Exposition on the Psalms of David
"If my enemy." Here he describes the malice of a certain singular and principal person in the multitude. And perhaps it refers to Saul, or to Doeg the Edomite. And first he sets forth an evil that could be tolerated in some way. Second, he sets forth an evil that is intolerable. It is tolerable in some way that a man should suffer persecution from enemies. And therefore first he describes the persecution of enemies: first from the side of the enemy who persecutes; second, from the side of the persecutor; third, from the side of the one who suffers persecution. The one who persecutes is sometimes called an enemy, namely when he exercises enmity outwardly. Sir. 12: "Never trust your enemy." Sometimes he exercises enmity while harboring hatred in his heart. Lev. 19: "Do not hate your brother in your heart." On the part of the persecutor there is a difference, because sometimes the one who persecutes explicitly speaks evil of the one he persecutes, either by slandering or by insulting. And this kind of persecution is called cursing. Hence he says, "If my enemy had cursed me." Ps. (9): "Whose mouth is full of cursing," etc. Sometimes he does not explicitly speak evil, but maintains an evil manner of speaking, because he speaks contemptuously. On the part of the one who suffers, there is also diversity, because sometimes he hears the insults and bears them patiently. Jas., last chapter: "You have heard of the patience of Job." Hence, "I would have borne it indeed." Sometimes he hides himself from the face of the enemy. Hence, "I would perhaps have hidden myself from him." Sir. 8: "Do not stand against the face of your enemy." Jn. 8: "He hid himself." Therefore, regarding the diversity of the persecutor, he says, "divide their tongues," etc., because I suffer not only from an enemy but from a friend. Regarding the second, he says, "If he had spoken great things against me, I would perhaps have hidden myself from him." "But you, a man of one mind with me." Here he sets forth the evil that is intolerable, that is, suffering injury from enemies, because no plague is more effective for doing harm than a familiar enemy. And he describes the enmity first with respect to interior things. Second, with respect to exterior familiarity, at "Who together with me." Regarding interior things, he describes the evil according to three things. First, according to the concord of voice. Phil. 1: "You stand unanimous in one spirit." And therefore he says, "But you, a man of one mind with me"; as if to say: you spoke evil of me; and therefore this is on an intellectual level. And according to this, he can be speaking of Saul, whose familiar he was. But in the Gloss, it is mystically explained in three ways: according as it applies to a believer in one way; in another way, according as it applies to Christ with respect to the Jews; in a third way, according as it applies to Christ with respect to Judas. In the first way, therefore, any believer can say this when he suffers persecution from another believer. In the second way, Christ can say this of the Jews, who were of one mind, because they bound themselves to his commandments. Exod. 24: "All things that the Lord has commanded, we will do." Third, regarding Judas, who had bound himself to his counsels. And what he says, "my guide," is likewise explained in three ways. In one way, insofar as someone can be called a guide because he gives good counsel and assistance, and afterward plans persecution. Mic. 7: "Do not trust in a guide." In another way, regarding Christ with respect to the Jews and Judas, who "is my guide," not leading me, but established by me as a guide of the nations. Rom. 2: "You are confident that you are a guide." Or regarding the priests, who are guides among the people. To Judas the apostle, Christ says: "You are a guide established by me," in one way because a guide of the Christian people together with the others to be led. Ps. (67): "The princes of Judah, their leaders." Or a guide because he was appointed by Christ among those who went before him wherever he was about to go (Lk. 10). "My acquaintance." One believer can say to another believer, "Who together with me took sweet food," because they lived together in the Church. Likewise, the Jew was known to Christ, who lived among the words of God (Rom. 3). Likewise Judas, because Christ foreknew his malice. Jn. 6: "One of you is a devil." Second, friendship consists in exterior familiarity. And he shows this in two things: namely, first in bodily and human things; second, in divine things. In the first, those have friendship toward each other who dine together. And if this is understood of Christ speaking to Judas, then, according to the Gloss, he took bodily food together with Christ at the table. Ps. (40): "He who ate my bread," etc. And he says "sweet," because the food of those dining together usually makes their spirits sweet. Sir. 6: "There is a friend who is a companion at the table." So also it can be said of any bodily familiar. There are also spiritual foods that Judas took with Christ, namely the word of God. Sir. 15: "He fed him with the bread of life," etc. God calls these "foods," because the words of God are sweeter than any bodily food. Ps. (118): "How sweet to my palate," etc. Regarding the second, therefore, he says, "We walked together in agreement." Jerome, commenting on Matthew, says that there is nothing that so causes distrust as diversity of faith and divine worship. And this was especially the case in the time of persecution, when fathers preceded their sons and vice versa. And thus the unity of faith and religion is the greatest bond of love; and therefore it is the greatest malice to prosecute those who share the same worship. And it happens in two ways that people are of different cults. In one way, because one is entirely not in the same cult as the other, as when one is a Christian and the other a Jew or a Pagan; and such are not together in the house of God. Sometimes both are of the same religion, yet they do not agree together, as a Catholic and a heretic; and he excludes both of these when he says, "Together we walked in the house of God," namely in the Church (1 Tim. 3), which is the house of God. Second, when he says, "in agreement." 1 Cor. 1: "That you all say the same thing." But if we refer this to the Jews, then "in the house," that is, in Jerusalem. And likewise, he was there with Judas, because Christ did not repudiate the bond of the old law. Mt. 5: "I did not come to abolish the law, but to fulfill it."
Oversæt med Google