Praises of the Virgin Mother by St Bernard : Homily II : §14-15/17

St Bernard, by Juan Correa de Vivar,
c. 1540-45. Museo del Prado.
(Public domain)

The following posts present the text of four homilies by St Bernard (1090-1153) frequently given the title of Missus est but which he himself called Praises of the Virgin Mother.

 

He was the first Cistercian monk to be placed on the calendar of saints and was canonized by Alexander III on the 18th January 1174. Pope Pius VIII bestowed on him the title of Doctor of the Church, “Doctor mellifluus,” on the 20th of August 1830. 

I offer this annotated presentation of St Bernard’s Homilies as a small gift to our gentle Queen and Mother in gratitude for her multitudinous graces and favours, requesting her continued help and protection for the author and his family.

The Latin text and references are based upon De laudibus Virginis Matris (Patrologia latina, vol. 183. J. P. Migne). The English text is based upon the version compiled and translated at St. Mary's Convent, York, and published by Washbourne in 1909.

Homily II : §14-15/17

 §14.   Why had he a mind to put her away? I give you on this point not my own opinion, but that of the Fathers. 

Lord, I am not worthy (Matt. viii. 8).

James Tissot (1886–1896). Brooklyn Museum, N.Y.

Joseph wished to put her away in the same way that Peter sought to distance himself from the Lord when he said[1]: 

“Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord;” 

and that of the Centurion when he exclaimed[2]: 

“Lord, I am not worthy that thou shouldst enter under my roof.” 

Joseph too, deeming himself unworthy and a sinner, felt that he ought no longer to share the intimate company of one so exalted – whose wondrous dignity, far surpassing his own, filled him with awe. He saw and trembled before someone bearing the most certain signs of the divine presence and, as he could not penetrate the mystery, he wished to put her away. Peter was struck with awe at the greatness of Christ’s power; and the Centurion by the majesty of His presence. Joseph too naturally recoiled as a man at the novelty of so great a matter and the depth of the mystery. For this reason, he wished to put her away privately. 

Do you marvel that Joseph deemed himself unworthy of the company of the pregnant Virgin when you hear that even the holy woman Elizabeth could not bear her presence except with trembling and reverence? For as she said[3]: 

“Whence is this to me that the mother of my Lord should come to me?” 

Accordingly, Joseph wanted to put her away, but why privately are not openly? Presumably so that the reason for the divorce would not be investigated, nor an explanation demanded. For what answer could a just man give to a stiff-necked people – a people who would not believe and would in fact reject his explanation? If he were to explain his thoughts and feelings – to declare what he had confirmed regarding her purity – would not the incredulous and cruel Jews immediately mock him and stone her? For why would they have believed the Truth who was silent in the womb, whom they later scorned when He spoke out in the Temple? What would they do – those who later laid impious hands even upon Him who shone with miracles – at this time when He had not yet revealed Himself? Rightly, therefore, the just man resolved to send her away secretly, so as not to be forced either to lie or to defame an innocent woman.

Footnotes

[1] Luke v. 8.

[2] Matt. viii. 8.

[3] Luke i. 43.

 §15.   If, however, anyone holds a different view, maintaining that Joseph did indeed doubt; that because he was a just man, he was unwilling to live with her due to the suspicious circumstances; but that, because he was devout, he did not wish to expose her to public disgrace, and therefore wanted to put her away privately – I answer briefly that even in this case, Joseph’s doubt was necessary and merited a divine message of reassurance.

The Dream of Saint Joseph, by Philippe de Champaigne
(1642-43). National Gallery London. CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.

For it is written[1]: 

“But while he thought on these things” (namely, that he should her away privately), “behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in his sleep, saying: Joseph, son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary, thy wife, for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.” 

