Understanding the psalms: textual fluidity

Genoa psalter of 1516, edited by Agostino Giustiniani, bishop of Nebbio

In the previous part of this set of introductory notes on tackling the psalms, I pointed to the need to keep in mind that each psalm connects to others, and that both its position in Scripture and in the Office are deliberate choices that are likely to have some meaning.

Today I want to conclude this set of preliminary notes by looking at some of the issues around the various versions of the texts of the psalms themselves.

In my first post in this set, I suggested focusing first on getting the words of the psalm right.  But today I want to provide a bit of a counterpoint to that, as I want to suggest that when you are studying the psalms rather than actually singing or saying them as part of the Office, you shouldn't get too hung up on the exact words of the text, whatever language you encounter the psalms in.

When it comes to Scripture, I want to suggest, an undue focus on the exact words can sometimes lead us astray, because there is often more than one, at least equally valid, 'text tradition' to draw upon.

Critical editions, Hebrew Scripture and competing text traditions

We are used, in our time, to the idea that there is one correct, authoritative version of a text; indeed academia devotes a great deal of effort to the preparation of 'critical editions' of early texts as the first step before translations can be made.

In the context of Scripture, that has long translated into an assumption that since the Old Testament was originally composed in Hebrew, the Hebrew base texts that we have represent a more authentic version of it than the Septuagint Greek for example.

In reality, however, the oldest manuscripts of  the Hebrew 'Masoretic Text' (MT), the only version of the Hebrew known until the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, dates from the tenth century.

In contrast, the Septuagint Greek, an officially commissioned translation started around three centuries before Christ, and which the Fathers regarded as a divinely inspired providential gift from God, is preserved in very early manuscripts indeed.

And it turns out that in fact these two rather different versions of the Old Testament genuinely represent two different text traditions both preserved in the Dead Sea Scrolls.

Why you should use the Vulgate!

I've written elsewhere on some of the reasons why Catholics should use the (Gallican) Vulgate (and ignore the Neo-Vulgate!), and focus on the Septuagint text tradition over the Hebrew Maseoretic Text, so I won't dig into that much further here.

I would urge though, Benedictines in particular to use the Vulgate, and translations based on it, as you will miss many of the echoes of the Rule if you don't.  

There are quite a few key words that St Benedict uses in various key contexts (such as the Suscipe, the verse used in the profession ceremony) that occur in several places in the Vulgate, but are not used in St Jerome's from the Hebrew or the Neo-Vulgate, and are not directly reflected in translations based on the Hebrew, as opposed to the Septuagint.

Text variations and commentaries

Despite all this though, in my notes I generally do provide a selection of Latin and English translations of each verse, and I wanted to explain briefly why I do that, and what to take out of it!

Patristic commentaries

And the first reason is simple: the Patristic commentators did not necessarily start from or stick to the version of the text that they sung in the Office when commenting on a psalm verse.

Instead, commentators such as St Augustine, St John Chrysostom and St Cassiodorus often mention different versions of the text, and sometimes provide alternative interpretations of verses based on them.

In other cases, they use versions of the text, such as St Jerome's from the Hebrew, as a tool to understand some of the more cryptic passages of the Vulgate (or Septuagint).

Text variants, in other words, are another input to interpreting verses at multiple levels, rather than just focusing on the literal.

Alternative versions of the Latin in the liturgy

The second reason is not unrelated to this: when you come across psalms in the liturgy, the version you encounter will not always be the Vulgate.  

The invitatory psalm 94, for example, is still sung each day at Matins using a 'Vetus Latin' text. 

And many responsories and antiphons use either the 'Romanum' or Vetus texts.

The problem with translations

 The third reason though, is that no matter what version of the Latin text you are using, you are working from a translation of a translation.  

No one translation, no matter how authoritative, can fully capture all of the possibilities and nuances of the original.

So having a couple of alternatives in front of you can sometimes add a bit of useful 'colour', and I'd encourage you to take a close look at them, and try and at least take note of the key the differences.

The translations

The versions of the text I sometimes or always include are as follows:

• Vulgate (V)  - the (Gallican) liturgical Latin;
• the neo-Vulgate (NV) - the current official version of the Latin used in Novus Ordo liturgy;
• the Romanum (R) - the version of the psalter used at Rome up (and elsewhere) until the tenth century (and beyond in some very limited cases);
• the Pian (P) - another failed twentieth century translation of curiosity value;
• St Jerome's translation 'from the Hebrew'; and
• the Septuagint.

I don't generally try to include the Vetus Latin (VL), since it isn't really one fixed text, but rather a collective term for several variants, but there are books and online tools to find the main ones if you are interested.

Secondly, since I'm mainly interested in the Latin tradition, that is, how the psalms have been received by the Church, and St Jerome aside, that didn't really include reference to the Hebrew until around the time of the Renaissance (and Reformation), I generally ignore the Hebrew unless I think it is particularly important or illuminating.  

Moreover, there are plenty of modern commentaries and online tools that focus almost exclusively on the Hebrew, so I see little point in duplicating that work.  For a light introduction, for example, the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible is a useful starting point, while online sources such as Blue Letter Bible will provide the Hebrew and links to Strong's wonderful concordance on it.  

I also try and include several English translations so you can try and get a feel for the range of possibilities.

