Song of Solomon 2:8-13
Every
Monday morning I create the bulletin for the next Sunday. This task involves
writing a call to worship and a prayer based on the Psalm of the week, selecting
two suggested texts, picking Hymns that will fit the selected texts and
creating a temporary title for the sermon which is usually changed by Thursday.
This has been my ritual forever and I doubt it will change any time soon.
Sometimes a scripture sits there begging to have a new sermon written about it.
Sometimes a scripture seems perfect for a particular time of the year.
Sometimes picking the scripture is like pulling teeth. This week, there was
never a doubt which scripture I would choose. A long time ago I made myself a
promise before I reached 65 I would preach at least one sermon on every book of
the Bible. As of last week I was at 65 books and holding. The one remaining
book was Song of Solomon. In our lectionary list, a text from Song of Solomon
only appears once every three years. I turn 65 in a month. Like it or not I
figured this is my last chance to make good on a promise made over 30 years
ago.
“Look,
my beloved comes, leaping upon the mountains, bounding over the hills. My
beloved is like a young stag, gazing through my window and beckoning, “Arise,
my love, my fair one, and come away with me.”
I
am not making those words up. In our Bible, right between Ecclesiastes claiming
everything is “Vanity” and Isaiah lamenting, “Judah as a wicked nation laden
with children who are corrupt and despise the One Holy God”, are eight chapters
of love poems that would make D.H. Lawrence blush. What the heck is going on?
I
spent a great deal of time last week reading and rereading, and then reading
again the 22nd book of the Old Testament. For a denomination
preoccupied with discussing sex for at least three decades, it is a wonder the
Song of Solomon hasn’t been banned. I decided to do some research and discover how
it was selected to be placed in the Bible. My studies were quite interesting.
Many
Christian scholars claim the Song of Solomon has nothing to do with sex but is
an allegory of Christ as the bridegroom of the church. Obviously they didn’t
read the same poems I read. Sometimes Christians work way too hard trying to
make the Old Testament a book that was only written to shed light on Jesus. My
fellow preachers place post resurrection interpretations on scriptures which were
not only written before the birth of Christ but scriptures which have
significant meaning within the framework of the Jewish faith. While some selections
of the Old Testament can be understood more fully in light of the Christ event,
we need to carefully honor the original intentions of the text.
My
confusion over Song of Solomon being seen as a representation of Christ as the
bridegroom of the Church is after a careful reading of the poems, and trust me
I read them very carefully, I never found God mentioned in the entire book. How
can a book that doesn’t talk about God be about God?
Let me share some other
interesting things I discovered. While it is listed in the Christian Bible as
the Song of Solomon, in the Jewish Canon is it called the Song of Songs. Why is
that? One reason would be while Solomon lived in the 9th century BCE,
the poems were probably written six centuries later. The literary style is similar to Egyptian
poems which were popularized by Greek poets. Three hundred years before Christ,
Judah was heavily influenced by Greek Scholarship. More than likely these poems
became integrated into the Jewish culture and were placed among the wisdom literature
we find in the Jewish Apocryphal. 100 years after the death of Christ, because
the Temple in Jerusalem had been destroyed and Jews were migrating throughout
the Mediterranean, Jewish scholars decided
to compile a list of books that would officially be recognized as the Hebrew
Bible. Books like Genesis, Exodus and Psalms were immediately included. Other
books were not accepted so quickly. Each book had to reveal some revelation
about God. After much discussion, the Jewish scholars, aware of the popularity
of the poems, and noting one verse mentioned the name of Solomon, decided
perhaps the poems were allegorical. They placed the book next to Ecclesiastes,
another book which barely crept into the Jewish Bible. When the Christian
Church compiled its own Canon, the Jewish Bible was accepted as a whole. 400
years later, celibate monks interpreting the Hebrew text into Latin, decided
the book could not possibly be about sex. They changed the name to Song of Solomon, and
declared the poems celebrated Christ and his bride the church.
So I ask you, why
can’t the poem just be about a beautiful relationship between two people? Furthermore,
why shouldn’t a poem celebrating love be in the Bible?