For the above reasons, therefore, Mary was espoused to Joseph, or rather, according to the words of the Evangelist[2], “to a man whose name was Joseph.” He calls him a man, not because he was a married man, but because he was a man of virtue[3]. Or rather, because – according to another Evangelist[4] – he is called not simply “a man,” but “her man,” being deservedly given the title that is thought necessary. Therefore, Joseph had to be called her man (husband) because it was necessary for him to be considered such. In the same way, Joseph earned the right not indeed to be but to be called, and thus to be considered, the Saviour’s father, as the same Evangelist states[5]: 

“And Jesus himself was beginning about the age of thirty, being—as was supposed—the son of Joseph.”

Thus he was in a sense neither the husband of the Mother nor the father of the Son although, as has been said, he was both called and considered to be so for a time by a certain and necessary dispensation 

Footnotes

[1] Matt. i. 20.

[2] Luke i. 27.

[3] virtue: the Latin text has virtus which echoes the references here to vir (“man”) and which also bears the sense of “manliness.”

[4] This is a reference to Matt. i. 19 where the Vulgate has vir eius / “her man,” translated in the Douay-Rheims text as “her husband.” 

[5] Luke iii. 23.

+       +        +

The Virgin of Tenderness. >12th century.

SUB tuum præsidium confugimus, Sancta Dei Genitrix. Nostras deprecationes ne despicias in necessitatibus, sed a periculis cunctis libera nos semper, Virgo gloriosa et benedicta. Amen. 

 

Totus tuus ego sum

Et omnia mea tua sunt;

Tecum semper tutus sum:

Ad Jesum per Mariam.

He that hearkeneth to me, shall not be confounded: and they that work by me shall not sin. They that explain me shall have life everlasting. Ecclesiasticus (Sirach) xxiv. 30-31.30-31.

Praises of the Virgin Mother by St Bernard : Homily II : §13/17

St Bernard, by Juan Correa de Vivar,
c. 1540-45. Museo del Prado.
(Public domain)

The following posts present the text of four homilies by St Bernard (1090-1153) frequently given the title of Missus est but which he himself called Praises of the Virgin Mother.

 

He was the first Cistercian monk to be placed on the calendar of saints and was canonized by Alexander III on the 18th January 1174. Pope Pius VIII bestowed on him the title of Doctor of the Church, “Doctor mellifluus,” on the 20th of August 1830. 

I offer this annotated presentation of St Bernard’s Homilies as a small gift to our gentle Queen and Mother in gratitude for her multitudinous graces and favours, requesting her continued help and protection for the author and his family.

The Latin text and references are based upon De laudibus Virginis Matris (Patrologia latina, vol. 183. J. P. Migne). The English text is based upon the version compiled and translated at St. Mary's Convent, York, and published by Washbourne in 1909.

Homily II : §13/17

 §13.   But could not God have given some sign which would have preserved His own birth from opprobrium and His Mother’s honour from calumny? Undoubtedly He could, and He could not hide from the demons what men knew. It was in fact necessary that this mystery of God’s counsel should for a time be concealed from the prince of this world. Not that God, if He wished to perform His work openly, feared that He could be hindered by him, but because He Himself – who accomplished whatever He willed not only powerfully but also wisely – was accustomed to observe certain congruities of things or times for the sake of the beauty of order in all His works. Accordingly, He wished to display not only His power but also His wisdom in this magnificent work of ours – namely, our restoration. He could have accomplished it by other means, but He willed to reconcile man to Himself by the same means and in the same order as He knew man had fallen. As the devil had first deceived the woman, then overcome the man by the woman, so he would himself be deceived by a woman, the Virgin, and afterwards be openly attacked and conquered by the Man (Christ). Insofar as the pious art of godliness outmanoeuvred the deceit of malice and the power of Christ crushed the strength of the Evil One, God appeared to the devil both wiser and stronger. For it was fitting that Wisdom incarnate should overcome spiritual wickedness reaching as is written[1]: 

“from end to end mightily, and ordereth all things sweetly.” 

Christ reached from end to end, meaning from Heaven to the nether regions; as it is also written[2]:

“If I ascend into heaven, thou art there: if I descend into hell, thou art present.” 

