Oldalképek
PDF
ePub

The imprecations of the Psalter belong to four historic situations: (1) The persecutions of Jeremiah and his associates by those who were pushing the national religion to destruction, Ps. 52 sq., cf. Je. 1118 sq. 1515 sq. 1718 1819 sq. 2011 sq.. (2) The brutal cruelty of Edom and Moab toward the Jews at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonians, Ps. 137, cf. Ob.10 sq.. (3) The treachery of Sanballat and Tobiah, Ne. 2-6, which threatened the very existence of the congregation of the Restoration. The imprecations of Ne. 44-5 614 1329 are in accord with those of Pss. 920-21 1015 6923-29 8310-18. (4) The persecution of Antiochus, which aimed at the extermination of the worshippers of Yahweh. To this period the majority of the imprecations belong, many of them glosses in older Pss. At that time, if ever, imprecations were appropriate, cf. Pss. 7910. 12 1096-15. 19-20. 28-29 Thus all the imprecations of the Pss. are upon just such treacherous hypocrites, traitors, and bloodthirsty enemies of the kingdom of God, as Jesus himself pronounces imprecations upon, who aim at nothing else than the wilful destruction of the true religion. It is the form and general character of these imprecations which are most obnoxious to the modern mind, especially the physical sufferings that are invoked, the dishonouring of wives and daughters, and the slaughter of babes, even of the unborn. This is from the point of view of the solidarity of interest in the family, tribe, and nation; and especially from the ancient principle of the duty of revenge which was inherited by sons and kinsmen; so that the only way to avoid future peril of revenge was the extermination of all who would be likely in the future to undertake it.

D. THE INTERPRETATION OF THE PSALTER.

§ 47. Jesus and his apostles interpreted the Psalter usually in accordance with the methods of their time, literally or allegorically, as they had need. But they chiefly used it either for practical exhortation, for dogmatic or ethical instruction, or for prophetic anticipations of the life and work of Jesus and his Church.

[ocr errors]

(1) Jesus used the Psalter more than any other part of the OT. He used it to describe his own state of mind: Ps. 64 in Jn. 1227, Ps. 222 in Mt. 2746 Mk. 1584, Ps. 316 in Lk. 2346, Ps. 3519 (= 695) in Jn. 1525, Ps. 426 in Mt. 2638 Mk. 1484; his actions, Ps. 69 in Mt. 723 = Lk. 1327; and the actions of others in his time, Ps. 88 in Mt. 2116, Ps. 4110 in Jn. 1318. He also used it for authoritative teaching, Ps. 3711 in Mt. 55, Ps. 483 in Mt. 585, and for historical reference, Ps. 7824 in Jn. 681. He used Ps. 82° in argument with the Pharisees after the Halacha method in Jn. 1084, arguing from less to greater. He used Ps. 1101 in Mt. 2244 = Mk. 1286 - Lk. 2042. 43, in argument with the Pharisees, to show that the Messianic son of David must be at the same time his Lord; cf. I Cor. 1525 Eph. 120 Col. 3 Heb. 13 81 122 1 Pet. 322. He also

=

applied Ps. 11822-28 to himself as the headstone of the spiritual temple, Mt. 2142 = Mk. 1210. 11 = Lk. 2017 (cf. Acts 411 1 Pet. 24-7). (2) The Gospels use the Pss. freely, applying them to Jesus and his work: (a) to his entrance into the world. Ps. 9111-12 is cited by the devil Mt. 4o = Lk. 410. 11; (b) to his experience in life Ps. 6910 in Jn. 217, his teaching Ps. 782 in Mt. 1385, his entrance into Jerusalem Ps. 11825-26 in Mt. 219 2389 Mk. 119 Lk. 1335 1988 Jn. 1213; (c) to his passion Pss. 228-9. 19 Jn. 1924, cf. Mt. 2785. 89. 48 Mk. 1524. 29 Lk. 2334-35, Ps. 3421 in Jn. 1986, Ps. 6922 in Mt. 2734. 48 = Mk. 1536 Lk. 2336 = Jn. 1928–29, Ps. 10925 in Mt. 2799. The canticles Lk. 1 are also chiefly mosaics of the Pss. (3) In the book of Acts: (a) Ps. 8920 is cited by Paul in Acts 1322 in historical reference, so Ps. 1325 by Stephen Acts 746; (b) Ps. 21. 2 in Acts 425-26 is applied to the persecution of Christ in his disciples, Ps. 6926 1098 in Acts 120 as fulfilled in Judas; Ps. 27 is applied in Acts 1383 to the resurrection of Jesus; so Ps. 168-11 in Acts 225-32 1335, and Ps. 1101 in Acts 284-35, Ps. 13211 in Acts 280 to his reign; (c) in liturgical use Ps. 1466 in Acts 424, cf. 1415. (4) In the epistles of Peter: (a) as practical exhortation Ps. 3418-17 in 1 Pet. 310-12, Ps. 5523 in 1 Pet. 57; as realised in Christian experience, Ps. 349 in 1 Pet. 2o; (b) as authoritative doctrine Ps. 904 in 2 Pet. 38.