It is worth keeping in mind though, that these basically fall into two camps, those based on the Hebrew MT, and those based on the Septuagint-Vulgate tradition.

Those in the Septuagint-Vulgate camp are:

DR: Douay-Rheims (- Challoner)

Brenton: Brenton's translation from the Septuagint

Those mainly based on the MT include:

MD: Monastic Diurnal (early twentieth century Collegeville translation)

RSV: Revised Standard Version

Cover: Coverdale

Knox: Knox translation

Grail: Grail (earlier version)

Please do ask if you come across an abbreviation that you can't decode!

Understanding the psalms: Scriptural Psalm titles

Dead sea scrolls Psalms: https://www.loc.gov/exhibits/scrolls/scr1.html

Continuing my Lent series on the psalms, I want to focus today on the 'psalm titles' included in Scripture.

Note that I am not talking here about the psalm titles developed in late antiquity and the early medieval periods - these are certainly of interest and can be quite helpful, but they are not Scriptural.

Should we take the psalm titles seriously?

Most modern commentators reject the idea that the titles of the psalms have any particular significance, seeing them instead as rather prosaic performance notes, or alternatively (a)historical claims for their context.

In my overviews of each psalm, though, I typically set out and comment on the titles ascribed to psalms in Scripture.

That's because the Fathers took them very seriously indeed, considering them to be part of inspired, canonical Scripture and often providing extended commentary on both their literal and spiritual meanings.

St Augustine, for example, in his commentary on Psalm 105, urged his audience to be conscious of the psalm titles, and the canonical order of the psalms, in trying to understand them:

confessing that we both believe the mysteries of all the titles in the Psalms, and of the order of the same Psalms, to be important, and that we have not yet been able, as we wish, to penetrate them.

By contrast, many, if not most, modern commentaries either ignore the titles altogether; take issue with their content (on ascriptions of authorship for example), or at best consider them only at the literal level.

So are the psalm titles part of Scripture or not?

Titles as canonical Scripture 

In fact the evidence strongly suggests that the psalm titles were part of the original text of the Psalter: they are found in both the Septuagint, the earliest Hebrew Masoretic Text manuscripts (dating from the tenth century), and in the Dead Sea Scroll versions of the psalms. 

The Scriptural titles were not typically written in smaller print, as most modern Bibles make them, but were either treated as the same level of text as the liturgical first line of the psalm, or sometimes centred above it.

We need to distinguish here, though, between the psalm titles included in the oldest surviving Hebrew and Greek versions of the psalms, and the various sets of medieval, non-canonical psalm titles that served as aids to interpretation.

The titles preserved in Scripture should be treated as part of canonical Scripture; the various medieval psalm titles series are of interest in the same way that Patristic and later commentaries are, but are not binding on us in any way.

Psalm titles on authorship, the ordering of the psalter and historical context

The Scriptural psalm titles, though, in my opinion at least, are well worth paying attention to.

At the literal level, many of the psalm titles ascribe the authorship of psalms to certain authors, such as David (79), or Moses. The Old Pontifical Bible Commission ruled that these ascriptions of authorship were not in fact open to debate.  Some doubt whether those rulings are still binding, but they have certainly never been explicitly overruled, and in the absence of hard factual evidence to contradict them, should surely be regarded at least as highly persuasive.  

Others specify the day of the week on which the psalm is to be said, presumably in the context of ancient temple liturgies.  The reasons for the particular ascriptions are often fairly obscure, perhaps connected to the days of creation, but whether by chance or otherwise, some of these specifications are also followed in the Benedictine psalter: Psalm 23, assigned to the first day of the week is said at Sunday Matins; Psalm 80 on Thursdays (in the Masoretic Text version) at Matins; and Psalm 92 on Friday at Matins.  A great many more have titles that the Fathers interpreted as referring to Sunday, as the day of the Resurrection: Psalm 6's title, for example, 'Unto the end...for the octave' is a good example.

Perhaps the most helpful titles are those that link the psalm to historical events, usually in the life of David.  Psalm 141, for example, is titled, ' Of understanding for David. A prayer for when he was in the cave', thus linking it to the story told in 1 Kings 24.

Psalm titles as a cue to canonical interpretation

But the most interesting takes on the psalm titles are, in my view, the spiritual interpretations provided by the Fathers: indeed St Gregory of Nyssa composed an entire treatise devoted to the titles of the psalms, and how they point us to the overall storyline of the psalter.

References to 'a psalm of David', for example, can be interpreted both a claim as to authorship, but also as pointing to its Christological content, since David is a 'type' of Christ.

In some cases the reasons for this interpretation are particularly obvious: the last psalm of Friday Vespers, for example, Psalm 144, has the title Laudatio ipsi David, or Praise, for David himself, and then opens with the verse:

Exaltábo te, Deus meus, rex: * et benedícam nómini tuo in sæculum, et in sæculum sæculi.

I will extol you, O God my king: and I will bless your name for ever; yea, forever and ever.

These spiritual meanings are, I think, often quite important for us to consider if we wish to understand the way the psalms are used liturgically, since they can sometimes help explain why a particular psalm was allocated to a particular day of the week or hour.

Understanding the psalms: The order of the psalter and Office psalm cursus

FecampBibleFol238rIncipPsalms
Source: Wiki Commons

In my previous post in this Lent series on the psalms I focused on the first of the 'three attentions' suggested by St Thomas Aquinas, namely focusing on the saying the words correctly.