Indeed, He acted valiantly in both realms: for He cast down the proud one from the heights above, and He despoiled the greedy one in the depths below. It was fitting, therefore, that He should also order all things – both heavenly and earthly – in a manner pleasing to the mind: so that, by casting down the rebellious one, He might establish peace among the others and – before vanquishing the envious one here below –  He might first leave us a much needed example of His own humility and gentleness. In this way, through the wondrous governance of wisdom, He appeared both gentle to His own people and formidable to His enemies; for how would it profit us the devil were conquered by God, while we remained proud? 

St Joseph. James Tissot (1886–1894);
Brooklyn Museum, N.Y.

It was necessary, then, that Mary should be espoused to Joseph, in order that by this means that which was holy might be concealed from the hounds of hell, Mary’s virginity might be attested by her spouse, and the Virgin’s modesty might be spared just as her reputation is safeguarded. What could be more wise? What could be more worthy of Divine Providence? By this one plan, a witness to the heavenly mysteries is admitted, an enemy is excluded and the unsullied reputation of the Virgin Mother is preserved. Otherwise, why would a just man have spared an adulteress? For it is written[3]: 

“Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing publicly to expose her, was minded to put her away privately.” 

Being a just man, he rightly did not wish to expose her to public disgrace; for as he would not have been just had he countenanced one that was guilty, neither would he have been just if he had condemned one whose innocence he had proved. 

Since, then, he was just and unwilling to expose her, he was minded to put her away privately.

Footnotes

[1] Wisdom viii. 1.

[2] Psalm. cxxxviii. 8.

[3] Matt. i. 19.

+       +        +

The Virgin of Tenderness. >12th century.

SUB tuum præsidium confugimus, Sancta Dei Genitrix. Nostras deprecationes ne despicias in necessitatibus, sed a periculis cunctis libera nos semper, Virgo gloriosa et benedicta. Amen. 

 

Totus tuus ego sum

Et omnia mea tua sunt;

Tecum semper tutus sum:

Ad Jesum per Mariam.

He that hearkeneth to me, shall not be confounded: and they that work by me shall not sin. They that explain me shall have life everlasting. Ecclesiasticus (Sirach) xxiv. 30-31.30-31.

Praises of the Virgin Mother by St Bernard : Homily II : §11-12/17

St Bernard, by Juan Correa de Vivar,
c. 1540-45. Museo del Prado.
(Public domain)

The following posts present the text of four homilies by St Bernard (1090-1153) frequently given the title of Missus est but which he himself called Praises of the Virgin Mother.

 

He was the first Cistercian monk to be placed on the calendar of saints and was canonized by Alexander III on the 18th January 1174. Pope Pius VIII bestowed on him the title of Doctor of the Church, “Doctor mellifluus,” on the 20th of August 1830. 

I offer this annotated presentation of St Bernard’s Homilies as a small gift to our gentle Queen and Mother in gratitude for her multitudinous graces and favours, requesting her continued help and protection for the author and his family.

The Latin text and references are based upon De laudibus Virginis Matris (Patrologia latina, vol. 183. J. P. Migne). The English text is based upon the version compiled and translated at St. Mary's Convent, York, and published by Washbourne in 1909.

Homily II : §11-12/17

 §11.   But let us see if Isaias, who explained earlier the new flowers on Aaron’s rod[1], has not also brought considerable light to bear on this “new thing” of Jeremias. He says[2]: 

“Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bring forth a son.” 

Behold here the “woman” who is referred to as “a virgin.” Do you want to hear what is known about the “man”? “And his name shall be called Emmanuel,” that is, ‘God with us.’[3] Therefore the woman compassing a man is the Virgin who conceives the Son of God. 

The Annunciation, by Filippo Lippi (ca. 1443). Alte Pinakothek, Munich.

Public domain.

