SR
← Sermones super Cantica Canticorum (Sermons on the Song of Songs)/Book 1 · Sermones super Cantica Canticorum
Chapter 4SermC.1.4

Sermo 4

Remembering the Threefold Kiss

The preacher recalls yesterday's teaching on the three spiritual kisses and signals his intention to continue the exposition.

Yesterday's talk embraced a certain threefold progress of the soul under the name of three kisses. Has it slipped your minds? That's what I'll take up in today's discussion, as God deigns to prepare in his own sweetness for this poor one. We said, if you recall, that those kisses are taken at the feet, at the hand, at the mouth, each one referring to each. In the first, then, the beginnings of our conversion are dedicated; the second, however, is granted to those advancing; and the third is experienced only by a rare perfection. From this last one alone, which is placed last, the Scripture we undertook to treat took its beginning, and for its sake the remaining two were joined by us. Or will you necessarily judge it so? I think, in fact, the very face of the language easily prompts us to seek these things out.

The Kiss of the Mouth and Other Kisses

Drawing on the Song of Songs, the preacher argues that the mouth's kiss is singular and supreme, and introduces the three soul-affections that correspond to the three kisses.

Isn't it remarkable, if you haven't already noticed, that there must truly be another—or other—kisses, distinct from that one of the mouth, which the one who said 'Let him kiss me with the kiss of his own mouth' wanted to set apart?✦ For why, when it would have been enough to say simply 'Let him kiss me,' did he nevertheless go beyond the ordinary usage of speech and distinctly and emphatically add 'with the kiss of his own mouth,' if not to show that the very kiss he was seeking was the highest, not merely ordinary?✦ Don't we finally speak to each other this way: 'Kiss me,' or 'Give me a kiss'—and no one goes on to say 'with your mouth' or 'with the kiss of your mouth'? What? When preparing to kiss one another, we turn our faces toward each other, yet we don't specifically ask for these by name? Finally, someone who tells, for example, how the betrayer was received by the Lord with a kiss, and he kissed him, they say—nor did they add 'with his own mouth' or 'with the kiss of his mouth.'✦ So indeed everyone who writes and who speaks is accustomed to do. There are, then, these three affections of the soul, or advances, sufficiently known and manifest only to those who have experienced them: when they obtain either pardon for evil deeds done, or grace for doing good things, or even the presence of the very one who grants these benefits and is their benefactor, in that way indeed in which it is possible in a fragile body to behold him.

The First Kiss: Peace at the Feet

The first kiss is identified as the kiss of peace granted through humble satisfaction for sin, sought at the feet of God.

Now, then, let me explain more clearly in what sense I would call the first and second kinds of kisses. We all know that a kiss is a sign of peace. Furthermore, if — as Scripture says — our sins separate us from God, let whatever stands between us be removed, and there is peace. So when we make satisfaction, so that — once the sin that separates us has been taken away — we may be reconciled, what would I call the pardon we receive but, as it were, a kiss of peace? And for now, this kiss is to be sought nowhere else than at the feet. Indeed, satisfaction ought to be humble and modest, since it is by such satisfaction that a proud transgression is corrected.

The Second Kiss: Lifting the Hand in Humble Gratitude

The second kiss is the kiss of the hand, granted to those advancing in grace, provided they give glory to God rather than themselves.

But when we're also granted, through a certain intimacy with greater grace, to live more rightly and to conduct ourselves more worthily toward God, we now lift our heads from the dust with greater confidence, about to kiss the hand of the Giver, as is his custom—provided, however, that for the gift received we seek not our own glory but the Giver's, and ascribe his gifts to him and not to ourselves. Otherwise, if you glory in yourself and not rather in the Lord, you'll be convicted of kissing your own hand and not the Lord's—which, according to blessed Job's judgment, is the greatest iniquity and a denial of God. If, then, by the testimony of Scripture, to seek one's own glory is to kiss one's own hand, then the one who gives glory to God is said, not unfittingly, to kiss the hand of God. And among humans, indeed, we see it to be so: servants, namely, are accustomed to kiss the feet of masters they've offended when they seek pardon from them, and the poor kiss the hands of the rich when they receive a gift from them.

