• About
  • Books

memoirandremains

memoirandremains

Tag Archives: metaphor

Richard Sibbes, Sermons on Canticles, Sermon 2.2 (How to use scriptural analogies)

06 Thursday Jun 2019

Posted by memoirandremains in Richard Sibbes, Song of Solomon, Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Analogy, Canticles, marriage, metaphor, Puritan, Richard Sibbes, Song of Solomon

The prior post in this series may be found here.

At this point, Sibbes moves onto the image of the Church as the bride, the spouse. He begins this with a consideration of the Church’s nobility. As the Bride of Christ, the Church is a queen to Christ’s King; the Church is nobility.

At this point, Sibbes makes an important observation when it comes to analogy of heavenly and earthly things. The Scripture everywhere provides us with analogies between our world and heavenly realities. Without analogies, there would be no means for us to understand anything concerning God.

Take the proposition: God is love. If there were no love in human existence, if we lived as animals, reproduction without commitment and affection; then the statement that God loves would utterly incomprehensible. God created a mechanism of human love so that we would have an analogy to understand God’s love.

The problem with analogy, is that we can run the analogy in the wrong direction. A great many errors take place, because we begin with the metaphor — the creation — and then try to force the original to conform and be limited by the metaphor. Thus, Sibbes writes:

Riches, beauty, marriage, nobility, &c., are scarce worthy of their names. These are but titles and empty things. Though our base nature make great matters of them, yet the reality and substance of all these are in heavenly things.

There is some similarity to the Platonic concepts of forms, where an original in the higher realm becomes the basis for what we experience in this realm. While not any sort of Platonic expert, I see a fundamental difference between the Christian understanding of analogy and Plato’s forms. There are aspects of this world which have been created for the purpose of functioning as analogies; however, not everything in this world must be considered an analogy. Moreover, the things in the creation do not pre-exist in some fashion prior to our creation: the relational categories, how God relates to his creation did not exist in practice prior to the creation. Love does pre-exist creation, but love of spouse does not.

Back to the concept of analogy. When considering an analogy between creation and God we must be careful in how we handle the analogy:

True riches are the heavenly graces; true nobility is to be born of God, to be the sister and spouse of Christ; true pleasures are those of the Spirit, which endure for ever, and will stand by us when all outward comforts will vanish.

That mystical union and sweet communion is set down with such variety of expressions, to shew that whatsoever is scattered in the creature severally is in him entirely. He is both a friend and a brother, a head and a husband, to us; therefore he takes the names of all. Whence we may observe further,

How then do we go about understanding the nature of the analogy of marriage. To properly read the analogy, Sibbes takes his cue not directly from his observation of human marriage in 17th century England, but from how the Scripture develops the analogy. He is the matter of the first marriage: a sort of birth of Eve (a sister and a spouse in a fashion:

That the church is the spouse of Christ. It springs out of him; even as Eve taken out of Adam’s rib, so the spouse of Christ was taken out of his side. When it was pierced, the church rose out of his blood and death; for he redeemed it, by satisfying divine justice; we being in such a condition that Christ must redeem us before he would wed us. First, he must be incarnate in our nature before he could be a fit husband; and then, because we were in bondage and captivity, we must be redeemed before he could marry us: ‘he purchased his church with his own blood,’ Acts 20:28. Christ hath right to us, he bought us dearly.

Next, he considers the matter of consent in marriage: this is what I will do. This is important aspect of Augustinian theology where faith is preceded by the work of the Spirit. Faith is true faith, but it is wrought faith. Our consent to the marriage is true consent, but it is Spirit-wrought consent:

Again, another foundation of this marriage between Christ and us, is consent. He works us by his Spirit to yield to him. There must be consent on our part, which is not in us by nature, but wrought by his Spirit, &c. We yield to take him upon his own terms; that is, that we shall leave our father’s house, all our former carnal acquaintance, when he hath wrought our consent. Then the marriage between him and us is struck up.

Sibbes then notes some additional elements of comparison: the wife takes the husband name — the Church is called by the name of Christ. The Church comes with her debt, which is paid by the husband. Moreover, the husband conveys to the spouse all of his wealth and honor. Third, there are friends of the bride who extol the beauty and desirability of the husband (Christ).