(5) St. Paul uses the Psalter freely: (a) as practical exhortation Ps. 45 in Eph. 426, Ps. 1129 in 2 Cor. 99, Ps. 11610 in 2 Cor. 418; (b) as authoritative teaching Ps. 241 in 1 Cor. 1026 (28), Ps. 321-2 in Rom. 47-8, Ps. 516 in Rom. 34, Ps. 9411 in 1 Cor. 320. P s. 510 107 141-8 (= 5324) 362 1404 are cited as descriptive of the utter wickedness of mankind, in Rom. 310-18; (c) Ps. 4423 is cited Rom. 836 as realised in Christian experience; (d) Ps. 6910 is cited Rom. 158 and applied to the humiliation of Christ. Ps. 87 is cited in 1 Cor. 1527 Eph. 122 and applied to the resurrection and reign of Christ; so Ps. 6819 in Eph. 48. Ps. 6928-24 is cited Rom. 119-10 and applied to the fall of Israel. Pss. 1850 1171 are cited Rom. 159-11 and applied to the conversion of the Gentiles. Ps. 195 in Rom. 1018 is applied to the preaching of the Gospel. (6) The epistle to the Hebrews makes great use of the Pss.: (a) as practical exhortation Ps. 957-11 in Heb. 37 sq., Ps. 1186 in Heb. 136; (b) as authoritative teaching Ps. 1044 in Heb. 17; Ps. 13514 in Heb. 1080; (c) Ps. 27 is applied to the resurrection and reign of Christ Heb. 15 55; so Ps. 85-7 in Heb. 26-8, Ps. 977 in Heb. 16, Ps. 457-8 10226-28 in Heb. 18-18, Ps. 1104 in Heb. 56 620 717. 21. Ps. 188 2228 are applied to his redemptive work in Heb. 212-18; so Ps. 407-9 in Heb. 105-7. In Heb. 41-11 Ps. 957-11 is interpreted at length in an allegorical way. (7) In the Apocalypse: the Psalter is often used in hymns and incidental allusions. Besides these it is cited as predictive of the reign of Christ, Ps. 28-9 in Rev. 226-27 125 1915.

§ 48. In the ancient Catholic Church the Apostolic Fathers and Apologists used the Psalter for practical purposes. The School of Alexandria emphasized the allegorical method of interpretation, the School of Antioch the typical method.

INTERPRETATION OF CATHOLIC CHURCH

ciii

The Christian writers of the second Christian century followed the example of the apostles in using the Psalter for practical purposes. Nothing at all resembling a Commentary, so far as we know, was composed by any of them. The citations of the Pss. in the Apostolic Fathers, Apologists, and early Fathers, Tertullian, Irenaeus, Cyprian, and others, are similar to those in the New Testament, using the same methods of interpretation, with a more decided tendency to the allegorical method and less restraint from its exaggeration. The School of Alexandria was established by Pantaenus, c. 200, and made famous by the great teachers and theologians, Clement and Origen. Pantaenus is said to have composed the first Commentary (Eusebius, Ecc. Hist. 510). Clement distinguished between the body and soul of Scripture, and called attention to its fourfold use. Origen made a Commentary on the Psalms, using the allegorical method of Philo, which he worked out in a Christian form and became its father in the Church. He distinguished a threefold sense, body, soul, and spirit, and used thirteen of Philo's rules (v. Br. SHS. 448-449 448-449). The School of Antioch was established by Lucian and Dorotheus at the close of the third century. Its fundamental principles of interpretation were: (1) Every passage has its literal meaning and only one meaning; (2) alongside of the literal sense is the typical sense which arises out of the relation of the Old Covenant to the New (Kihn, Theodor von Mopsuestia, s. 29). The most of the Commentators on the Pss. in the Greek Church were from writers of this school. Jerome occupied an intermediate and not altogether consistent position. He strives for historical and grammatical exposition, yet it is easy to see that at the bottom he is more inclined to the allegorical method. Thus there grew up in the ancient Church three exegetical tendencies, the literal and traditional, the allegorical and mystical, the historical and ethical, and these became gradually interwoven in the writings of the Fathers, and in all sorts of abnormal forms of exegesis in others (v. Br.SHS. 453).

Corderius (Expositio Patrum Graecorum in Psalmos, 3 Tom. 1643) uses the following Greek Commentators: Athanasius, Ammonius, Anonymous, Apollinarius, Asterius, Basilius, Gennadius, Geo. Alexandrinus, Gregorius Nazianzenus, Gregorius Nyssenus, Didymus, Dionysius Areopag, Eusebius Caesariensis, Hesychius, Theodoretus, Theodorus Antiochenus, Theodorus

Heracleota, Isidorus, Cyrillus Alexandrinus, Maximus, Pachymera, Chrysostomus, Psellus, Origines. I have italicised those most frequently cited. Jerome (ep. ad August. cxii.) mentions the following Greek interpreters of the Psalter up to his time: Origen, Eusebius of Caesarea, Theodore of Heraklea (the Anonymous of Corderius), Astelios of Skythopolis, Apollinaris of Laodicea, Didymos of Alexandria. All of these interpretations of the Psalter, so far as preserved, are given by Migne in his Greek Patrology. For additional information we may refer to Pitra, Analecta Sacra, Bäthgen, ZATW., 1886, Lietzmann, Der Psalmencommentar Theodore von Mopsuestia, 1902. The work of the great Syrian scholar, Gregory Bar Hebraeus († 1286, given by Lagarde, Praetermissorum, 1879), must be added here as the noblest representation of the late Syrian School. The work of Jerome on the Pss. is given in his Epistles, XX., XXVIII., XXX., XXXIV., LXV., CVI., CXL. (Migne, XXII.), and his commentary (edited by Morin, Anecdota Maredsolana, III., 1895).