Today, I want to start looking at how we become more conscious of the meanings of what we are saying, starting at the 'macro' level of why psalms are said on particular days and at particular hours of the Office.

Scriptural order vs selective forms of the Office

Early forms of the Office basically take two main forms, canonical order, and selective.

Canonical order

By far the most common form of the Office in late antiquity, in the West at least, was to say all of the psalms in their numerical, or canonical, order.  The Rule of the Master for example, which was probably written in the mid sixth century in the region near Rome, adopted this approach, as did the more or less contemporary rules of Caesarius of Arles (circa 510 - 535) and Columbanus (towards the end of the sixth century).

The number of psalms said at the Night Office typically varied depending on the season - when the nights were longer, more psalms were said - so instead of specifying which psalms were said at each hour, early instructions for the Office often just specified how many psalms were said at each hour.

In most cases for which we have hard evidence, the approach was simply to start at a particular hour with Psalm 1 and then continue the sequence in order at each subsequent hour until the cycle started again.  

The net result was that it took a varying length of time to get through the entire psalter depending on the time of year, rather than it being fixed to a week or some other period as we are used to.

It also meant that, a few special psalms aside, psalms were not attached to particular hours.

Selective

The alternative approach was to assign particular psalms to particular hours and days.

In some early forms of the Office, typically only a small selection of the psalms were used, such as the Office captured in the fifth century Codex (Fol. 532v) that assigned one psalm to each hour of the day and night.

One theory is that that this selection that may then have been consolidated into the Office of twelve psalms of Vespers and Matins used by some Northern Egyptian eremite monks described by Cassian. 

Meaning in the ordering?

The key reason for Offices based on the canonical order of the psalms was the assumption that the order of the psalms in Scripture was divinely inspired, and has a particular rationale and meaning.  

Many of the early commentaries on the psalms comment on this, highlighting, for example, the connections between particular blocks of psalms, as well as how they fit together to tell an overall story.

Selective orderings of the psalms, by contrast, generally choose psalms for their appropriateness to the day and hour, or in order to reflect some other themes that the author of the Office wants to highlight.

Of course, where the selective approach also involves a principle of saying all of the psalms within a  particular time period, as the Benedictine and Roman Offices do, there may be limits to the extent to the thematic approach.

All the same, while much twentieth century liturgical scholarship assumed that the placement of psalms in the Benedictine and Roman Offices was largely driven by purely functional considerations, medieval commentators generally took a rather different view, providing extended explanations of just why particular psalms were used at particular hours, or on particular days. 

Finding meaning in St Benedict's ordering of the psalter

St Benedict's Rule, alas, is more concerned with providing instructions on what to say and when, rather than setting out a rationale for the particular choices made.  The saint presumed, I think, that the person praying the Office would, over time, become aware of these layers of meaning as they meditated on it.

That was a much easier process, I suspect, for a monk in late antiquity, steeped in the Patristic explanations of the psalms, than for us today!

Still, if we pay attention both to the canonical order of the psalms, and the way St Benedict moves away from that in his form of the Office, we can I think, find themes that the internal evidence strongly suggests were deliberately engineered into the Office, or even if that is not the case, and worth meditating on all the same.

The last seven psalms of the psalter, for example, are all hymns of praise, and there is, according Cassiodorus a great significance in this, relating to the 'sacred number' (as St Benedict terms it) seven:

It is not otiose that the Lord's praises are enclosed in this number seven, for the confession of penitents is designated by this number, and the holy Spirit himself has been proclaimed with His sevenfold powers; perhaps it points to that sacred mystery when the Lord ordered Moses to set seven lamps shining with enduring light in His tabernacle. 

St Benedict, however, effectively makes the seven psalms into eight, by dividing Psalm 144 into two parts, a number that symbolises the Resurrection, and on which he makes great play several times in the Rule, requiring his monks, for example, to rise at the eighth hour of the night to say Matins, and to say eight hours each day.

The seven days of creation

I've mentioned previously that I think St Benedict deliberately 'engineered in', inspired perhaps by St Augustine's commentaries on the days of creation, several linked weekly cycles, including the days of creation, the seven ages of salvation history, and the life of Christ.

In the case of Psalm 147, for example, its key focus on Jerusalem (which means peace), and the peace granted by God, and on the restful days of summer fits neatly with the seventh day as the day of rest.

I will say some things on this in the context of the psalms I'm looking at for Friday and Saturday Vespers, but if you would like to read more on this topic, see my previous posts on this here.

'Horizontal' memes

There are also, though, some themes and phrases that run across each of the hours, and help give the hours internal coherence and meaning.

At Vespers, for example, there are verses each day that echo the words of the Magnificat's warning that the proud will be humbled, and the humble will ultimately be exalted. For Saturday, for example, consider these verses:

Psalm 144:4   Allevat Dominus omnes qui corruunt, et erigit omnes elisos.

14   The Lord lifteth up all that fall: and setteth up all that are cast down.

and

Ps 145: 8   Dominus illuminat cæcos. Dominus erigit elisos; Dominus diligit justos.

8   the Lord enlighteneth the blind. The Lord lifteth up them that are cast down: the Lord loveth the just.

