she filled with marrow and fatnesse.”^139 King asserts Peter’s experience at the
Transfiguration captures the depth of this love that soars even higher, a “doting love
that carries the soule to a spiritual distraction.” Peter “was so transported, so ravished
with the love of Christ, that like a man spiritually distracted he knew not what hee
sayd.”^140 Owen recognizes the reciprocal nature of “conjugal affection, in
communion between Christ and believers:--he delights in them, and they delight in
him.”^141 Similarly Pearse rejoices as he speaks of the benefit of spiritual marriage,
“[t]here is sweetness and delight in Christ.” He continues by making reference to
Bernard and declares, “[h]ow sweet is his presence, entercourse, and communion with
Him.” On the very next page Bernard is again quoted, this time from On Loving God,
that individuals share “the joy of Communion with him.”^142 Clearly the intimate joys
and mutual delight of spiritual marriage echo the intimacy and enjoyment of godly
marriage.
Obviously this depth of joy that arises from a growing spiritual marriage does
not happen automatically. Therefore, Thomas Watson declares, “[m]inisters are
paranymphi, friends of the bridegroom. This day I come a wooing for your love.
Love him who is so lovely.”^143 Puritan preaching sought to woo and prepare the way
for the Holy Spirit to work in their listeners’ souls.^144 Further, they frequently
(^139) Rous, Mysticall Marriage (^) , 268 (^) - 9.
(^140) King, Marriage of the Lambe, 34-5.
(^141) Owen, Communion with God, 132.
(^142) Pearse, Best Match, 222, 223, 224, cf. esp. 17, 18, 19, 25, and 262 for additional
usage of Bernard to capture the delights of being in communion with Jesus. 143
144 Watson, Christ’s Loveliness, 319.^
Husband The language of woo, 5; Rutherford, ing is abundant. See for example Vincent, Christ and the Doves, 9, 10, 14; and Pearse, Christ the Best Best Match, 2.