How stupendous is this one miracle wrought in and through the Virgin – a miracle which so many other miracles foreshadowed and so many oracles foretold. There was, of course, but one spirit of the Prophets and although they spoke in different ways, by different signs and at different times[4], it was the same thing that they – different individuals, yet not in a different spirit – both foresaw and foretold. That which was shown to Moses in the burning bush, to Aaron in the flowering rod, to Gideon in the fleece and dew, is clearly foretold by Solomon in the valiant woman and her price; more clearly by Jeremias in the woman compassing a man; and most clearly by Isaias in the Virgin and Emmanuel. In the end, however, it was Gabriel who offered his salutation to this same Virgin, for she is the one of whom the Evangelist says[5]: 

“The angel Gabriel was sent from God . . . to a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph.”

Footnotes

[1] Isaias xi. 1. See §11 above.

[2] Isaias. vii. 14.

[3] That it might be fulfilled which the Lord spoke by the prophet, saying: Behold a virgin shall be with child, and bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us: Matt. i. 22-23.

[4] God, who, at sundry times and in divers manners, spoke in times past to the fathers by the prophets: Hebr. i. 1.

[5] Luke i. 26-27.

 §12.   “To a virgin espoused.” Why espoused[1] ? Since she was, I am saying, a chosen virgin – and, as has been shown, a virgin destined to conceive and to give birth – it is a cause for wonder that she was betrothed who was not destined to marry. Is it possible this happened by chance? It certainly did not happen by chance but rather it had a rational cause – a highly useful and necessary cause, and one entirely worthy of the divine plan. 

Marriage of the Virgin, by Giotto (1304-06).
Scrovegni Chapel, Padua. Public domain.

Here is it how it appears to me, or in fact how it appeared to Fathers before me. The reason for Mary’s betrothal corresponds to the reason for the doubts Thomas had[2]. It was in fact the custom among the Jews for brides to be entrusted to the care of their future husbands from the day of betrothal until the time of the nuptials. The intention was that, being faithful by reason of the betrothal, the more diligently they would preserve their chastity. By first doubting and later touching, Thomas became a most steadfast confessor of the Lord’s resurrection. In the same way, by betrothing Mary to himself and being diligently watchful over her during the time of their betrothal, Joseph became a most faithful witness to her chastity. They could indeed have ensnared us in a corresponding error – casting suspicion upon the truth regarding his fidelity and her chastity; but, quite the contrary, everything was done with great prudence and piety, so that instead of suspicion there might be firm certainty. For regarding the resurrection of the Son, I – weak as I am – would sooner believe Thomas who doubted and touched rather than Cephas who heard and believed. As for the Mother’s chastity, it was easier for her spouse – who was both guardian and witness – to vouch for it than the Virgin herself whose only defence was her own conscience. Tell me, I pray, who, upon seeing her pregnant but not betrothed, would not call her a fallen woman rather than a virgin? It was not fitting, however, for this to be said about the Mother of the Lord. It was, therefore, more tolerable and honourable to suppose that Christ was born within a marriage, even if only for a time, rather than through fornication.

Footnotes

[1] For a detailed discussion of questions relating to the meaning of espoused, see The Great Commentary of Cornelius À Lapide on Luke i. 18.

[2] Isaias xi. 1. See §11 above.

.  

+       +        +

The Virgin of Tenderness. >12th century.

SUB tuum præsidium confugimus, Sancta Dei Genitrix. Nostras deprecationes ne despicias in necessitatibus, sed a periculis cunctis libera nos semper, Virgo gloriosa et benedicta. Amen. 

 

Totus tuus ego sum

Et omnia mea tua sunt;

Tecum semper tutus sum:

Ad Jesum per Mariam.

He that hearkeneth to me, shall not be confounded: and they that work by me shall not sin. They that explain me shall have life everlasting. Ecclesiasticus (Sirach) xxiv. 30-31.30-31.