§ 49. In the Latin Church the allegorical method of interpreting the Psalter prevailed, chiefly through the influence of Ambrose and Augustine, although Junilius and Cassiodorus exerted a modifying influence in the use of the principles of the Antiochan School.

[ocr errors]

Ambrose may be regarded as the father of the interpretation of the Psalter in the Western Church; but Augustine, his pupil, was the one who dominated all subsequent times. He distinguishes four kinds of exegesis, the historical, aetiological, analogical, and allegorical, and laid down the principle that whatever cannot be referred to good conduct or truth of faith must be regarded as figurative. Junilius, and still more Cassiodorus, exerted a wholesome influence by the introduction into the West of the principles of the Schools of Antioch and Nisibis. He urged the comparison of Scripture with Scriptures, and points out that frequent and intense meditation is the way to a true understanding of them (v. Br.SHS. 449-453)

Jerome (ep. ad August. cxii.) mentions the following Latin interpreters of the Pss.: (1) Hilary of Poitiers, based on Origen and Eusebius; (2) Eusebius of Vercelli, who translated the Commentary of Eusebius of Caesarea; (3) Ambrose. Ambrose († 397) is the only one who was independent and original. Ambrose was a practical prelate, possessed of the true Roman spirit, and he gave the allegorical method a Western practical turn. His Enarrationes have had great influence on the Church. Augustine († 430) built his Enarrationes on those of Ambrose, and became the basal authority for all subsequent writers. The most wholesome commentary of the times is that of Cassiodorus († 563). Other early Western writers on the Psalter were Hippolytus (†235), Arnobius

(tc. 406), Asterius († 410), Gregory of Tours († 594), Gregory the Great († 604), Prudentius (eighth century). All of these are given by Migne in his Latin Patrology.

§ 50. In the Middle Ages the Commentaries were chiefly com pilations of the earlier writers, called Epitomes, Glosses, Postilles, Chains, which appeared in great numbers, all under the domination of the allegorical principles of Augustine, often in exaggerated forms.

The compilers of the Oriental Church were Euthymius Zigabenus († 1118, v. Pitra, Analecta, IV.); Nicephorus, thirteenth century (given by Migne). A host of writers on the Pss. appear in the West: Beda († 735); Alcuin (†804); Walafrid Strabo (†849); Haymo (†853); Rhabamus Maurus (+856); Paschasius Radbertus (†866); Hincmar (†882); Remigius (ninth century); Bruno Herb. († 1045); Romualdus († 1027); Anselm (†1109); Bruno Carth. (†1101); Richard St. Victor († 1173); Innocentius III. († 1216); Hugo S. Caro, Postillae († 1263) (commentaries 1496 attributed wrongly to Alexander Hales, † 1245); Antonius Patavinus († 1231, Sermones in Pss., 1757); Thomas Aquinas († 1274, In Psalmos Expositio, 1876); Albertus Magnus († 1280, Comm. on Pss., Col. 1536); Ayguanus († 1396, Com. on Ps., 1524+); Nicolaus de Lyra († 1340, Postillae, Rom. 1471; Biblia cum glossa ordinaria, v., Basel, 1506); Herenthal († 1400, Catena, Col. 1483); Turrecremata († 1468, Expositio, 1474). Those italicised are found in Migne's Patrology.

§ 51. In the Middle Ages Jewish Commentators distinguished themselves as compared with the Christian by a fuller use of the literal and historical methods of interpretation, although no less dependent on Rabbinical tradition than Christian scholars were on Christian tradition.

The earliest important interpreter of the Pss. whose writings have been preserved was Saadia (†942), author of the Arabic translation of the OT. His Commentary was published in Cracow in 1660. Raschi's Commentary (R. Solomon Isaaki, † 1105) was published in the Rabbinical Bibles, also a Latin translation by Breithaupt, 1710. Aben Ezra's Commentary († 1167) was published in the Rabbinical Bibles. His Commentary on the first ten Pss. was published in Latin and Hebrew by P. Fagius, 1542. David Kimchi's Commentary († 1235) was published, Naples, 1487; Venice, 1518; Isny, 1541; Amsterdam, 1765; Latin translation by Janvier, 1566. The first book of Psalms was published according to the text of the Cambridge Ms. Bible with the larger Commentary of R. David Kimchi, critically edited from nineteen

« ElőzőTovább »