9   Dominus custodit advenas, pupillum et viduam suscipiet, et vias peccatorum disperdet.

9   The Lord keepeth the strangers, he will support the fatherless and the widow: and the ways of sinners he will destroy.

First and last psalms

Finally I want to alert you to some theological and spiritual themes that I think run across the first and last psalms each day respectively.

In the case of the first psalms at Vespers, the theme is the attributes of  God: on Thursday his omniscience; on Saturday his omniscience for example.

And the last psalm each day, I think, has a particular relevance to the monastic vocation.  

The most obvious of these is Psalm 132 on Tuesdays, 'Behold how good and pleasant it is for brethren to dwell in unity', which St Augustine depicted as the quintessential monastic psalm.

Psalm 147, also fits this theme neatly, ending the week on that most Benedictine of values, the pursuit and attainment of peace.

Meditating on the psalms

The bottom line on all this is, I think, that although we tend to focus on particular psalms as distinct entities, we need also to keep in mind that they are part of a book which is deliberately ordered, often to bring psalms with common themes and phrases together.

That is even more true in the psalter, where there is at least some degree of selectivity and deliberate design.

So if, when you say the Office, you are suddenly struck by words or phrases that are repeated during a day or hour, do take that as a cue to think more deeply on it; look out for such connections yourself; or consider taking my suggested themes as a starting point for your own consideration!

And in the meantime here is a setting of the opening psalm of Thursday Vespers to enjoy. 

And you can find the next part of this series here.

Understanding the psalms: The three attentions of St Thomas Aquinas

Catacomb of the Via Latina. Jacob's Ladder,
Source: Wiki Commons

This Lent, as I've previously flagged, I plan to provide some verse by verse notes on some of the Vespers psalms for Friday and Saturday.  

Before I turn to the individual psalms themselves next week though, I want to provide first some notes on a few key topics around their interpretation, focusing on the importance of the words themselves aside from their meaning; the significance of the order of the psalter; the psalm titles; and dealing with what might be described as 'textual fluidity', or variant translations and text traditions for the psalms.

Vespers on Friday and Saturdays

The Vespers psalms of Friday and Saturday are particularly appropriate to Lent, I think, because the Benedictine Office effectively contains a mini-Triduum each week in its the psalms, with several of them traditionally understood as referring to the events of Maundy Thursday and Good Friday. 

I want to start backwards as it were, though, with the very last psalm of the week, Psalm 147, since it both sets out what it is that we are seeking to achieve, namely the enduring summer that represents true peace of heaven, but also reminds us of the need to endure the seasons of hardship that come before it.

And that strikes me as a metaphor very apt for Lent!

While some of the psalms at the earlier hours on Saturdays can certainly be interpreted as referring to the descent into hell and freeing of the souls there, or the resting in the tomb, by the time we reach Saturday Vespers, we are effectively at First Vespers of the Resurrection, as the ancient first antiphon for the hour, Thy kingdom O Lord is a kingdom for all ages' makes clear.

But as the Roman Office is used during the Triduum rather than the Benedictine, we don't sing Psalm 147 at Vespers in Holy Week (though in the post-Pius X version it is sung at Lauds), so it seems appropriate to consider it in the weeks when it is said rather than later.

Focusing on the words

Before I start the verse by verse notes, though, I thought it would be timely to make some comments on the key sources for my notes, some of the thinking behind the various components of the notes I provide, as well as suggestions on how to approach the task of learning the psalms.

So today, I want to suggest that when you are thinking about digging into a particular psalm, or learning a new hour of the Office, the first thing to do is not to worry about its meaning at all, but to focus solely on the words themselves.

And by words, I mean the Latin of the psalm, even if you have little or no Latin, and even if you plan to pray the Office in English.

Why bother to learn to pray the Office in Latin, or look at the Latin of the psalms?

I generally start my notes by focusing on the Latin translation of the psalms rather than English.

There are three main reasons I take this approach.

First, purely legalistic: for those who wish to pray the older forms (ie 1960 or earlier rubrics) of the Office liturgically, the permissions for it to be said required it to be in that language.  

That doesn't, of course, prevent the older form of the Office being said devotionally in English or another language by those who are not bound to say it, and starting in English and gradually learning is a good tactic.

There is a reason for this legal requirement though, namely, to preserve, and join in solidarity with, the patrimony of the Benedictine order and the Church in praying the Office as it has been prayed for centuries, going back to St Benedict's own time.

Most importantly though, the specific words of the Latin enable us to connect with the theological, spiritual and musical traditions of the Church.  

Saying the Office in Latin also allows us to use the traditional chants of the Office, as well as the rich patrimony of polyphonic settings; and to connect with a theological and spiritual vocabulary that forms part of the Church's tradition, and has gained meaning and developed through time in the works of the Fathers and Theologians.

If you would like to dig a bit deeper into reasons for starting from the Latin, I strongly recommend reading David Birch's book Latin Prayer Aspects of Language and Catholic Spirituality

Do you need to understand the Latin to be able to pray in Latin?

I want to advocate here for studying the psalm in Latin, even if you plan to pray it in English.

But I'd also like to suggest at least trying to pray it in Latin.

Some people will object that it inappropriate to pray in a language such as Latin unless we actually understand what we are saying. 

I beg to differ!