Praises of the Virgin Mother by St Bernard : Homily II : §9-10/17

St Bernard, by Juan Correa de Vivar,
c. 1540-45. Museo del Prado.
(Public domain)

The following posts present the text of four homilies by St Bernard (1090-1153) frequently given the title of Missus est but which he himself called Praises of the Virgin Mother.

 

He was the first Cistercian monk to be placed on the calendar of saints and was canonized by Alexander III on the 18th January 1174. Pope Pius VIII bestowed on him the title of Doctor of the Church, “Doctor mellifluus,” on the 20th of August 1830. 

I offer this annotated presentation of St Bernard’s Homilies as a small gift to our gentle Queen and Mother in gratitude for her multitudinous graces and favours, requesting her continued help and protection for the author and his family.

The Latin text and references are based upon De laudibus Virginis Matris (Patrologia latina, vol. 183. J. P. Migne). The English text is based upon the version compiled and translated at St. Mary's Convent, York, and published by Washbourne in 1909.

Homily II : §9-10/17

 §9.   Now I am going to consider the way the Virgin conceived and gave birth in order to see if – among the many new and wondrous things a diligent inquirer will assuredly find there – I might also discover this new thing referred to by the Prophet[1]. In fact here we see what is long made short, what is wide made narrow, what is high made low and what is deep filled up. Here we behold the Light[2] withholding its rays, the Word unable to speak[3], Water  feeling thirst[4] and Bread suffering hunger[5]. Just look and see how Omnipotence is ruled, Wisdom is instructed and Strength is sustained; the God who refreshes the Angels is nourished at His Mother’s breast; He who consoles the afflicted utters the cries of a baby. Look and behold joy sorrowing, confidence trembling, safety suffering, life dying, and strength growing weak; but – what is no less remarkable – here we can discern sorrow that gladdens, fear that strengthens, suffering that saves, death that gives life and weakness that fortifies. 

Jesus as a youth among the doctors. James Tissot
(1886-94_. Brooklyn Museumn, NY.

Who does not now see that I have found what I was looking for? Is it not easy for you to recognize in these things a woman compassing a man, when you see Mary enfolding within her womb Jesus, the man approved by God? I would maintain, moreover, that Jesus was a man not only when He was spoken of as “a prophet, mighty in work and word,”[6] but also when the Mother of God was carrying the Infant’s delicate limbs in her womb and tenderly cradling Him in her arms. Jesus, therefore, was a man even before he was born – a man in wisdom, not in age; in the vigour of His mind, not in bodily strength; and in maturity of judgment, not in physical stature. For the wisdom of Jesus was as great at His conception as at His birth, and it was as great when He was a child as when He was a grown man. Whether hidden in the womb or mewling in the manger, whether a youth among the doctors or teaching the people in the fullness of His manhood, He was in truth equally filled with the Holy Spirit. There was no moment of His human life when that plenitude of the Holy Spirit which He received at His conception was either diminished or increased. From the first He was perfect, from the first He was full of “the spirit of wisdom, and of understanding, the spirit of counsel, and of fortitude, the spirit of knowledge, and of piety and . . . the spirit of the fear of the Lord.”[7] 

Footnotes

[1] Jerem. xxi. 22. 

[2] In him was life, and the life was the light of men and the light shineth in darkness: John I. 4-5;  I am the light of the world: John viii. 12.

[3] The Latin here is: verbum infans. This can be interpreted as “the word unable to speak” and as “the Word as an infant (or baby).”

[4] He that believeth in me shall never thirst: John vi. 35; If any man thirst, let him come to me, and drink: John vii. 37.

[5] I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall not hunger: John vi. 35.

[6] Luke xxiv. 19.

[7] Isaias xi. 2-3.

 §10. 

“Santa Maria del Sol” - from the Cathedral of
Nuestra Señora de la Asunción (Córdoba).
Reproduced from the  Liturgical Arts Journal.

You should not be surprised if you read elsewhere[1]: 

“And Jesus advanced in wisdom, and age, and grace before God and men.” 