Does God Have Hands or Feet?

The preacher addresses the problem of attributing bodily members to a spiritual God, affirming that God possesses these in effect and not in nature, and leads the soul through confession, devotion, and contemplation toward inaccessible light.

But because God is spirit, and that simple substance is not distinguished by any bodily limbs, perhaps someone will form no conception of God from such notions, but will demand from me that God's hands or feet be shown to them — and so it be proved that what I define concerning the kissing of feet or hands applies to God.✦✦ But what if I in turn were to ask my own questioner about the mouth of God as well — whether what Scripture says about the kissing of the mouth pertains to God?✦ Assuredly, either God has these together with that, or God lacks these together with those. But in fact God has a mouth, by which he teaches humanity knowledge; and he has a hand, by which he gives food to all flesh; and he has feet, whose footstool is the earth, to which sinners of the earth, surely, turned back and humbled, make amends.✦ These things, I say, God possesses in their effect, not in their nature. Indeed, with God one finds both humble confession, whereby self is cast down by humbling itself; and ready devotion, whereby self is restored by being renewed; and joyful contemplation, whereby self finds rest by going beyond itself. He who administers all things is all things to all, and yet properly speaking, he is nothing of all that exists. For in himself God dwells in inaccessible light, and his peace surpasses every understanding; and of his wisdom there is no number, and of his greatness there is no limit; nor can a mortal see God and live.✦✦

God as the Being of All Things

God is presented as supremely present yet incomprehensible, the being of all things not materially but causally, distributing existence, life, reason, virtue, and glory to creatures.

Not that he is far from each one — he who is the being of all things, without whom all things are nothing — but so that you may wonder the more: nothing is more present than he is, and nothing more incomprehensible. After all, what is more present to each thing than its own being? Yet what is more incomprehensible to each one than the being of all things? I would say, then, that God is the being of all things — not because those things are what he is, but because all things are from him, and through him, and in him. He himself, then, is the being of all things that were made — their maker, but a causal maker, not a material one. In just such a way that majesty deigns to be present to its own creatures: to all things, indeed, simply that they are; but to living things, that they also live; and further, to those that use reason, light; to those that use it rightly, virtue; and to those that conquer, glory.

God Works Without Bodily Instruments

Unlike souls, God needs no bodily senses or members to create, govern, know, or make himself known to pure hearts.

And in creating, governing, administering, moving, advancing, renewing, and strengthening all these things, he needs no bodily instruments — he who created all things, bodies and spirits alike, by his Word alone.✦ Souls need bodies and bodily senses, through which they may become known to one another and be of use to each other. But not so almighty God, whose swift efficacy, flowing from will alone, suffices as much for creating things as for ordering them however he wills. He is able as much as he wills, and that without the service or obedience of bodily members. What? Do you suppose that, to behold the things he himself made, he requires the aid of a bodily sense? Nothing at all lies hidden or escapes the light that is present everywhere; yet he does not need the service of a reporting sense in order to recognize anything necessary. Nor does he know all things only without a body; he also makes himself known to hearts that are pure, without a body.

A Promise Deferred Until Tomorrow

The preacher signals that a fuller treatment of the matter must be postponed to the next day's sermon.

Let me say the same thing more broadly, so it's clearer. But perhaps because the approaching end of this sermon doesn't allow for it, it's more a matter of planning to put it off until tomorrow.1

Read the original Latin

Triplicem quemdam animae profectum sub nomine trium osculorum sermo hesternus complexus est. Nunquid excidit vobis? Is mihi hodierna disputatione prosequendus erit, prout parare dignabitur in dulcedine sua pauperi Deus. Diximus, si recolitis, illa oscula sumi ad pedes, ad manum, ad os, singula singulis referentes. In primo sane primordia dedicantur nostrae conversionis; secundum autem proficientibus indulgetur: porro tertium sola experitur, et rara perfectio. Ab hoc solo, quod ultimum positum est, sumpsit exordium Scriptura ista quam tractare suscepimus, et ipsius causa reliqua duo a nobis adiuncta sunt. An vero necessarie vos iudicabitis. Puto enim, facies ipsa eloquii facile admonet et ista requirere.