Sibbes makes an interesting observation from a provision in the Law: Deuteronomy 21:12 (AV), “Then thou shalt bring her home to thine house; and she shall shave her head, and pare her nails”. A woman who was brought in as a wife from a foreign nature conquered by Israel would be married, but before she comes in there is a cutting off of her former life:

Before she should be taken into the church, there must be an alteration; so before the church, which is not heathenish, but indeed hellish by nature, and led by the spirit of the world, be fit to be the spouse of Christ, there must be an alteration and a change of nature, Is. 11:6–8; John 3:3. Christ must alter, renew, purge, and fit us for himself. The apostle saith, Eph. 5:24, it was the end of his death, not only to take us to heaven, but to sanctify us on earth, and prepare us that we might be fit spouses for himself.

Richard Sibbes Sermons on Canticles, Sermon 2.1 (Christ our Brother)

24 Friday May 2019

Posted by memoirandremains in Richard Sibbes, Song of Solomon, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Brother, brotherly love, Canticles, Church, metaphor, Richard Sibbes

The Second Sermon

I am come into my garden, my sister, my spouse: I have gathered my myrrh with my spice; I have gathered my honeycomb with my honey; I have drunk my wine with my milk: eat, O friends; drink, yea, drink abundantly, O beloved.’—Cant. 5:1.

This song is a mirror of Christ’s love, a discovery of which we have in part in this verse; wherein Christ accepts of the invitation of the church, and comes into his garden; and he entertains her with the terms of sister and spouse. Herein observe the description of the church, and the sweet compellation, ‘my sister, my spouse;’ where there is both affinity and consanguinity, all the bonds that may tie us to Christ, and Christ to us.

1. His sister, by blood.

2. His spouse, by marriage.

To begin with: the relationship sibling and spouse do not usually mix in our understanding. Therefore, before we go on, we must consider the nature of metaphors used to describe the relationship between Creator and Creature: the metaphors are used to draw out some aspect of the relationship: no single metaphor provides us a complete understanding. There are other images which are used to describe the relationship between God and his people. We pray “our Father”. The Lord refers to Israel as his bride in Hosea. Minear finds 95 images of the church in the New Testament. When reading a metaphorical description, take it for what it has been proposed — but don’t begin to cross-reference the images to find contradiction. Read them as partials images to provide a complementary whole.

Notice how Sibbes draws out five implications of Christ being our brother

First, the church as “sister”: this implies the image of Christ as “brother”. Christ is our brother, because he is a human being like us:

Christ is our brother, and the church, and every particular true member thereof, is his sister. ‘I go,’ saith Christ, ‘to my Father and to your Father, to my God and to your God,’ John 20:17. ‘Go,’ saith he, ‘and tell my brethren.’ This was after his resurrection. His advancement did not change his disposition. Go, tell my brethren that left me so unkindly; go, tell Peter that was most unkind of all, and most cast down with the sense of it. He became our brother by incarnation, for all our union is from the first union of two natures in one person. Christ became bone of our bone and flesh of our flesh, to make us spiritually bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh.

Second, Sibbes then turns this around: if Christ has become like us, let us become like him:

Therefore let us labour to be like to him, who for that purpose became like to us, Immanuel, God with us, Isa. 7:14; that we might be like him, and ‘partake of the divine nature,’ 2 Pet. 1:4. Whom should we rather desire to be like than one so great, so gracious, so loving?

Third, there is an interesting thing to consider in all of this. In Romans 8, Christ is said to been found “in the likeness of sinful flesh” (Rom. 8:3). He, “emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men.” Philippians 2:7 (NASB95) His becoming like us was a loss, a degradation. In John 17:5, Jesus prays to be restored to the glory which he had “before the world was”. 

Despite this shame, he willingly took it on:

Again, ‘Christ was not ashamed to call us brethren,’ Heb. 2:11, nor ‘abhorred the virgin’s womb,’ to be shut up in those dark cells and straits; but took our base nature, when it was at the worst, and not only our nature, but our miserable condition and curse due unto us. Was he not ashamed of us? and shall we be ashamed to own him and his cause? Against this cowardice it is a thunderbolt which our Saviour Christ pronounceth, ‘He that is ashamed of me before men, him will I be ashamed of before my Father, and all the holy angels,’ Mark 8:38. It argues a base disposition, either for frown or favour to desert a good cause in evil times.

This has often struck me. He has every reason to be ashamed of me — I have no reason to be ashamed of him. I wonder if it is the shame of being found unworthy of his company; that I am not sufficiently like him to claim his friendship. How bizarre that to be ashamed of one so glorious. 