What is here said of wisdom and grace must be understood not of their essence but of their outward appearance; that is to say, our Lord never acquired what He did not before possess, but He seemed to acquire it when He willed it to appear in this way. 

You, O Christian soul, do not make progress when and as you would choose but rather, without your knowledge, your journey is directed and your life is ordered. But the Child Jesus who guides your life also regulated His own. When He would, and on what occasions He would, He appeared wise; when and as He willed, He appeared more wise; and when and as He willed, He appeared most wise – though in Himself He never was anything other than most wise. Similarly, although He was always filled with every grace – whether that which He ought to possess before God or that before men – He nevertheless displayed it at His own discretion, now more and now less, according to what He knew to be either in keeping with the merits of the beholders or conducive to their salvation.

It is evident, then, that Jesus always possessed the spirit of a man, even though He did not always appear outwardly as a man. Why would I doubt that He was a man in the womb, when I do not doubt that He was God there? For to be a man is surely less than to be God.

Footnotes

[1] Luke ii. 52.    

+       +        +

The Virgin of Tenderness. >12th century.

SUB tuum præsidium confugimus, Sancta Dei Genitrix. Nostras deprecationes ne despicias in necessitatibus, sed a periculis cunctis libera nos semper, Virgo gloriosa et benedicta. Amen. 

 

Totus tuus ego sum

Et omnia mea tua sunt;

Tecum semper tutus sum:

Ad Jesum per Mariam.

He that hearkeneth to me, shall not be confounded: and they that work by me shall not sin. They that explain me shall have life everlasting. Ecclesiasticus (Sirach) xxiv. 30-31.30-31.

Praises of the Virgin Mother by St Bernard : Homily II : §7-8/17

St Bernard, by Juan Correa de Vivar,
c. 1540-45. Museo del Prado.
(Public domain)

The following posts present the text of four homilies by St Bernard (1090-1153) frequently given the title of Missus est but which he himself called Praises of the Virgin Mother.

 

He was the first Cistercian monk to be placed on the calendar of saints and was canonized by Alexander III on the 18th January 1174. Pope Pius VIII bestowed on him the title of Doctor of the Church, “Doctor mellifluus,” on the 20th of August 1830. 

I offer this annotated presentation of St Bernard’s Homilies as a small gift to our gentle Queen and Mother in gratitude for her multitudinous graces and favours, requesting her continued help and protection for the author and his family.

The Latin text and references are based upon De laudibus Virginis Matris (Patrologia latina, vol. 183. J. P. Migne). The English text is based upon the version compiled and translated at St. Mary's Convent, York, and published by Washbourne in 1909.

Homily II : §7-8/17

 §7.   

Gideon and the miracle of the fleece; 
F.J. Shields, 1877. Wellcome Collection.

Gideon’s fleece was indeed shorn from the flesh but without any wound to the flesh. It was placed upon the dry ground and firstly there was dew on the fleece and later on the ground[1]. What can this represent if not the flesh assumed from the flesh of the Virgin, and without any loss of virginity? Heaven dropped down dew upon it[2], filling it with the plenitude of the Divinity, and of that fullness we have all received[3] – we who, but for it, would be like the dry ground. There is a prophetic reference in the Psalms which seems to touch very beautifully on this fact in Gideon’s history[4]:

“He shall come down like rain upon the fleece.” 

The words which follow this – “and as showers falling gently upon the earth,” – have the same meaning as when the dry ground is found wet with dew. That voluntary rain, indeed, which God set apart for His inheritance, first descended gently and without any noise or clamour of human agency in a most tranquil infusion of the virginal womb; but afterwards, it spread throughout the world through the mouths of preachers—no longer like rain coming down upon the fleece, but like showers falling upon the earth, accompanied by a certain clamour of words and the resounding noise of miracles. For indeed, the preachers were like clouds bearing rain and they remembered the command given to them when they were sent forth[5]: 

“That which I tell you in the dark, speak ye in the light: and that which you hear in the ear, preach ye upon the housetops.” 