In fact, St Thomas Aquinas addressed the important question of what is necessary in order to pray 'in spirit and in truth' and gain the merits that come from prayer in his Summa.  He argued (ST II-II 183 art 13) that there are three kinds of attention in prayer:

"It must be observed, however, that there are three kinds of attention that can be brought to vocal prayer: one which attends to the words, lest we say them wrong, another which attends to the sense of the words, and a third, which attends to the end of prayer, namely, God, and to the thing we are praying for. That last kind of attention is most necessary, and even idiots are capable of it. Moreover this attention, whereby the mind is fixed on God, is sometimes so strong that the mind forgets all other things, as Hugh of St. Victor states [De Modo Orandi ii]."

In St Benedict's time, Latin was (more or less) still the vernacular for most monks and nuns, but for most of the Church's history down the centuries monks, nuns and the laity encountered Latin as a second language, the language of the Church.

And they typically learnt to pronounce the words first, and only learnt their meanings later.

Learning how to pronounce the psalms

In the light of all this, the first step in learning a psalm is learning how to pronounce it using Ecclesiastical Latin pronunciation (warning: if you learnt Latin at school or University, you were probably taught 'classical' pronunciation', a reconstruction of an earlier stage of Latin than that used in the Vulgate or by the Fathers, and which is significantly different).

There are a number of excellent summary guides to Ecclesiastical Latin pronunciation available online, and you can find a good selection of them here.

You can also find youtube videos of the psalms read aloud.

In the context of the Office though, I think the best approach is to hear them sung in the context of the Office.  A number of monasteries do livestreams and/or make recordings available of some or most of their Offices,

I recommend listening to each psalm over and over, ideally repeating line by line, until you can clearly hear, and then reproduce the Latin.

An excellent tool for this purpose is the Neumz ap, as it actually shows you which part of the chant is being sung, the only problem being that it is currently keyed to the Novus Ordo calendar rather than the 1960 one so won't always align. An alternative is to use the archives of the chants of Le Barroux website or their podcasts.

Memorize?

It is also worth considering trying to memorize the psalms.

Today both books and electronic versions of the Office are readily available.

And some people are much better at this than others (I will admit that I, personally, am absolutely hopeless at memorization).

Even so, for centuries the Office was sung entirely from memory, and this has numerous advantages.  

It means you can say the Office anywhere, anytime, without needing to be obvious about it.  

You can sing Compline and Tenebrae during the Triduum without straining your eyes in the darkness!

It helps you more easily make connections between different psalms and Scripture more generally.  

And it provides rich fodder for meditation.

Indeed, one of the most common monastic practices in the early church was the constant recitation of the psalter outside of the Office in its numerical order each day while undertaking other tasks.

So this Lent, consider setting out to memorize a few psalms!

Psalm 147

Just in case you want to get started immediately, here is the text of Psalm 147 (with a translation alongside), by way of a teaser.

Psalm 147 – Lauda Jerusalem 

Vulgate	Douay-Rheims
Lauda, Jerúsalem, Dóminum: * lauda Deum tuum, Sion.	Praise the Lord, O Jerusalem: praise your God, O Sion.
2  Quóniam confortávit seras portárum tuárum: * benedíxit fíliis tuis in te.	Because he has strengthened the bolts of your gates, he has blessed your children within you
3  Qui pósuit fines tuos pacem: * et ádipe fruménti sátiat te.	Who has placed peace in your borders: and fills you with the fat of corn.
4  Qui emíttit elóquium suum terræ: * velóciter currit sermo ejus.	Who sends forth his speech to the earth: his word runs swiftly.
5  Qui dat nivem sicut lanam: * nébulam sicut cínerem spargit.	Who gives snow like wool: scatters mists like ashes.
6  Mittit crystállum suam sicut buccéllas: * ante fáciem frígoris ejus quis sustinébit?	He sends his crystal like morsels: who shall stand before the face of his cold?
7  Emíttet verbum suum, et liquefáciet ea: * flabit spíritus ejus, et fluent aquæ.	He shall send out his word, and shall melt them: his wind shall blow, and the waters shall run.
8  Qui annúntiat verbum suum Jacob: * justítias, et judícia sua Israël.	Who declares his word to Jacob: his justices and his judgments to Israel
9  Non fecit táliter omni natióni: * et judícia sua non manifestávit eis.	He has not done in like manner to every nation: and his judgments he has not made manifest to them. Alleluia.

You can hear it read aloud here.

You can find the next part in this series here.

Lent series: Notes on the psalms continued!

Vespasian Psalter, London, British Library, Cotton Vespasian A I. f 30v, 31r (wiki commons)

This Lent I plan to offer some more notes on the psalms, primarily filling in a few of the gaps in my verse by verse notes for the psalms of Vespers.

I've previously provided notes for the psalms used at Vespers from Sunday to Thursday in the Benedictine Office, so my plan is to look at Psalms 141 (Friday), and Psalms 147 (Saturday), and perhaps one more if I have enough time.

Both these psalms are particularly appropriate to focus on in the context of Lent, since Psalm 141 has long been interpreted as being specifically about the events of the Passion and Christ's descent into hell, while Psalm 147 takes us to the end of all our efforts, namely the achievement of heaven.

Why not read a modern commentary?

So why bother with these notes?

There are, of course, a large number of excellent commentaries on the psalms around, both ancient and modern.