More years ago than I
care to remember I was asked to fly to Kansas City to meet with Presbyterians
from all over the United States. Our task was to review a new curriculum which
was taking a creative and honest approach toward teaching human sexuality to
young people between the ages of 13-16. It was advertised to be faith based and
celebrated God’s gift of sexuality. After
extensive training, I was instructed to go home to try this new approach.
I thought it was
terrific. Every time I moved to a new church I exposed the youth to this
curriculum. I taught classes in Wilmington NC, then Va. Beach, and later in San
Angelo, Texas. Each group was composed of radically different young people and some
very cautious parents, particularly in North Carolina. I taught these classes over
a period of ten years and found the results to be absolutely amazing. Both my
son and daughter were students and to this day I believe one of the reasons my son became
involved in public health issues is because of the openness and honesty of
those classes.
The tragedy of the
story is that the curriculum was never published. An outcry in the Presbyterian
Church emerged, claiming it was the role of the parents and not the church to
teach sex education, no matter how faith based the curriculum might be.
Why are we so
uncomfortable with public conversations about sexuality? The opening statement in the banned
curriculum was, “God made human beings male and female for their mutual help
comfort and joy. We recognize that our creation as sexual beings is part of
God’s loving purpose for us. God intends all people to affirm each other with
joy, freedom and responsibility. God created us and gave us the gift of
sexuality.” That is hardly a radical
statement, yet thirty years ago it was viewed as a dangerous theological
assumption. For thirty years I have watched folks leave our denomination
because of their fear of having an open and honest conversation concerning this
God given gift.
Norman Pittenger
wrote, “Christianity is not about good behavior, nor is it an interesting
speculation about God. Christian faith is the commitment of the self to the
reality of the cosmic Love which is in, and behind, and through, and under all
creaturely experience. The church exists to enable men and woman to experience
the love of Christ, consciously, intentionally, and attentively, thus finding
wholeness in their lives.”
Admittedly finding Old
Testament stories depicting sexuality as a gift are not easy to find. The early
codes on sexuality are based on the desire to procreate and be fruitful. These
laws were written before women were considered to be human beings. The only
purpose for women was to have children. Ironically one of the last books to be
written is the one we assume to be the oldest. In the prologue of the book of
Genesis, sexuality is expressed as a God given gift. The Genesis stories, Adam
and Eve, Abraham and Sarah, Isaac and Rebekah, Jacob and Rachael speak of two
people finding completeness in each other. This theme continually surfaces
through the post exilic texts and becomes dominate in the New Testament where
God is understood as perfect, unadulterated love.
The Song of Songs was
never about God’s relationship with Israel. It was about fulfilling God’s gift
to humankind. The Song of Songs is not about Christ being the bridegroom of the
church, but about celebrating Christ when we honor and respect our life long
partner.
Sexual practices can
be exploitive, cruel, and have nothing to do with love. The global market has
made human sexuality a commodity for the promotion and sale of goods and
services. This is a parasite on a God given gift.
Sexual exploitation is
not unique to our century. We know from the beginning of time woman and
children have been sexually oppressed. Perhaps in the third century before Christ,
in the light of the abuse of a God given gift, a poet sat down to write. She
wrote about her lover. She wrote about their commitment to each other. She
wrote playfully, yet seriously. She
included her hopes and dreams. She wrote lovingly in every sense of the word.
Then she signed it, Solomon, hoping by using a cherished name from the past the
poems might be read by those shackled by a culture’s misrepresentation of a God
given gift.
Those that read the
poems cherished them. Those that read the poems protected them. Those that read
the poems preserved them for future generations. Then 400 years later, I would like to imagine
that God spoke to a respected Rabbi who was one of many elected to choose the
sacred text for the Jewish Canon.
God said, “Pick this
one.” The Rabbi was aghast, “I can’t
propose Song of Songs to be part of the Holy Words. It is so outrageous, plus
you are not even mentioned.” God responded, “But it gives me such great
delight.” Amen.