This injunction they carried out, for 

“their sound hath gone forth into all the earth: and their words unto the ends of the world.”[6]

Footnotes

[1] Judges vi. 37-40.

[2] Isaias xlv. 8.

[3] John i. 16.

[4] Psalm. lxxi. 6.

[5] Matt. x. 27.

[6] Psalm. xviii. 5.

 §8. 

Maria gravida,[3] ca. 1420.
Marienstern Cistercian Convent,
Germany. Alfred Löhr, Public domain

Let us now listen to the words of Jeremias who foretells new wonders while he ardently desires and confidently promises the coming of Him whose presence he could not point out in his own time. 

“The Lord,” he says[1], “hath created a new thing upon the earth: a woman shall compass a man.” 

Who is this woman, and who is this man? And if a man, how is he compassed by a woman? To speak more plainly, how can he be a grown man and in his mother’s womb at the same time? For this is what it means for a man to be compassed by a woman: by men we are speaking of those who, having passed through infancy, childhood, adolescence, and youth, have attained maturity. How, then, can a man who is already fully grown be compassed by a woman? If the prophet had said, “A woman shall compass a baby,” or “A woman shall compass an infant,” it would have seemed neither novel nor surprising. He did not, however, say anything like that but spoke of a man, and therefore we ask: what is this new thing that God created upon the earth, that a woman should compass a man, and that a man should confine himself within one, small female body? When speaking of a man, Nicodemus asks[2]:

“Can he enter a second time into his mother’s womb, and be born again?” 

Footnotes

[1] Jerem. xxi. 22.

[2] John iii. 4.

[3] gravida: Latin for “heavy with child.” 

     

+       +        +

The Virgin of Tenderness. >12th century.

SUB tuum præsidium confugimus, Sancta Dei Genitrix. Nostras deprecationes ne despicias in necessitatibus, sed a periculis cunctis libera nos semper, Virgo gloriosa et benedicta. Amen. 

 

Totus tuus ego sum

Et omnia mea tua sunt;

Tecum semper tutus sum:

Ad Jesum per Mariam.

He that hearkeneth to me, shall not be confounded: and they that work by me shall not sin. They that explain me shall have life everlasting. Ecclesiasticus (Sirach) xxiv. 30-31.30-31.

Praises of the Virgin Mother by St Bernard : Homily II : §5-6/17

St Bernard, by Juan Correa de Vivar,
c. 1540-45. Museo del Prado.
(Public domain)

The following posts present the text of four homilies by St Bernard (1090-1153) frequently given the title of Missus est but which he himself called Praises of the Virgin Mother.

 

He was the first Cistercian monk to be placed on the calendar of saints and was canonized by Alexander III on the 18th January 1174. Pope Pius VIII bestowed on him the title of Doctor of the Church, “Doctor mellifluus,” on the 20th of August 1830. 

I offer this annotated presentation of St Bernard’s Homilies as a small gift to our gentle Queen and Mother in gratitude for her multitudinous graces and favours, requesting her continued help and protection for the author and his family.

The Latin text and references are based upon De laudibus Virginis Matris (Patrologia latina, vol. 183. J. P. Migne). The English text is based upon the version compiled and translated at St. Mary's Convent, York, and published by Washbourne in 1909.

Homily II : §5-6/17

 §5.   

The valiant woman: Our Lady of Expectation, by Diego
de Siloé and Juan de Balmaseda (1530). Museo de
 Santa Cruz  (Toledo).José Luis Filpo Cabana, CC BY 4.0

What other woman was Solomon looking for when he said[1]: 

“Who shall find a valiant woman?” 

This wise man understood the frailty of that sex, in particular the weakness of their bodies and the inconstancy of their minds. He had read what God had promised and saw how fitting it was that the enemy who had been victorious over the human race by means of a woman should himself be overcome by another woman. Pondering earnestly, Solomon wondered: “Who shall find a valiant woman?” This is as though he were thinking that, if upon a woman depends

⁃ the salvation of our race, 
⁃ the restoration of innocence and 
⁃ victory over our common enemy,

 

then such a woman must indeed be valiant who was chosen for such a great undertaking.