In general, I personally find most modern commentaries inadequate.  

Some are certainly worth reading, but in general they are not geared at helping those praying the Office in Latin.

More fundamentally, they are typically very focused on the literal, historical meanings of the psalms at the expense of the, generally far more important in my view, spiritual meanings.  

And they are that way because they downplay or outright ignore the tradition of how the Church has interpreted the psalms down the centuries, as revealed in the New Testament, the liturgy, and in the commentaries of the Fathers, Theologians and the other commentators down the ages. 

Patristic and medieval commentaries

The other solution, of course, is to read one of the many commentaries composed by various Church Fathers; the Theologians; or the many excellent medieval commentaries.

No one of these commentaries, though, I'd suggest, is really sufficient on its own: they all provide different and sometimes overlapping perspectives to be sure, and the later ones often draw on the earlier, but ultimately, there is, in view at least, no single definitive psalm commentary that you should read at the expense of all others.

Accordingly, my aim is generally to provide something of an overview and guide to the key commentaries, and to hopefully inspire you go read more yourself!

And because I'm most interested in how St Benedict would have approached the psalms as he laid them out in his Office, that means focusing predominantly on the Patristic commentaries.

The verse notes and my methodology

My aim, as always, is to provide some material to help those praying the Office understand more deeply what it is they are praying.

And since it is quite a while since I've posted verse by verse notes, I thought it would also be timely to provide a few posts on the approach I am taking in the notes, how I think those praying the Office should approach the texts, and some brief explanations of my sources, and key abbreviations.

More on that on Wednesday!

Psalm commentaries: A guide, Part II - Patristic commentaries

Today to mark the start of Lent, I want to continue on my series on psalm commentaries, looking at the key Patristic commentaries available in English, just in case anyone is still looking for a book to read for Lent!

Antioch vs Alexandria

I should note that the Patristic commentaries largely fall into two camps - those focused on the more literal/historical context, such as St John Chrysostom and Theodoret of Cyrus; and those that also draw in the more allegorical meanings, such as Origen, Eusebius, Jerome and Augustine.  

I noted in my previous post that SS Ambrose and Augustine's are in my view the best psalm commentaries of all, closely followed by Cassiodorus and Bellarmine.   

But the psalms are so rich in meaning that multiple interpretations are possible, and so many of these commentaries are well worth a look.

Fragments or texts only available in their original language

I should note that the list below is not complete - there are a few early commentaries on individual psalms that I haven't as yet collected together, as well as many more for which there is as yet no available English translation.

Some of the latter are quite important for various reasons, so one can only hope the situation is soon remedied! These include: Didymus the Blind (313-398) - translations of only two psalm commentaries are available in English; Hilary of Poitiers (210-367), for which a critical edition is available, but no complete translation as far as I know; Arnobius Junior, and more.

Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture

I should also mention the Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture series, which offers two volumes of extracts edited by Craig Blaising and Carmen Hardin, arranged for selected verses of each psalm.

The strength of this series is that it includes material not just from psalm commentaries, but also from  patristic commentaries on other works that take in the psalms.  And it provides a useful taster and source for some very obscure writers not otherwise available in English (including the authors listed above).

For each psalm they also provide an overview of the commentaries.

The problem with this excellent (in principle) series, though, is that it is very dependent on editorial choices, and when it comes to the psalms, I find some of the choices perplexing. Still, there is a wealth of interesting material there to be explored!

Commentaries available in translation

1. Origen (184-253)

Editions

Michael Heintz, trans, Origen Homilies on Psalms 36 - 38, Fathers of the Church vol 146, Catholic University of America Press, 2023. [translations from Rufinus' Latin versions of the psalm commentaries]

Joseph W Trigg (trans), Origen Homilies on the Psalms: Codex Monacensis Graecus 314, Fathers of the Church vol 141, Catholic University of America Press, 2020

Psalms commented on: Psalms 36 - 38; 15, 36, 67, 73-77, 80.

Why they are worth reading

Although Origen held heretical views on some subjects, he was nonetheless easily the most influential of all early exegetes of Scripture, and his works were studied carefully and translated into Latin by a number of different church Fathers (albeit with amendments in places)!

For centuries, only extracts preserved in catenas, together with a few of his commentaries in the Latin version by Rufinus, were thought to have survived.  But a recent manuscript discovery has yielded a new set of them for a selected psalms in the original Greek, and they offer many important insights, both on the psalms themselves, and on early Christian approaches and uses of them.

In particular, one theory popularised in recent decades is that the psalms only came into prominence in early Christian thinking as a consequence of the fourth century monastic movement; this work makes it clear that their use was part of Christian culture from its very beginnings.

I'm still working these two books myself at the moment, but they certainly look as if they will repay the effort.

2. Eusebius of Caesaria (d339)

Editions: Justin M. Goh (trans), Eusebius, Commentary on the Psalms, 2023. You can find these on the translator's blog, or a consolidated version on his academia.edu page.

Psalms covered: Prefatory Material, 8, 9, 22, 23, 44, 50, 51, 52, 57, 62, 63, 67, 68, 71, 73, 77, 81, 86, 87, 89, 90, 92, 94, 117, Hypotheseis on Pss 119-133, 136.