Fourth, to have such a brother is a great encouragement

Again, It is a point of comfort to know that we have a brother who is a favourite in heaven; who, though he abased himself for us, is yet Lord over all. Unless he had been our brother, he could not have been our husband; for husband and wife should be of one nature. That he might marry us, therefore, he came and took our nature, so to be fitted to fulfil the work of our redemption. But now he is in heaven, set down at the right hand of God: the true Joseph, the high, steward of heaven; he hath all power committed unto him; he rules all. What a comfort is this to a poor soul that hath no friends in the world, that yet he hath a friend in heaven that will own him for his brother, in and through whom he may go to the throne of grace boldly and pour out his soul, Heb. 4:15, 16. What a comfort was it to Joseph’s brethren that their brother was the second person in the kingdom.

(While that would not likely how Richard Sibbes have thought it possible to sing of this happiness — it certainly expresses the encouragement we should feel)

Fifth, to know that Christ is the brother of the Church, is to know that Christ is the brother of every Christian. The sorrows carried by the Church in earth are known by their brother in heaven:

Again, It should be a motive to have good Christians in high estimation, and to take heed how we wrong them, for their brother will take their part. ‘Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?’ Acts 9:4, saith the Head in heaven, when his members were trodden on upon earth. It is more to wrong a Christian than the world takes it for, for Christ takes it as done to himself. Absalom was a man wicked and unnatural, yet he could not endure the wrong that was done to his sister Tamar, 2 Sam. 13:1. Jacob’s sons took it as a high indignity that their sister should be so abused, Gen. 34. Hath Christ no affections, now he is in heaven, to her that is so near him as the church is? Howsoever he suffer men to tyrannise over her for a while, yet it will appear ere long that he will take the church’s part, for he is her brother.

There is yet one more implication related to this final point. Yes, the persecutor of the Church should think of the danger he incurs by provoking the brother of the Church. But the members of the Church should also take this heart. Sibbes has said that we should become like Christ. But too often the Christians have become very devils. 

The slander, backbiting, unforgiving, judgmental, bitterness which infects congregations is a hideous black mark upon the church. Don’t these Christians realize that the brother or sister they are tearing apart with their tongue is a brother of Christ? Christ died for them, and we think ourselves better than one for whom Christ died? 

In Psalm 50, God warns:

Psalm 50:19–21 (NASB95)

19“You let your mouth loose in evil

And your tongue frames deceit.

20“You sit and speak against your brother;

You slander your own mother’s son.

21“These things you have done and I kept silence;

You thought that I was just like you;

I will reprove you and state the case in order before your eyes.

We can comfort ourselves with the thought that Psalm 50 refers only to unbelievers. But what of Matthew 18 and the Parable of the Unforgiving Servant? A servant who has been forgiven much by his master refused to forgive a fellow servant (remember that no one image exhausts the demonstration of our relationship to God). Here Christ applies the principle to all believers:

Matthew 18:31–35 (NASB95)

31“So when his fellow slaves saw what had happened, they were deeply grieved and came and reported to their lord all that had happened.

32“Then summoning him, his lord *said to him, ‘You wicked slave, I forgave you all that debt because you pleaded with me.

33‘Should you not also have had mercy on your fellow slave, in the same way that I had mercy on you?’

34“And his lord, moved with anger, handed him over to the torturers until he should repay all that was owed him.

35“My heavenly Father will also do the same to you, if each of you does not forgive his brother from your heart.”

Remember that the other person in your congregation is a brother of Christ, a son of God. To mistreat him is to provoke the ire of God. 

The Spiritual Chymist, Meditation LII

15 Tuesday Aug 2017

Posted by memoirandremains in Uncategorized, William Spurstowe, William Spurstowe

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

metaphor, Rock, The Spiritual Chymist, William Spurstowe

The most recent post in this series may be found here

Upon a Rock

It is the saying of the moralists, that accidents which befall men have a double handle by which they may be apprehended. So as they be rightly taken they become less burdensome and unpleasant, and also of use and advantage to those that sustain them (like bitter herbs that are by the skill of the physician turned into wholesome medicine).

The same may be said of this present subject, that it hath a double aspect under which it may be represented to our consideration, each of which will suggest thoughts far differing from one another, and yet both have their rise from Scripture.

Does not God bid us look uno the rock from when we are hennaed to the pit whence we are digged? [Isaiah 51:1] And then what can it hold out to our view but the misery of our natural condition, our deadness, deformity, barrenness, and intractableness to any good? Is it not the complaint of the best that there are hearts are stony & rocky, and that they are apt to stand it out with God and not to yield to the work of his grace? Is there any evil that in their account is more insuperable than a flinty heart?

