The Song of Songs is a title not easy bestowed! Yet here it rests on one of the most unlikely candidates for the biblical canon, a cobbled collection of erotic love poetry! Interpreting the Song of Songs or Solomon’s Song in the 21st century is one of the hardest tasks of any biblical interpretation, primarily due to its interpretative history.

The main point of contention lies over whether it should be read as the very definitely sexual work that it appears, or whether the physical metaphors of heterosexual love are in fact representative of a deeper spiritual meaning, even analogy, between Yahweh, the Lover and his people, the Beloved.

Since Origen in the early 3rd century BCE Christian tradition has been disposed to treat the Song of Songs as an allegory of the relationship of Christ to his church. This led to the somewhat oddly ironic situation that during the Middle Ages it was the most translated of all the canonical writings, by people committed to a life of celibacy!

What is clear, however, is that Christianity has struggled, certainly since the 3rd century BCE, to integrate sexuality as a positive aspect of spirituality, indeed sometimes to see it as anything more positive than a necessary procreative activity. Our reading of Song of Songs will inevitably be coloured by that history and we should be wary of its influence. However, the other side of the coin is that many modern interpreters have reacted against the removal of ‘difficult’ sexual language by analogy and so reduced it to without any spiritual content at all. This, of course, does nothing to bless the cohabitation of sex and God in our lives.

It is important when reading Song of Songs that we remember poetry like this is not necessarily written to provide ‘answers’ or ‘make a point’. Poetry is written to express life in an ambiguous way. It is for thoughts, emotions, desires, beliefs that would be crushed or stripped of their magic if they were articulated through prose, with its propositions and clarifications (which may well happen with this commentary!?). As such, we should search for the emotional response in our reading and attempt to soak ourselves in the author’s world, all the time resisting the need for resolution.

My thoughts, then, on Song of Songs, are the result of my reading. This is of course the same with any text, but with poetry there is significantly more scope for subjectivity. The text is more vulnerable (hence the longstanding interpretative debates), but perhaps, in the end, more powerful and more compelling.

So to the text: It’s tricky to discern a storyline through the dialogue of the Lover and his Beloved; instead we are introduced to a fairly haphazard selection of reflections and encounters between them, with occasional commentary from the woman’s Friends. At times the words are strongly intense and erotic (e.g. 5:2-8 & 7:7-8:4), though never sexually explicit. At others it is the complimentary speech of two loves, though the imagery is quite amusing for us, so removed are we from these cultural idioms (e.g. 4:1-7; 5:10-16; 6:2-9).

When I read its dialogue, so full of excitement and tension, I can’t help thinking about contemporary portrayals of sexual passion. In Song of Songs there is perpetual suspense; one can imagine the enthralled lovers interlacing each other’s words with vulnerable looks and flirtatious movements. Though the language is intensely physical, the act of sex itself is veiled by innuendo and implication. The Beloved’s refrain ‘do not arouse or awaken love until it so desires’ inspires us to believe that the love and longing she feels for her Lover is overwhelming; it is not a force to be tampered with lightly.

Contrast this with much of the representations of sexuality found in our current culture. Sex is an immediate commodity. Adverts are intended to arouse us, the internet is overwhelmed with graphic pornography and walk into any newsagents and at least one bottom-shelf women’s magazine cover will enthusiastically scream out ’48 ways to better orgasm!’ We are increasingly prioritising the physical sensations of sexual activity over our surrounding relationships; we may desire something to be aroused or awakened, but it is not love!

I don’t believe that Song of Songs is designed as an allegory, (though given the sheer bulk of interpretative literature on possible analogies between its words and the relationship between Yahweh and Israel, or indeed Christ and the church, this less prescriptive point of view should not be ignored). But I do believe that sex is spiritual, and it is the deep longing of passionate desire that unites the very human experience of intimate sexuality with the divine source of self-giving love. Longing for the ‘other’ and for union with them is what turns love from an abstract concept into a raw and yearning emotion.

Which of our relationships are defined by deep longing? And is our knowledge of God about being ‘found’, or the desperate searching of a soul; enticed by love, but battered and bruised by the power of unquenchable desire? (5:6-7)

Our sexuality is part of our spirituality? It colours all of our relationships, sometimes beautifully, sometimes not, because our sexuality is part of who we are and how we relate. Being a heterosexual male should be defined as much by my treating women with respect as by my finding the female form sexually attractive. Our love towards people may climax in sexual love toward one particular person. Is it a love that resonates majestically with the greatest commandment: love God and others? That is up to us.

Song of Songs paints such a passionately engaging picture of sex within the context of a deep and full relationship that pale alternatives hardly need critique. The physical and sexual expression of a longing love can be found in all kinds of places: sharing a meal, reassuring touch, generous gifts, vulnerable interaction, working together, as well as an intimate physical encounter. The whole experience of passionately loving someone else is what gives sex its enduring meaning and what makes it so great.

21st century Christianity is really struggling to respond to 21st century sexuality. Homosexual, metro-sexual, bisexual, transsexual are all diversions from the ‘narrow’ scope of the traditional monogamous heterosexual marriage relationship. I don’t think that Song of Songs is going to give us many answers to the questions posed by these alternative lifestyles. But its lack of fascination with the physical act of sex, and its clear assumption that love is its best context may be a valuable challenge to all sides.

*

As usual, there is some debate over the authorship of this book, but as with Ecclesiastes, I take the position that, in the very normal tradition of the time, a more senior figure than the actual author is credited for the work in order to lend it more credibility. However, in both of these works, Solomon is used somewhat ironically. For the redactor of Song of Songs, Solomon is the classic antithesis of everything this work stands for. Seven hundred wives and three hundred concubines don’t make for much sexual longing!