Song of Songs.
Song of Songs.
§ 148. The Song of Songs is called by the Hebrews 
, which in the Hebrew language means “an outstanding or exceptional song.” The Greeks call it 
, “Song of Songs,” and also connect a mention of the author—that it was written by Solomon. First Kings 4:32 relates that Solomon composed many songs, but none of these is extant today except this one, which was more excellent than the rest.
The interpreters differ regarding the aim [scopus] of this book, yet it is certain that it does not discuss marital love, much less excessive marital love. The Hebrews say: “Heaven forbid! Heaven forbid that this be a song about obscene things! Rather, it is a metaphor ….” Otherwise, “if it were not of great dignity, it would not be written in the catalog of the Holy Scriptures.” (I) Many of the ancients relate it to the spiritual marriage between Christ and the Church, as well as that of Christ and any faithful soul. Augustine, De civ. Dei, bk. 17, c. 20: “The Song of Songs is a spiritual pleasure of holy minds in the marriage of the King and the queen-city, that is, of Christ and the Church. This pleasure, however, is wrapped in allegorical veils so that the Bridegroom might be desired more ardently and be seen with greater joy.” (II) Some think that in this book there is described the ardent affection of the king for the state of Israel and vice versa. (III) Luther relates it to the affection of the people of Israel toward God.
It has eight chapters and consists of constant dialogue.
§ 149. Some of the ancient heretics used to say that the Song of Songs “was written not by the Spirit of God but by the heavy breath of lust,” according to Philaster (De haeres., c. 133). Beza attributes the same opinion to Castalion. This book was taken into the canon, however, by the common approval of both the Israelite and the Christian Church. In fact, among the ancient Hebrews, so great was their reverence for this book that they forbade anyone to read it—along with the beginning of Genesis and the beginning and end of Ezekiel—before his thirtieth year. The Christian interpreters seem to stand in the footsteps of those who think that the explanation of this song is not to be attained in youth but must be reserved for the solace of Christian old age and the provision [viaticum] of a devout departure. As examples, we have Bernard, Thomas Aquinas, and Jean Gerson, who spent the last days of their lives meditating upon and explaining this book.
§ 150. The common judgment of theologians attributes those three books we just listed—Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs—to Solomon (as we said earlier). Yet there are some who claim that the prophet Isaiah gathered the statements of these three books from the proverbs and songs that Solomon had composed and that had been preserved in the Israelite church until Isaiah’s time.
Proverbs was written especially for the young man, Ecclesiastes for the man in full bloom, and Song of Songs for the old man. Origen (prolog to Homil. in cant., vol. 1, f. 71), Jerome (on Ecclesiastes 1), Theodoret (preface to his commentary on Song of Songs), and others of the ancients compare summaries of these books with the three parts of philosophy. Because according to the Stoics and Platonists all philosophy is divided into three parts—namely, physics, ethics, and dialectics (by which the Platonists understand metaphysics)—therefore they say that in Proverbs there is set forth the ethical part of philosophy, that is, useful discipline concerning behavior. In Ecclesiastes there is set forth the physical part of philosophy, indicating the nature of those things perceived by the senses and teaching the vanity of this present life and all things that are seen here, so that as we recognize their fluctuating and fragile character we may spurn them as fleeting, passing things and acknowledge that what is to come is firm and will endure forever. In the Song of Songs there is set forth theology and the metaphysical part of philosophy, which denotes the mystic union of bride and Bridegroom.