Mirum vero si non et vos advertitis, oportere revera esse aliud, sive alia oscula, a quibus illud oris distinguere voluit qui dixit: Osculetur me osculo oris sui. Cur enim, cum sufficere poterat dixisse simpliciter, osculetur me; praeter morem tamen usumque loquendi, distincte et signanter adiecit, osculo oris sui, nisi ut ostenderet ipsum, quod petebat osculum, summum esse, non solum? Nonne denique ita invicem loquimur: Osculare me; vel: Da mihi osculum: et nemo sequitur ut dicat Ore tuo, sive, Osculo oris tui? Quid? alterutrum osculari parantes, tuum versus invicem ora tendimus, quae tamen ab invicem non requirimus nominatim? Denique qui narrat, verbi gratia, a Domino susceptum in osculo proditorem: Et osculatus est, ait, eum; nec addidit: Ore suo, vel, Osculo oris sui. Sic nimirum omnis et qui scribit, et qui loquitur consuevit. Sunt ergo hi tres animarum affectus, sive profectus, expertis duntaxat satis noti et manifesti, cum aut de actis malis indulgentiam, aut de bonis agendis gratiam, aut ipsius etiam indultoris et benefactoris sui praesentiam, eo quidem modo quo in corpore fragili possibile est, obtinent intueri.

Caeterum primum et secundum qua ratione oscula nominaverim, manifestius accipite. Osculum, pacis indicium esse omnes novimus. Porro autem si, ut Scriptura loquitur, peccata nostra separant inter nos et Deum, tollatur de medio quod interest, et pax est. Cum ergo satisfacimus, ut, ablato quod separat peccato, reconciliemur; indulgentiam quam recipimus, quid nisi quoddam osculum dixerim pacis? Idque interim non alibi, quam ad pedes sumendum. Humilis quippe et verecunda debet esse satisfactio, qua emendatur superba transgressio.

At cum etiam ad vivendum emendatius, Deoque dignius conversandum, placita quadam amplioris gratiae familiaritate donamur; ampliori fiducia caput iam levamus de pulvere, largitoris, ut assolet, manum osculaturi; si tamen de accepto munere non nostram, sed auctoris gloriam quaerimus, eique sua dona, et non nobis ascribimus. Alioquin si in te, et non magis in Domino gloriaris, propriam profecto et non Domini manum osculari convinceris: quod, iuxta beati Iob sententiam, est iniquitas maxima, et negatio in Deum. Si ergo, ad Scripturae testimonium, propriam gloriam quaerere, propriam est osculari manum; profecto qui dat gloriam Deo, Dei dicitur non incongrue manum osculari. Et in hominibus quidem ita esse videmus, servos videlicet offensorum dominorum osculari solere pedes, cum ab ipsis veniam petunt; et pauperes divitum manus, cum ab eis munus accipiunt.

Verum quia spiritus est Deus, et nullis simplex illa substantia membris distincta corporeis; erit forsan qui nullatenus de illo recipiat tale aliquid, sed a me sibi Dei manus vel pedes flagitet demonstrari, sicque probari quod de osculo pedum manusve definio. Sed quid, si et ego vicissim ab ipso meo sciscitatore de ore quoque Dei requisiero, quatenus quod de oris osculo Scriptura loquitur, ad Deum pertinere demonstret? Nempe aut cum isto simul et illa habet, aut cum illis pariter et isto caret. Sed enim et os habet Deus, quo docet hominem scientiam; et manum habet, qua dat escam omni carni; et pedes habet, quorum terra scabellum est, ad quos nimirum peccatores terrae conversi atque humiliati satisfaciunt. Haec, inquam, habet Deus omnia per effectum, non per naturam. Invenit profecto apud Deum et verecunda confessio, quo se humiliando deiiciat; et prompta devotio, ubi se innovando reficiat; et iucunda contemplatio, ubi excedendo quiescat. Omnia omnibus est qui omnia administrat, nec quidquam est omnium proprie. Nam, quod in se est, lucem habitat inaccessibilem, et pax eius exsuperat omnem sensum; et sapientiae eius non est numerus, et magnitudinis eius non est finis; nec potest eum videre homo ut vivat.