Why they are worth reading

Like Origin, Eusebius seems to have composed one of the earliest commentaries on all of the psalms; but as for Origen, not all have survived, at least in full.  The critical edition of the Greek was only completed in 2022, so this is another largely untapped source.

3. Evagrius (345 - 399)

Luke Dysinger (trans)

Why these are worth reading

Another very early commentary, this time by an extremely influential, but highly controversial monastic writer whose work has largely been transmitted into the tradition through Cassian.   

They are mostly very short, so worth a look, and while you are doing so, take a look around Fr Dysinger's fabulous texts and sources website, which is full of goodies not otherwise readily accessible.

**4. St  Basil (330-379)

Edition: Sr Clare Agnes Way (trans), Saint Basil Exegetical Homilies, Fathers of the church vol 46, Catholic University of America Press, 1963 (available on internet archive).

Psalms covered: 1, 7, 14, 28, 29, 32, 33, 44, 45, 48, 59, 61 and 114.

Why its worth reading

Although the homilies cover only a small sub-set of psalms, they are wonderful commentaries on them, and some seem quite pertinent to St Benedict's use of these psalms in the Office.  the other homilies in the volume relate to the days of creation, and also well worth a read.

5. St Gregory of Nyssa (c335-395)

Edition: Ronald Heine, Gregory of Nyssa's Treatise on the Inscriptions of the Psalms, Oxford, 1995

Why its worth reading

This is not a commentary on the psalms per se, but rather the psalm titles plus a commentary on the overall ordering of the psalter.  

The psalm titles are one of those things ignored or outright rejected by most modern commentators who don't seem them as an authentic part of Scripture (some official decisions to the contrary notwithstanding).  But the Fathers took them very seriously indeed.

**6. John Chrysostom (347-407)

Edition: Robert Charles Hill (trans), St John Chrysostom Commentary on the Psalms, 2 vols, Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 1998.

Psalms covered: 4-12; 43-49; 108 - 117; 119 - 150.

Why it is worth reading

St John's commentary is very rich indeed, often brining in a lot of interesting contextual material and variant text readings.  The commentaries are not short though, but provide a lot of moral instruction in particular.

**7. St Jerome (c342-7 - 420)

Edition: Sr Marie Liguori Ewald (trans), The Homilies of St Jerome, vol 1 (1-59 on the Psalms), Fathers of the Church vol 48, CUA press, 1964.

Psalms covered: 1,5,7,9, 14,66,74-78, 80-91, 93, 95 - 115, 119, 127-133, 135 - 137, 139-143, 145 - 149.

Why it is worth reading

There was a theory advocated some years ago that these were essentially translations of Origen: the rediscovery of Greek texts for more of his commentaries has now effectively disproved that, though they were certainly strongly influenced by his work.

St Jerome's homilies have two key virtues in my view.  First, unlike virtually every other commentary, they are generally very succinct.  And secondly, they often include references to monastic perspectives, and emphasize ideas that became important to the later tradition.

8. Theodore of Cyrus (393 – c. 458/466)

Edition: Robert C Hill (trans), Theodoret of Cyrus Commentary on the Psalms, 2 vols, Fathers of the Church vol 101&102, CUA Press, 2000.

Why it is worth reading

This is one of the few patristic commentaries that covers all of the psalms, and the expositions are very clear and straightforward.  And for those who find the allegorical exertions of Augustine and others a stretch at times, this is your commentary! 

9. Pseudo- Athanasius (prob early fifth century)c. 296-373) c. 296-373)

Edition: Robert W Thompson, Athanasiaana Syriaca Part IV Exposition in Psalmos, Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium, Louvain, 1977 (selected pslams only)

Why you should read them

St Athanasius' letter on the interpretation of the psalms remains justly famous; whether or not these short and longer series commentaries are really by him remains a matter of academic debate however.

I'm still working through these, and this is a hard to obtain book, so possibly not worth recommending, but the commentaries do offer some great insights.  They largely follow in the tradition of Origen and Eusebius, but also draw on several other early Eastern Fathers.

I will look at some of the later commentaries in the next post.

Psalm commentaries: a guide (Pt 1)

I realised that is a long time since I have updated my set of notes on the various psalm commentaries by the Fathers, Doctors and Saints that are available, and thought that it might be an opportune time to do this over a few parts.

Where to start

I should, though, set out a few of my own views, so you know where I'm coming from.

First, I have to say that there is no one psalm commentary that I would recommend as your one and only source - they all have strengths and weaknesses, and you can get a lot out of many of them.

Secondly, in general, I'll stick to pre-twentieth century commentaries (though if I have time I'll mention a few more recent ones in a later part).  

I haven't found any satisfactory modern commentaries from a traditionalist point of view - the early twentieth century ones generally reflect an attitude to the Septuagint that has now been thoroughly discredited, while the more recent ones either mostly still reflect literary-historical approaches to Scripture that I  dislike, or have some dodgy theology embedded in them.

Thirdly, while there are a number of interesting and worthwhile medieval commentaries on the psalms now available in translation, such as those by St Thomas Aquinas, St Bruno, and Denis the Carthusian, personally, I don't think that these are good starting points from the point of view of understanding the use of the psalms in the Office.

Instead, I'd generally suggest focusing on the great patristic commentaries such as those of St Augustine, Ambrose, Basil, Jerome, Chrysostom and others.