When Moses, who had faith to work many miracles, most distrust but when he was to make the Rock to yield water? [Numbers 20:11] And yet is it not the promise of God to take away the stony heart and to give a heart of flesh? [Ezekiel 11:19] And is it not that which I beg, that God would mollify both my natural and acquired hardness and preserve me from judicial hardness; that so I may not resist Pharaoh-like his [God’s] messages, his miracles, his judgments, and his mercies, and worse instead of better.

I would that God might be a Rock to me; but I would be as wax to unto him, that so I might be apt to receive divine impressions from him. It is my sin to be as a rock to God, inflexible and sooner broken than bent. But is my unspeakable comfort to think that God will be a Rock to me, who stand in continual need of his aide and power, to uphold me, who, if it I be not built upon him, cannot subsist. And, if I be not hid in him can have no salvation.

I cannot therefore but give some scope and line to my thoughts, that I amy the better take the honey and sweetness that drop form this metaphorical name of God, who is often styled in Scripture, the Rock of Israel, the Rock of Ages, the Rock of Salvation. But here I must use the help of the schools, who rightly inform us, that we anything of the creature is applied to God, it must be via remotions, by way of remotion; and via eminentiae, by way of transcendent eminency.

First, by way of remotion: All defects and blemishes whatsoever are not in the least to be attributed unto him who is absolutely perfect. As heralds say of bearings, the resemblance must be taken from the best of their properties, not the worst. Is a rock deformed and of unequal parts? God if the first of beauties, as well as of being, and all his attributed are equally infinite. His justice is as of large an extent as his mercy; and his wisdom as his power. Is a Rock insensible of the straits of those that fly unto to it for succor? So is not God, who is both a Rock and Father of Mercies: who can read the expression of his tenderness and note be affected?

How shall I give thee up, Ephraim?
how shall I deliver thee, Israel?
how shall I make thee as Admah?
how shall I set thee as Zeboim?
mine heart is turned within me,
my repentings are kindled together. [Hosea 11:8]

Is the strength of a Rock intransigent, and fixed in itself, not communicating its virtue to what lies upon it? So is not the strength of Israel [God], who is a living and not a dead rock; and gives both life and power to those that united to him.

I can do all things (as Paul says) through Christ strengthening me. [Philippians 4:13]

Is a rock barren and can yield no food, though it afford shelter? So is not God who is a full storehouse as well as a free refuge; a sun as well as a shield.

Secondly, by way of eminency: all perfections whatsoever, either for degree or kind, which put a worth or value upon the creature are to be found infinitely more in God. Is a Rock strong, and dashing to pieces all resistance made against it? God is incomparably more: He (as Job says) is wise in heart, and mighty in strength: who hath hardened himself against him, and hath prospered? [Job 9:4].

Is a rock durable, and not subject to change by the many revolutions of Ages that pass over it? God is far more immutable, his years are throughout all generations: he is the same yesterday, and today and forever: In the Lord Jehovah is everlasting strength. [Isaiah 26:4]

Is the shadow of a great rock desirable in a weary land, to bear off the scorching of the sun and to revive the fainting traveller? What a covert and hiding place then is God against all storms and heats whatsoever, raised either by the rage of men or by the estuation [agitation] of a troubled conscience, and fomented by the malice of Satan?

Is a rock of an awful aspect for its height and apt to work upon the heard of them that looks down from the top of it? How great then is God whose glory is above the heavens? Whose faithfulness reaches unto the clouds, whose righteousness is like the great mountains, and whose judgments are a great deep?

And now methinks I may say to my soul, as David did unto who, Why art thou downcast O my soul? And why are thou disquieted within me? [Ps. 43:5]

Cannot God keep him in perfect peace whose mind is stayed on him? Is not he a very present help in times of trouble? What evil can befall me, under which his everlasting arms cannot support me? What sea of trials can overwhelm me when God shall set me upon a rock that is higher than I? As I myself cannot climb it, so neither can my enemies’ power ever reach it.

A believer can only be wounded by his own fears; as the diamond is only cut by its own dust. Peter sunk not till his faith failed him: if his confidence had risen as the wind and billows did blow, he would have greatly honored his Lord, as his Rock, upon whom he was built, and have been highly commended by him as he was for the good confession he made of him.