Non quod longe ab unoquoque sit qui esse omnium est, sine quo omnia nihil: sed, ut tu plus mireris, et nil eo praesentius, et nil incomprehensibilius. Quid nempe cuique rei praesentius, quam esse suum? Quid cuique tamen incomprehensibilius, quam esse omnium? Sane esse omnium dixerim Deum, non quia illa sunt quod est ille; sed quia ex ipso, et per ipsum, et in ipso sunt omnia. Esse est ergo omnium quae facta sunt ipse factor eorum, sed causale, non materiale. Tali proinde modo dignatur illa maiestas suis esse creaturis, omnibus quidem quod sunt; animantibus autem quod et vivunt; porro ratione utentibus lux, recte vero utentibus virtus, vincentibus gloria.

Et in his omnibus creandis, gubernandis, administrandis, movendis, promovendis, innovandis, firmandis, nullis corporeis indiget instrumentis, qui omnia solo verbo et corpora creavit, et spiritus. Animae corporibus et corporeis egent sensibus, quibus sibi invicem innotescant, et valeant. At non ita omnipotens Deus, qui de sola voluntate celeris suppetit efficientia tam creandis rebus, quam ordinandis prout voluerit. Valet qui vult, quantum vult, et absque corporalium officio, obsequiove membrorum. Quid? ad intuenda quae condidit ipse, putas sibi requirat corporei sensus adiutorium? Nihil omnium omnino latet, aut effugit lucem ubique praesentem; nec tamen ut agnoscat aliquid, necessarium habet renuntiantis sensus ministerium. Nec solum universa noscit sine corpore, sed et innotescit mundis corde sine corpore.

Dico autem idem latius, ut planius fiat. Sed forte quia finiendi iam sermonis angustia non admittit, consilii magis est ut in crastinum differamus.

Scripture echoes

  1. ↩Song.1.2 — Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth, for your love is better than wine.
  2. ↩Song.1.2 — Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth, for your love is better than wine.
  3. ↩Matt.26.49;Luke.22.47 — And immediately he came to Jesus and said, 'Greetings, Rabbi!' And he kissed him. Luke.22.47 — While he was still speaking, a crowd came up, and the one called Judas, one of the twelve, was leading them. He approached Jesus to kiss him.
  4. ↩John.4.24 — God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.
  5. ↩Isa.66.1;Ps.98.5 — Thus says the LORD: The heavens are my throne, and the earth is my footstool. What house will you build for me, and what is the place of my rest? Ps.98.5 — Sing to the LORD with the lyre, with the lyre and the sound of melody.
  6. ↩Song.1.2 — Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth, for your love is better than wine.
  7. ↩Isa.66.1 — Thus says the LORD: The heavens are my throne, and the earth is my footstool. What house will you build for me, and what is the place of my rest?
  8. ↩1Tim.6.16 — He alone has immortality, dwelling in unapproachable light, whom no one among human beings has seen or is able to see. To him be honor and eternal dominion. Amen.
  9. ↩Exod.33.20 — And he said, 'You cannot see my face, for no one may see me and live.'
  10. ↩John.1.3 — All things came into being through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into being that has come into being.

Notes

  1. 1 ↩consilii magis est: partitive genitive construction ('it is more of a plan/matter of planning'); the sense is that postponement is the more practical course.

Sermones super Cantica Canticorum (Sermons on the Song of Songs) companion

Practice Bernard's method every morning

The free course teaches the method; the Chosen Portion app gives you a fresh historic portion to practice it on each day.

Bernard built his monks' devotion around a short daily portion of one text taken slowly; Chosen Portion serves the same daily-portion practice on your phone.

  • Learn Bernard's one-verse meditation method in 7 daily emails, about 5 minutes each
  • Get 7 curated excerpts from the actual sermons, in readable modern English
  • Finish with a repeatable 10-minute daily meditation routine you can run in the free app
Chosen Portion — Daily Prayer (free iOS app) →