The second text comes into remarkable line with this. The verbal
resemblance is not quite so strong in the original. The words for
_diadem_ and _crown_ are not the same; the word rendered _glory_ in the
second text is rendered _beauty_ in the first, but the two texts are
entirely one in meaning. The same metaphor, then, is used with reference
to what God is to the Church and what the Church is to God. He is its
crown, it is His.

I. The Possession of God is the Coronation of Man.

(a) Crowns were worn by guests at feasts. They who possess God sit at a
table perpetually spread with all which the soul can wish or want.
Contrast the perishable delights of sense and godless life with the calm
and immortal joys of communion with God; 'a crown that fadeth not away'
beside withered garlands.

(b) Crowns were worn by kings. They who serve God are thereby invested
with rule over selves, over circumstances, over all externals. He alone
gives completeness to self-control.

(c) Crowns were worn by priests. The highest honour and dignity of man's
nature is thereby reached. To have God is like a beam of sunshine on a
garden, which brings out the colours of all the flowers; contrast with
the same garden in the grey monotony of a cloudy twilight.

II. The Coronation of Man in God is the Coronation of God in Man.

That includes the following thoughts.

The true glory of God is in the communication of Himself. What a