The Tree of Jesse, Cathedral of Santa Maria, Burgos.
© José Luiz Bernardes Ribeiro. CC BY-SA 3.0.

“Who shall find a valiant woman?” he asks, and lest he should be accused of asking the question despairingly, he adds in prophecy[2]: “far and from the uttermost coasts is the price of her.” 

Her value is not small, nor mean, nor of little account, nor is it from earth but from Heaven – and not even from the Heaven nearest the earth, for its “going out is from the end of heaven”[3]. When Moses saw the bush on fire but not being burned[4], what else did that represent other than Mary giving birth without the pains of labour? What, I ask, was that rod of Aaron flowering without moisture[5] if not Mary conceiving even though she knew not man[6]? 

The mystery of this great miracle is indicated even more clearly by Isaias when he says[7]: 

“There shall come forth a rod out of the root of Jesse, and a flower shall rise up out of his root.” 

By the rod is to be understood the Virgin and by the flower the Child she brought forth. 

Footnotes

[1] Prov. xxxi. 10.

[2] Ibid.

[3] Psalm. xviii. 7.

[4] Exod. iii. 2.

[5] Num. xvii. 8.

[6] Luke i. 34.

[7] Isaia xi. 1.

§6. 

Moses Strikes the Rock, by James Tissot (c. 1896-1902).
The Jewish Museum, N.Y. Public Domain.

But if the fact that Christ is now said to be signified by the flower seems to conflict with the earlier view – according to which He was said to be represented not by the rod’s flower but by the flower’s fruit – you should understand how in that same rod of Aaron (which not only bloomed blossoms but also spread leaves and produced fruit[1]), He is signified not only by the flower blossom and the fruit but also by the leaves themselves. 

You should also know that, in the case of the references made by Moses, it is not by the rod’s fruit or its blossom that He is signified, but by the rod itself – that very rod used to part the waters so the people might cross on dry land[2] or to strike the rock so the people might drink[3]. There is nothing unfitting in Christ being represented under different figures for different reasons. In the rod, indeed, may be seen His power; in the flower, His fragrance; in the fruit, His sweet taste; and in the leaves, His watchful protection – for He never ceases to shelter the little ones who flee to Him beneath the shadow of His wings, whether from the heat of carnal desires or from the assaults of the wicked who pursue them. How good and desirable is the shade beneath the wings of Jesus where may be found safe refuge for those who flee, and welcome refreshment for the weary. 

“Have mercy on me,” Lord Jesus, “have mercy on me: for my soul trusteth in thee; and in the shadow of thy wings will I hope, until iniquity pass away.”[4]  

If we return to the testimony of Isaiah, however, the flower represents the Son and the rod represents the Mother; for just as the rod blossomed without a seed-bearing shoot, so the Virgin conceived knowing not man; and just as the blossoming of the flower did not harm the freshness of the rod, neither did the bringing forth of the holy Infant Jesus harm the Virgin’s purity.

Footnotes

[1] Num. xvii. 8.

[2] Exod. xiv. 16.

[3] Exod. xvii. 6.

[4] Psalm. lvi. 2.

+       +        +

The Virgin of Tenderness. >12th century.

SUB tuum præsidium confugimus, Sancta Dei Genitrix. Nostras deprecationes ne despicias in necessitatibus, sed a periculis cunctis libera nos semper, Virgo gloriosa et benedicta. Amen. 

 

Totus tuus ego sum

Et omnia mea tua sunt;

Tecum semper tutus sum:

Ad Jesum per Mariam.

He that hearkeneth to me, shall not be confounded: and they that work by me shall not sin. They that explain me shall have life everlasting. Ecclesiasticus (Sirach) xxiv. 30-31.30-31.