE FEAST OF SAINT LANDELINUS OF VAUX, ROMAN CATHOLIC ABBOT; SAINT AUBERT OF CAMBRAI, ROMAN CATHOLIC BISHOP; SAINT URSMAR OF LOBBES, ROMAN CATHOLIC ABBOT AND MISSIONARY BISHOP; AND SAINTS DOMITIAN, HADELIN, AND DODO OF LOBBES, ROMAN CATHOLIC MONKS
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
BLOGA THEOLOGICA 