That said, there are two more modern commentaries of note, namely that of St Robert Bellarmine and St Alphonsus Liguori that can be very useful early on in your voyage!

You have to start somewhere, so in this post I'll highlight a few of what I consider the best commentaries, and related resources, and then in subsequent posts I'll do a more systematic listing of Patristic, medieval, later commentaries plus a few collections of extracts.

1. St Ambrose: Commentary on Psalm 118

Editions: 

English: Ide Ni Rian trans, Halcyon Press, Dublin, 1998.

Latin and Italian: Commento al Salmo CXVIII, Luigi Franco Pizzolato (Introduction, translation, notes, Opera Omnia di Sant' Ambrogio commento al salmo 118, 2 vols, Biblioteca Amborisana citta' Nuova Editrice, 1987.

Latin only: Expositio de psalmo CXVIII

Why you should read it

I've included this book in the list because if ever see a copy, grab it. 

Even though it only covers one psalm (albeit by far the longest), if there is one patristic book on the psalms I would recommend reading above all others, this is it - it is an absolutely wonderful book with profound insights to offer on the virtue of humility (which the psalm centres on), the spiritual life, and much much more.  

St Ambrose's starting point was Origen's (now lost) commentary on the psalm, which was also independently translated by St Hilary of Poitier around the same time.  St Ambrose's version, though, is four times longer than St Hilary's, as it also incorporates a commentary on the Song of Songs, a guide to lectio divina and how to interpret Scripture more generally, and much more.

Unfortunately the English translation has long been out of print, rarely comes onto the market and is extremely expensive when it does.  I really really hope someone can negotiate the copyright to this (and ideally St Ambrose's other commentary on twelve psalms) and do a reprint...

2. St Robert Bellarmine, A Commentary on the Book of Psalms.

Editions:

Ven John O'Sullivan (trans), Loreto Publications, 2003.

Online: St Robert Bellarmine

Why you should read it

I love this commentary because St Robert gets straight to the spiritual juice of the text, providing a lively commentary that draws heavily on the tradition, but also offers some new insights and focuses, spurred not doubt by the Reformation, but which remain particularly pertinent to our time.

If you can only buy one psalm commentary, or need a good starting point, this is the one I'd recommend.

The only downside to it is that it generally takes a fairly literal approach to the text, often ignoring many of the allegorical meanings that the Fathers emphasized, and that are, I think, important to understanding why certain psalms were said at particular hours and on particular days.  But it is a great foundational text all the same.

I've written more on it here and here.

3.  St Cassiodorus Explanation of the Psalms

Editions: 

English: P G Walsh (translated and annotated), Cassiodorus: Explanation of the Psalms, Ancient Christian Writers, 3 vols, Paulist Press, 1990. Online: Internet archive

Latin: Adriaen, Marc (ed), Magni Aurelii Cassiodori expositio psalmorum, Corpus Christianorum Series Latina, 97, 98, Turnhout: Brepols, 1958.

Why you should read it

This is a commentary that has grown on me over the years -  I initially found it a bit hard going, but I've come to appreciate it a lot more over time, and if you want a good starting point on Patristic interpretations of the psalms, reflecting the milieu that St Benedict would have been influenced by, then this is probably it.

Cassiodorus' commentary was written in the mid-sixth century, so is more or less contemporaneous to St Benedict, and was probably the single most read commentary (albeit under other names!) by monks up until the reformation.  There is, though, a certain irony in this, for St Benedict famously fled the teaching of classical grammar that Cassiodorus championed, and St Gregory the Great was none to convinced of the merits of Cassiodorus' attempts to wed classical methods to Scriptural interpretation. 

Nonetheless, it has proved immensely influential, and was written to instruct novices at his monastery of the Vivarium, so includes notes on grammatical structures employed in the psalms, as well as a lot of instruction on how to interpret Scripture generally, a commentary on the meaning of numbers in Scripture and much more. 

Cassiodorus claims to provide a distillation of St Augustine's (extremely long) commentary, but in reality it isn't that much shorter!  And while it is certainly heavily influenced by St Augustine, it draws on other sources as well, and is a genuinely original composition.

The format is also nice - each psalm has a brief introduction that says what it is about and provides notes on the psalm title, then verse by verse notes, and a conclusion on the lessons to be drawn from it.

You can read more on it here.

4.  St Augustine, Enarrations on the Psalms

Editions: 

English: Multiple (but be careful, some of them have been made very politically correct).

Online: New Advent (extracts only)

Why you should read it

St Augustine's is probably the greatest of all psalm commentaries.  And his work can be reread many times getting more out of it each time.

The 'enarrations' also includes extensive discourses on other books of Scripture, especially the Pauline epistles, since most of these were originally sermons preached either at Mass or the Office, and sparked off the texts used on that particular day.

The extracts on the New Advent site are a good way into this work, as the downside to it is that it is very long, with several different commentaries on some psalms - as a result it amounts to six volumes or more in translation, depending on which version you buy.

You can read more on it here and here.

5. St Alphonsus Liguori: The Divine Office Exposition of the Psalms and Canticles

Editions:

English: PDF

Why you should read it

Arranged around the Roman Office cursus, the book provides a very short summary of the meaning of each psalm, and then notes on key words or selected verses as aids to understanding.

The notes on each psalm are very brief, but the summaries and translation notes are often a useful starting point all the same.