Comments on: The Song of Solomon http://pursiful.com/2008/04/the-song-of-solomon/ Darrell Pursiful's blog Thu, 09 Sep 2010 21:38:51 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: David Reimer http://pursiful.com/2008/04/the-song-of-solomon/comment-page-1/#comment-934 David Reimer Fri, 04 Apr 2008 16:04:46 +0000 http://pursiful.com/?p=654#comment-934 Here's a nice snippet from Dietrich Bonhoeffer's <i>Letters and Papers from Prison</i> (p. 303 in my edition): "There's always a danger in all strong, erotic love that one may love what I might call the polyphony of life. What I mean is that God wants us to love him eternally with our whole hearts - not in such a way as to injure or weaken our earthly love, but to proivide a kind of <i>cantus firmus</i> to which the other melodies of life provide the counterpoint. One of these contrapuntal themes (which have their own complete independence but are yet related to the <i>cantus firmus</i>) is earthly affection. Even in the Bible we have the Song of Songs; and really one can imagine no more ardent, passionate, sensual love than is portrayed there (see 7.6). It's a good thing that the book is in the Bible, in face of all those who believe that the restraint of passion is Christian (where is there such restraint in the Old Testament?). Where the <i>cantus firmus</i> is clear and plain, the counterpoint can be developed to its limits." FWIW! Here’s a nice snippet from Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s Letters and Papers from Prison (p. 303 in my edition):

“There’s always a danger in all strong, erotic love that one may love what I might call the polyphony of life. What I mean is that God wants us to love him eternally with our whole hearts – not in such a way as to injure or weaken our earthly love, but to proivide a kind of cantus firmus to which the other melodies of life provide the counterpoint. One of these contrapuntal themes (which have their own complete independence but are yet related to the cantus firmus) is earthly affection. Even in the Bible we have the Song of Songs; and really one can imagine no more ardent, passionate, sensual love than is portrayed there (see 7.6). It’s a good thing that the book is in the Bible, in face of all those who believe that the restraint of passion is Christian (where is there such restraint in the Old Testament?). Where the cantus firmus is clear and plain, the counterpoint can be developed to its limits.”

FWIW!

]]> By: mike http://pursiful.com/2008/04/the-song-of-solomon/comment-page-1/#comment-933 mike Thu, 03 Apr 2008 18:03:46 +0000 http://pursiful.com/?p=654#comment-933 To be fair, other Church Fathers had a more positive view of sex -- Clement of Alexandria, for example, and the later Chrysostom. (In the next few days, I'll try to post my essay on Chrysostom and marriage.) Augustine is much maligned when this subject comes up, but I think he was realistic, drawing from his own experience of sex. He did say that our practice of sex almost always involves some venial sin. But that‚Äôs not a denigration of sex. My practice of phone conversation almost always involves some venial sin, but that doesn‚Äôt mean the phone is a bad thing. Many of the Fathers, reflecting on the Scriptures, thought that marriage would pass away, and was indeed already passing away. Their attitude is understandable when you consider that Christians were embracing the Gospel call to celibacy in astonishing numbers. There were several thousands of registered celibates in Antioch in the mid-fourth century. In later years, the Byzantine Empire actually deemed it necessary to impose legislative restrictions on the practice of celibacy! When moderns want to portray the Fathers as anti-sex, it seems that most of the material comes from ancient fervorinos addressed to monks. The Fathers associated pre-communion abstinence with the temporary abstinence of the priests and levites during their terms of service. I didn't mean to go on so long. Thanks for the post! To be fair, other Church Fathers had a more positive view of sex — Clement of Alexandria, for example, and the later Chrysostom. (In the next few days, I’ll try to post my essay on Chrysostom and marriage.) Augustine is much maligned when this subject comes up, but I think he was realistic, drawing from his own experience of sex. He did say that our practice of sex almost always involves some venial sin. But that‚Äôs not a denigration of sex. My practice of phone conversation almost always involves some venial sin, but that doesn‚Äôt mean the phone is a bad thing.

Many of the Fathers, reflecting on the Scriptures, thought that marriage would pass away, and was indeed already passing away. Their attitude is understandable when you consider that Christians were embracing the Gospel call to celibacy in astonishing numbers. There were several thousands of registered celibates in Antioch in the mid-fourth century. In later years, the Byzantine Empire actually deemed it necessary to impose legislative restrictions on the practice of celibacy!

When moderns want to portray the Fathers as anti-sex, it seems that most of the material comes from ancient fervorinos addressed to monks.

The Fathers associated pre-communion abstinence with the temporary abstinence of the priests and levites during their terms of service.

I didn’t mean to go on so long. Thanks for the post!

]]> By: D. P. http://pursiful.com/2008/04/the-song-of-solomon/comment-page-1/#comment-932 D. P. Thu, 03 Apr 2008 14:59:56 +0000 http://pursiful.com/?p=654#comment-932 Thanks for chiming in, Bob! And just in time to lift some of those Akiva quotations for class today! :-) Thanks for chiming in, Bob! And just in time to lift some of those Akiva quotations for class today! :-)

]]> By: Bob MacDonald http://pursiful.com/2008/04/the-song-of-solomon/comment-page-1/#comment-931 Bob MacDonald Thu, 03 Apr 2008 14:55:57 +0000 http://pursiful.com/?p=654#comment-931 Here are a couple of quotes from R. Akiva which I noted last year when a choir I used to sing with did a program on the Song: ...there is a warning from Rabbi Akiva (c100 CE) not to see the Song simply as entertainment. Whoever warbles the Song of Songs at banqueting houses, treating it like an ordinary song, has no portion in the world to come. (Tos. San. 12:10) We see from his record in the Talmud that he had a very high regard for this text. The entire world is unworthy of the day that the Song of Songs was given to Israel, for all of Scripture is holy, but the Song of Songs is the Holy of Holies. (M. Yad 3:5). He went further than this, claiming that if Torah had not been given, that the Song would have sufficed for the guidance of Israel - I could not find the source of this one. These may be in Pope, Marvin H., Song of Songs, The Anchor Bible Commentary or in Harold Fisch - Poetry with a Purpose. Personally, I find the Song astonishing - I did a structural analysis - the second version is <a href="http://bmd.gx.ca/psalms/411.htm" rel="nofollow">here</a> Here are a couple of quotes from R. Akiva which I noted last year when a choir I used to sing with did a program on the Song:

…there is a warning from Rabbi Akiva (c100 CE) not to see the Song simply as entertainment. Whoever warbles the Song of Songs at banqueting houses, treating it like an ordinary song, has no portion in the world to come. (Tos. San. 12:10)

We see from his record in the Talmud that he had a very high regard for this text. The entire world is unworthy of the day that the Song of Songs was given to Israel, for all of Scripture is holy, but the Song of Songs is the Holy of Holies. (M. Yad 3:5).

He went further than this, claiming that if Torah had not been given, that the Song would have sufficed for the guidance of Israel – I could not find the source of this one.

These may be in Pope, Marvin H., Song of Songs, The Anchor Bible Commentary or in Harold Fisch – Poetry with a Purpose.

Personally, I find the Song astonishing – I did a structural analysis – the second version is here

]]>