But, O blessed Savior,
If Peter cry out, Save Master I perish!
How much more shall I, who fall far short of his little faith?
And am apt to fear, not only in the deeps seas, but in the shallow brooks:
Not only when the waves roar, but when the petty streams murmur?
Do thou therefore, holy Lord,
Teach me to know what a Rock thou art
And cause all thy glory to pass before me
As thou didst before Moses
That so I may see every attribute of thine
As so many clefts in the Rock
To which I may run in time of danger
And rejoice to find how I am compassed about,
With thy power, wisdom, faithfulness, goodness,
From when more sure comfort will arise,
Than if a numerous host of angels should pitch their tents round about me.

 

The Garrison of Peace

20 Thursday Aug 2015

Posted by memoirandremains in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

metaphor, Paul, peace, Philippians

  
John S. Howson

The Meatphors of St Paul

1870

Edward Taylor’s Poem on a Spider and Salvation

16 Thursday Feb 2012

Posted by memoirandremains in Edward Taylor, Preaching, Puritan, Quotations, Richard Sibbes

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Edward Taylor, joy, metaphor, Poetry, Preaching, Puritan, Quotations, Richard Sibbes, Richard Sibbes, salvation, Sin

Taylor uses an extended observation of a spider with first a wasp and then a fly to create a metaphor for our relationship to sin, hell, God, and grace.

Such an extended use of a single metaphor was not uncommon in 17th century preachers. Richard Sibbes was a master of hanging an entire sermon on a primary metaphor.

As a preaching technique, it is a useful means of permitting a hearer to keep track of the various elements of a sermon. However it must be used carefully lest the metaphor control the teaching or the relationship between metaphor and the doctrine becomes too cute.

Taylor’s use of the conceit apparently breaks form in the last stanza, because he turns to nightingales after speaking about flies. However rather than spoil the metaphor he actually illustrates a profound truth: When God frees us from the tangled web of sin, he does not merely free a fly, he makes something new: the fly becomes a bird; the Zombie (Eph.2:1-3) becomes a real human being:

the new self, which is being renewed in knowledge after the image of its creator.

Col. 3:10

Thus, Taylor’s shift to bird from insect drives home his point vividly. He also expresses the essential joy of the Christian life – which exists despite the concurrent pain of our trials. It is a paradoxical thing- but that is for another time.

Interesting how Taylor sets up his observation to metaphor movement in the first stanza with a question to sorrow. Sorrow of course has nothing to do with spider’s or flies-only men beset by sin and its effects.

UPON A SPIDER CATCHING A FLY

By Edward Taylor

Thou sorrow, venom Elfe:
Is this thy play,
To spin a web out of thyselfe
To Catch a Fly?
For Why?

I saw a pettish wasp
Fall foule therein:
Whom yet thy Whorle pins did not clasp
Lest he should fling
His sting.

But as affraid, remote
Didst stand hereat,
And with thy little fingers stroke
And gently tap
His back.

Thus gently him didst treate
Lest he should pet,
And in a froppish, aspish heate
Should greatly fret
Thy net.

Whereas the silly Fly,
Caught by its leg
Thou by the throate tookst hastily
And ‘hinde the head
Bite Dead.

This goes to pot, that not
Nature doth call.
Strive not above what strength hath got,
Lest in the brawle
Thou fall.

This Frey seems thus to us.
Hells Spider gets
His intrails spun to whip Cords thus
And wove to nets
And sets.

To tangle Adams race
In’s stratigems
To their Destructions, spoil’d, made base
By venom things,
Damn’d Sins.

But mighty, Gracious Lord
Communicate
Thy Grace to breake the Cord, afford
Us Glorys Gate
And State.

We’l Nightingaile sing like
When pearcht on high
In Glories Cage, thy glory, bright,
And thankfully,
For joy.

Categories

Archives

Recent Posts

  • Thomas Traherne, The Soul’s Communion With Her Savior 1.1.6
  • Addressing Loneliness
  • Brief in Chiles v Salazar
  • Thomas Traherne, The Soul’s Communion With Her Savior, 1.1.5
  • Draft Brief on First Amendment Protection

Categories

Archives

Recent Posts

  • Thomas Traherne, The Soul’s Communion With Her Savior 1.1.6
  • Addressing Loneliness
  • Brief in Chiles v Salazar
  • Thomas Traherne, The Soul’s Communion With Her Savior, 1.1.5
  • Draft Brief on First Amendment Protection

Blog at WordPress.com.

  • Follow Following
    • memoirandremains
    • Join 630 other followers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • memoirandremains
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar