Sermon LXVIII. On the Manner in which the Bridegroom Attends to his Spouse and she to Him

"My Beloved to me, and I to Him."

Listen now, my brethren, to what has been held over since yesterday. Be attentive whilst I tell you of the joy which I have found. It is also your joy. Hear me therefore with gladness. I have discovered this joy in a single expression of the Bride's, and after refreshing myself with its fragrance, so to speak, I have kept it concealed until now, when it shall cause you all the more pleasure in proportion as it is the more seasonably proposed. The Spouse, then, has spoken, and she has declared that her Bridegroom attends to her. But who is this Spouse? And who is this Bridegroom? The Bridegroom, my brethren, is none other than our God. And the Spouse— dare I say it? — the Spouse is ourselves, together with the rest of the multitude of captives,¹ all known to Him. Let us therefore rejoice. "This is our glory," the consciousness that we are the Spouse to whom God attends..Yet how infinitely great is the distance between Him and us! What are we, "earth-born and the sons of men," compared to God? In the words of the Prophet Isaias, "All nations are before Him as if they had no being at all, and are counted to Him as nothing and vanity." What, then, can such a Spouse mean by putting herself on an equality with One so far above her, when she says, "My Beloved to me, and I to Him"? Either she exalts herself extravagantly, or He loves her excessively. What a wonderful thing it is that she should thus claim His attention for herself, as her own exclusive property, as it were, in the words "My Beloved to me"! Nor is she satisfied with so much. She carries her glorying still further and dares to give herself to Him in return, to exchange herself for Him, so to speak, as a thing of equal value! "And I to Him," she adds. A presumptuous speech, surely, this "and I to Him." And not less presumptuous that other, "My Beloved to me." But both together are clearly more presumptuous than either of the two taken singly.

Oh, how great is the daring of a pure heart, of a good conscience, and of a "faith unfeigned"! "He attends to me," she says. Is it then true that the Divine Majesty, to Whom belongs the government and the administration of the wide world of creatures, gives His whole attention to her? Can it be a fact that the care of the universe is exchanged for the mere intercourse of love, rather say for the repose of love, in order to gratify the desires of the Spouse? Such in truth is the case. For this Spouse is the Church of the elect, whereof the Apostle says, "All things for the sake of the elect." And who can have any doubt "that the grace of God and His mercy is with His saints, and that He hath respect to His chosen"? I do not, however, deny His providence over His other creatures; but I say that the Spouse claims for herself all His special care and attention. "Doth God take care for oxen"? asks the Apostle. It is manifest that we may say the same of horses, of camels, of elephants, and of all the other beasts of the earth; yea, of all the fishes of the sea, and of all the birds of the air, and finally of everything in the world, those creatures only excepted to whom alone it has been said, "Casting all your care upon Him, for He hath care of you." Does it not seem to you, my brethren, as if you heard the admonition, "Attend to Him because He attends to you"? And take notice how the Apostle Peter, to whom belong the words quoted, observes here the same order as the Spouse. For he does not say, "Casting all your care upon Him that He may have care of you," but, "Casting all your care upon Him because He hath care of you." Thereby he clearly indicates not alone how dearly beloved is the Church of the saints, but also how she has been prevented by love.

It is therefore evident that what St. Paul interrogatively affirms of the oxen applies not to her. For surely the Lord must have care for her, seeing that He hath loved her and delivered Himself for her. Is she not that wandering sheep the care of which the Good Shepherd preferred even to the care of His heavenly flock? Yea, abandoning these. He descended to earth for her sake; He sought for her diligently; and when at last she was found. He did not lead or drive, but He carried her back to the fold. Next, on account of her and in company with her, He made new feasts of joy in heaven, inviting all the choirs of angels to participate therein. What then? After deigning to bear her back on His own shoulders, will He no longer have care former? Impossible! Hence she does not hesitate to say, "The Lord is careful for me." Neither has she any fear lest she should be over-confident in affirming, "The Lord will repay for me," and using the other similar expressions which seem to signify God's special solicitude for her. Therefore it is that she calls the Lord of Hosts her Beloved, a'nd glories that He Who "judgeth all things with tranquillity" attends to her. And why should she not glory therein? Has she not heard Him saying to her, "Can a mother forget her infant, so as not to have pity on the son of her womb? And if she should forget, yet will I not forget thee"? Besides, it is written, "The eyes of the Lord are upon the just." But what is the Spouse except the whole assembly of the just? What is she, I ask, but "the generation of them that seek the Lord, of them that seek the face" of the Bridegroom? For it is not the case that He attends to her whilst she does not attend to Him. Therefore she makes explicit reference to the attention on both sides, saying, "My Beloved to me, and I to Him." As if she should say, "He attends to me, because He is kind and compassionate; and I attend to Him because I am not ungrateful; He renders to me ' grace for grace,' and I render back to Him thanks for grace; He attends to my deliverance and I attend to His glory; He attends to my salvation and I attend to His will; He attends to me and to none other, because I am His only dove; and I attend to Him and to none other, because I listen not to the voice of strangers, and I pay no heed to them that say to me, ' Lo, here is Christ,' or, * Lo, He is there.'" So may the Church apply to herself the words, "My Beloved to me, and I to Him."

But what of each of ourselves, individually, my brethren? Can we suppose that there is anyone amongst us to whom the same words may in some sense apply? But why do I say "anyone amongst us," since it is my opinion that this question might be asked, and not unreasonably, with regard to every single member of the universal Church? However, the Bridegroom does not attend in the same manner to the individual Christian and to the multitude of believers. It was not for the sake of any particular soul, but on account of many, in order to collect many into one Church, to unite and form many into one single Spouse, that God did so much and suffered so much when He "wrought salvation in the midst of the earth." This is the Spouse that is most dear to Him, exclusively His as He is exclusively hers, giving her love to no other Bridegroom, yielding her place to no other Bride. What may she not presume with so solicitous a Lover? What may she not hope for from Him Who came down from heaven to seek her and called her to Himself from the ends of the earth? And not alone has He sought her, but He has also bought her; and the price that was paid for her was the Blood of the Purchaser. There is another consideration also which is wont to be made the ground of special confidence. It is that, looking forward into the future, she clearly recognises that the Lord has need of her. Do you ask, for what purpose? "That He may see the good of His chosen, that He may rejoice in the joy of His nation, that He may be praised with His inheritance." Nor must it be supposed that this is an object of but little moment. For I tell you that unless this is secured, no work of God shall continue perfect. Can it be denied that the end of all things depends upon the final state and consummation of the Church? Take this away, and then in vain "the expectation of the (inferior) creature waiteth for the revelation of the sons of God." Take this away, and neither the patriarchs nor any of the prophets shall be consummated, because, as the Apostle assures us, God has so "provided for us that they should not be perfected without us." Take this away, and the glory of even the holy angels shall suffer diminution by reason of the imperfection of their number. Take away this, finally, and the city of God itself shall be defrauded of the joy of its integrity.

How then, I ask, shall God be able to accomplish His design and bring to pass the secret purpose of His will, the "great mystery of godliness"? Or where shall you find for me the "infants and sucklings" out of whose mouths the Lord may perfect His praise? In heaven there are no infants or sucklings. They belong only to the Church, to whose children it was said, "I gave you milk to drink, not meat." And it is these the Psalmist invites to perfect and complete, as it were, the praises of God, where he says, "Praise the Lord, ye children." Do you imagine that God can have the praise of His glory full and entire, before the advent of those who shall sing "in the sight of the angels," "We have rejoiced for the days in which Thou hast humbled us, for the years in which we have seen evils"? Gladness of this kind heaven could not know except through the children of the Church. To rejoice with such a joy is impossible to creatures who have never lived an hour without rejoicing. Especially sweet is the joy which succeeds to sadness, the repose which follows labour, the haven after shipwreck. Security is pleasing to all, but to him more particularly who has long been a prey to alarm. Light gives pleasure to everyone, but to none so much as to those who have escaped from the power of darkness. To have passed out of death into life doubles the joy of living. This is my portion at the celestial banquet, special to myself, and incommunicable to the blissful angels. Yet I dare to afhrm it, that even the happiness of these heavenly spirits would be incomplete, as lacking the bliss which is peculiarly human, did they not (as. they so graciously condescend to acknowledge) par- 1 ticipate through their charity with me and through me in mine. Hence they certainly seem to owe to me something of the perfection of their blessedness, nor is that something a matter of little importance. We know that the angels rejoice over the conversion of a sinner. But if even my contrite tears are a source of delight to these citizens of heaven, how great must be their joy in my happiness! Their only occupation is to praise God. Yet they know how imperfect their praise shall be, if there be none who can sing, "We have passed through fire and water, and Thou hast j brought us out into a refreshment."

Happy, therefore, is the Church in her universality. Inadequate to the motives she possesses is all her glorying, looking not only to the benefits and prerogatives already granted her, but also to the favours which, by the divine promise, she shall hereafter receive. And why should she trouble herself about merits, seeing that she has a more solid and secure ground for glorying in the free purpose of God's good pleasure than any merits of her own could give her? God cannot deny Himself, nor can He undo what He has already done; and, according to the Prophet, He has already accomplished the things that are to be. Yes, He will undoubtedly do as He has said. God will not be unfaithful to His promise. Thus, there is no longer any reason for you to ask me what those merits are whereon we may build our hopes of heaven, especially since you have heard through the Prophet Ezechiel the announcement, "It is not for your sakes that I will do this, but for My holy name's sake, saith the Lord." For our merit it suffices us to know that our own merit suffices us not.² But just as it is sufficient for our merit not to presume on our merit, so it is sufficient for our judgment to be found entirely deficient in merit. Even regenerated infants are none of them without merits, for they have the merits of Christ. Yet one renders himself unworthy of a participation in the merits of Christ by not joining thereto merits of his own, if this is due not to incapacity but to negligence; which, however, is a danger rather for adults than for infants. Study, therefore, my brethren, to acquire merits. But when they have been acquired, be sure you regard them as the gifts of God.³ Let the mercy of the Lord be the fruit you expect from them. And in this way you shall avoid all danger of spiritual poverty, of ingratitude, and of presumption. The worst kind of poverty is poverty of merit, whilst presumption of spirit is but a deceitful show of wealth. Hence the Wise Man prays to the Lord, "Give me neither beggary nor riches." Happy the Church to which are wanting neither merits without presumption, nor presumption without merits! She has indeed grounds whereon to presume, but these grounds are not her own merits. She has merits also, but merits which make her worthy of reward, not such as would lead her to presume. Is not the very fact of her not presuming on anything of her own real merit and a title to reward? Therefore the less she presumes on her own merits the more safely does she presume on the merits of Christ. Nor is it possible that she should be confounded in her-glorying, who has so many motives for glorying. For "the mercies of the Lord are many" and "the truth of the Lord remaineth for ever."

Why, my brethren, may not she glory in security since "mercy and truth have met each other" to testify to her glory? Therefore, whether she says, "My Beloved to me," or whether she says, "With expectation I have waited for the Lord," or, "The Lord is careful for me," or in fine whatever other expressions of this kind she makes use of, which appear to signify in the same way a certain special love and singular favour on the part of God for His Spouse; she believes that there is none of all these utterances which does not truly apply to herself.⁴ And well she may, considering that she has such soHd reason for presuming in the Lord's free choice of her, particularly as she beholds no other Spouse, no rival Church for whose sake the divine pledges, which cannot fail, are to be fulfilled. Hence it is evident that the Church has no hesitation at all in appropriating to herself the prerogatives and graces of the promise. But even with regard to the individual soul, provided that she is holy and spiritual, the question may be reasonably asked, whether she also has not the right to presume in these matters, at least to a certain extent? It seems evident enough that no single soul, however far advanced in holiness she may be, can lay claim to all the privileges and promises appertaining to the universal Church, for the sake of which all things are done. It will consequently be no easy matter, as I think, if indeed it is not altogether impossible, to discover how such presumption, even within limits, can be lawful for any individual. Hence I judge it necessary to reserve this investigation for another discourse. For I am unwilling to enter upon so difficult a disputation, the issue whereof I cannot tell, until we have first prayed for light on this obscure question to Him "Who openeth and no man shutteth," the Bridegroom of the Church, Jesus Christ Our Lord, Who is over all things, God blessed for ever. Amen.

Footnotes

1. That is to say, the faithful, whose sojourn on earth was typified by the Babylonian captivity. — (Translator.) ↩

2. In his fifteenth sermon on Psalm xc. he has, "Hoc totum hominis meritum, si totam spem suam ponat in Eo Qui totum hominem salvum fecit." — (Translator.) ↩

3. There is hardly anything which the Fathers appear more anxious to impress upon us than the truth that our merits are really the gifts of God. Thus in his Confessions (1. ix. c. 13), St. Augustine writes, "Quisquis Tibi enumerat vera merita sua, quid Tibi enumerat nisi munera Tua?" And in his book, De Grat. et Lib. arbit., c. 6, "Dona sua coronat Deus, non merita tua; si ergo Dei dona sunt bona merita tua, non Deus coronat merita tua tanquam merita tua, sed tanquam dona sua." Also in De Eccl. Dogmat., c. 32, "Tanta est erga omnes homines bonitas Dei ut nostra velit esse merita quae sunt Ipsius dona." Similarly, St. Gregory the Great, "Praeveniente gratia et bona voluntate subsequente, hoc quod omnipotentis Dei donum est fit meritum nostrum" (Super Ezech., h. 9). See also note at page 26, vol. i. — (Translator.) ↩

4. "Nihil horum a se alienum putabit." This seems to be an echo of Terence's hne, "Homo sum, et nihil humanum a me aUenum puto." — (Translator.) ↩