political, intended as an encomium on the government of Solomon; or as one says, A dialogue 'between Solomon and the republic of the Jews (personified as a female beauty) inviting him to reign over it!'-Others have understood it as a philosophico-allegorical colloquy between the above prince and wisdom, or divine philosophy, according to his supposed language in the Apocrypha; I loved her, and sought her out from my 'youth; I desired to make her my spouse, [or, to marry her,] and I was a lover of her beauty'.' 6 This, according to Dupin', was the hypothesis of Theodore of Mopsuestia; and both these expositions are, it must be confessed, ingenious and beautiful; but as I believe it is long since they had any advocates, I do not think it necessary to examine them. The Targum, and several of the Jewish commentators, as Eben Ezra, Solomon Jarchi, and the author of the Book of Zohar3, consider this book as an historical parable, or mystical history of the ancient Jewish church: on the other hand some Christian writers, as Brightman and Cotton, consider it as prophetic of the Christian church : and some have been so minute as to point out the several periods to which it may be referred, 1 Wisdom, viii. 2, &c. 2 Hist. Eccl. Cent. 5. 3 This book tells us that Solomon's Song comprehends. the whole law, the creation, the slavery of Israel in Egypt, the Exodus, the covenant of Sinai, building the temple, captivity and redemption of Israel, &c. &c. and finally the Sabbath of the Lord, which is, and was, and is to come. 4 Hermişchius in Gill. answerable to the states of the seven Asiatic churches, in the revelation, which they also suppose to be prophetical, as follows: 1 The Church at Ephesus, Rev. ii. 1 to 7. Cant. i. 5 to 17. A. D. 33 to 370. ii. 1-17. 8-11. 12-17. 18-29. iii. 1-6. 7-13. 14-22. iii. 1-11. iv. 1-v. 1.. 708-1045. 1046-1383. v. 2-vi. 2.. 1384-1721, - vi. 9-vii. 14.-- 1722-2059. viii. 1-14. -2060&onward These suppositions are so fanciful and unfounded, that I confess myself at a loss how to attempt an answer; and shall therefore leave them with the censure of Dr. GILL', who observes that hereby the book is made liable to arbitrary, 'groundless, and uncertain conjectures, as well as its usefulness in a great measure laid aside.' There is one other hypothesis which I would name rather out of respect to the talents of its author, than from any idea of its plausibility; I mean that of the late ingenious Mr. ROBINSON of Cambridge, who thinks it'not improbable' that the book of Canticles is a topographical compo'sition,' descriptive, of some beautiful spots in ⚫ the landed estates of Solomon';' and that, particularly, the description of the beloved in chap. v. intends nothing but a mountain, ornamented with copses, and enriched with quarries of marble, and a mine of gold3. It is readily admitted that geography borrows many of its terms from the members of the human 1 Expos. p. 16. 3d edit. 2 History of Baptism, ch. iii. p. 23, 4. 3 Ibid. body, as an arm of the sea, the mouth of a river, the foot of a mountain, &c. and this custom probably originated among the first fathers of mankind. But that Behemoth meant the Dead Sea, Leviathan a volcano, Jonah's whale a Jewish fishery, and the beloved in this book a hill with mines in it, are ideas which require something more than mere conjecture to support them. Beside, whoever heard of a gold mine in Judea? and if Solomon had such in his own estate, why send a three years voyage to procure it? Farther, did marble and gold grow in the same mountain? And did it also produce quarries of ivory, and saphire, and beryl? Did the same mountain produce springs of water, beds of spices, and copses' bushy ' and black as a raven?' Surely the idea is too ridiculous to merit a serious confutation, and could not have been entertained even by Mr. Robinson, if he had attempted to pursue it farther, and exa. mine the particular application of his hypothesis. For supposing a few passages might be thus illustrated, the far greater part would be thrown into impenetrable darkness. I know not whether the protestant reader will bear with my adding to the above hypotheses, the mystical one of some modern catholics, who while they explain the bridegroom to be Jesus Christ, make the spouse to be the Virgin Mary'. It is now time to state what I conceive a far 1 Explan. of Cant. in Verse. Paris, 1717. more rational and consistent application of the imagery in this poem, and to consider the grounds and arguments on which it rests. In the first place, then, I confess' (in the words of the very learned bishop LowTH') that by several reasons, by the general authority and consent of the Jewish ⚫ and Christian churches, and still more, by the nature and analogy of the parabolic style, I feel 'irresistibly inclined to that side of the question which considers this as an entire ALLEGORY.' A mystic allegory of that sort which induces a more sublime sense on historical truths, and which, by the description of human events, sha'dows out divine circumstances.' So Dr. BLAIR says, Considered with respect to its spiritual ⚫ meaning it is undoubtedly a mystical allegory'.' -On this occasion, says Mr. GREEN, we may say what the apostle says on another; • No man can lay any other foundation than what is laid, even Jesus Christ'.' The ground of a mystic allegory lays in the analogy between natural and spiritual objects; and it is well known to have been the doctrine of Plato's school, that all material objects had their archetype in the divine mind, which principle was adopted by Philo, the Alexandrian Jew, and from him descended to the Cabbalists, and became the fountain of all their allegorical interpretations. These Cabbalists, from the maxim that sensible things are but an imitation of things above,' Lecture XXXI. thence conceived that the matrimonial union had its counterpart, or original pattern, in the heavenly state; namely, in the loves of TIPHERET and MALCUTH, the invisible bridegroom and bride of the celestial world. By TIPHERET, which signifies ornament or beauty, if they understood themselves, they must have meant the king Messiah, whom they call the second Adam,' or the 'Adam who is on high,' in distinction from our common father; and by MALCUTH, which signifies kingdom, the congregation of Israel or the kingdom of the Messiah; and these notions appear to have been very ancient, as they are adopted by the sacred writers, and particularly by St. Paul, who represents Jesus Christ, both as the second • Adam, the Lord from heaven,' and as the hus'band or bridegroom of his church'. But this notion may be traced to a sublimer origin than Plato, namely, to the Hebrew prophets, who abound with the same ideas. By them God ' is represented as the spouse of the church, and 'the church as the betrothed of God. Thus also 'the piety of the people, their impiety, their idolatry, and rejection stand in the same relation to the sacred covenant, as chastity, immodesty, 'adultery, and divorce, with respect to the marriage contract. And this notion is so familiar in Scripture, that the word adultery (or whoredom) is commonly used to denote idolatrous worship, เ 1 1 Cor. xv. Eph. v. 32. |