Note 147 — INTRODUCTION. (continued 2)
Christian D. (Christian David) Ginsburg translation
It is allowed by scholars of taste, that, regarded as a mere human production, this poem is inimitable. “Every part of this Song,” says the learned Bishop Bossuet,147 “abounds in poetical beauties; the objects which present themselves on every side are the choicest plants, the most beautiful flowers, the most delicious fruits, the bloom and vigour of spring, the sweet verdure of the fields, flourishing and well-watered gardens, pleasant streams, and perennial fountains. The other senses are represented as regaled with the most precious odours, natural and artificial; with the sweet singing of birds, and the soft voice of the turtle; with milk and honey, and the choicest of wine. To these enchantments are added all that is beautiful and graceful in the human form, the endearments, the caresses, the delicacy of love. If any object be introduced which seems not to harmonize with this delightful scene, such as the awful prospect of tremendous precipices, the wildness of the mountains, or the haunts of lions, its effect is only to heighten, by the contrast, the beauty of the other objects, and to add the charms of variety to those of grace and elegance.” Bishop Lowth, after having descanted upon some passages, remarks, “Nothing can be imagined more truly elegant and poetical than all these, nothing more apt or expressive than these comparisons.”148 If the poet is so charming in his style, so exquisite and true in his picture of nature, surely it is but reasonable to give him credit for understanding his art, that he was acquainted with the manners and habits of the women of his age, and that he would be as true to nature in the description of the bride as he is in depicting nature herself. If it be true that language of such exquisite taste would outrage female decency and modesty when addressed to a human love, it will surely be more outrageous when put into the mouth of the humble, penitent, and submissive Church in addresses to the Lord of lords. Where in the Old or New Testament do we find any address from the saints to God or Christ resembling the opening of this poem? The addresses of Abraham, (Gen. xviii. 23–33,) Jacob, (Gen. xxxii. 10–13,) and of Solomon himself, (1 Kings viii. 23–53,) and the language in which Christ has taught us to appeal to God, are characterized by the greatest reverence and humility. How, then, can it be affirmed, that language which would violate female modesty and decency in the mouth of a woman to a lover whom she prizes above all things, is becoming in the mouth of the Church when addressing the Holy One of Israel?