Trust of the Afflicted

 

Trust of the Afflicted[j1] 

An Exegetical Study of Psalm 22

 

While Psalm 22 is entitled The Deer of the Dawn (a musical term which suggests that this psalm was sung by the congregation), and phrases such as "the declaration of trust and confidence" (v. 21b, you have rescued [answered, RSV] me) probably presupposes "the declaration of an oracle", and participating "in the sacrificial feast" (the poor shall eat and be satisfied, v. 26a) of cultic worship (Craigie, 198), it is not an exaggeration to say that an individual believer could pray the Psalm.

The function of this Psalm is not so much problematic as the structure is. This Psalm consists of two disparate sections, lament (vv. 1-21) and praise (vv. 22-31). The Psalmist falls down head-long to the gate of the dead in the first part of the Psalm, and he recoils from the abyss of affliction and gives praises immediately to God in the second section. The change of mood is so rapid that a scholar commented that “something happened between verse 21 and verse 22” (Brueggemann, 36). It may be that this Psalm was a combination of the two Psalms (cf. Goldingay, 323). Unless it has coherences in the poetic pathos and its theology throughout it, we could have agreed with such assumptions. There are unarguable lamenting words, but the plot and language ultimately lead to an ｅxpression of trust, and a bold praise. The mood of the Psalm changes from despair to triumphal praise. The Psalmist’s trust in Yahweh, while mocked, threatened and broken by the destructive power of the Psalmist’s enemies, is the key to unleashing praise. In this sense, this can be categorized as a “trust” Psalm, wrapped in lamenting words and tone.

Inclusio of Psalm 22 (in English Text*)

a. The hidden presence of God (v. 1)

 b. Invocation of God in the form of lament (v. 2)

   c. Grounding God’s salvation on the past history of Israel (vv. 3-5)

    d. The enemies’ attacks on the Psalmist (vv. 6-8)

     e. The Psalmist’s defense; his created-ness (vv. 9-11)

      f. The enemies’ threats; the power of destruction (vv. 12-13)

      f’. The Psalmist’s disembodiment (vv. 14-18)

     e’. Pleas for help in cry (vv. 19-21)

    d’. The salvation of God delivered (vv. 22-26)

   c’. Grounding our praise on Yahweh’s open future (vv. 27-28)

b’. Invitation of people to praise and worship (vv. 29)

a’. The hidden praise of humans to Yahweh (v. 30-31)

(* NRSV)

As for, “Why have you forsaken me?” (v. 1), we should not be in a hurry to label it to a sign for the absence of God. The Psalmist is almost crushed by the weight of afflictions, albeit, God is already there before his pain-taking appeal was articulated. No one whom God is really absent from can call up God “My” God, and cry for two times. Nobody can accuse God of forsaking him or her except a person who is so strongly connected with God that they can yell at God.

It seems that the Psalmist might have felt the vague but undeniable presence of a hidden and silent God, and this enabled him to raise his trembling voice to God. Therefore, the distance (“so far from helping me”) and indifference (“from the words of my groaning”) of God mentioned in v. 1 should not be regarded as words of dereliction. That said, we should not romanticize the supplication of the Psalmist, and we should not be so preoccupied with praise that we overlook the reality of affliction. The interrogative “why” appears two times in raw, stressing sadness and desperation. It is obvious that lament is one of the couplers that make this Psalm one of genuine trust and praise.

Poetically, “O my God” in v. 2 seems to be cooler and a little bit more relaxed than “my God” in v. 1. With these words, the Psalmist invokes God in a seemingly calm fashion. But he tries to find what ought to be done, as soon as he found an elbow room (“I cry”). At this moment, his despair is redoubled when his “cry” is unheard and ignored even though he appealed “by day” and “by night”. But for the Psalmist, “rest” is the byproduct of “answer” (Yahweh’s). Despite the blurred presence of God, and his foolish effort in securing his rescue by his initiative (crying), his faith is preserved in the grip of God.

Strangely and abruptly, he is reminded of Israel’s past (vv. 3-5). The subjects and verbs in vv. 1-2 changes from the first person singular (“I”) to the third person plural (“they”). He remembered what God did for his ancestors who “trusted”(twice, v. 4), “cried”(v.5). Their God not only “delivered”(v. 4), “saved”(v. 5) them, but also did not put them “to shame” (v. 5). What might have occasioned this reminiscence? “Solidarity in grace” is the only possible answer. Though we do not know, and need not know what deliverances the Psalmist refers to here, Israel’s covenant God “delivered,” “saved” Israel (the Psalmist’s ancestors) only through his steadfast grace. Thus the solidarity with “our ancestors” means that he expects God’s saving intervention again for him, not in the light of his own effort (“cry”, v. 2) but of the God’s acts in the past (grace). The history of Israel functions like a cement gluing the Psalmist to the right stand of unconditional salvation.

Verses 6-8 allude to one of the sources of the Psalmist’s afflictions, those who surround him, his fellow believers. “Others” and “the people” (v. 6) are not “they,” that is, his ancestors. They advise him to make things even with Yahweh by committing “cause” to, and earning “delights” for Yahweh (v. 8) . From their ‘merit-reward’ theology, the afflicted Psalmist is “a worm not human” (v. 6). The negative verbs, “scorn” “despise” (v. 6), “mock” “make mouths at” and “shake heads” (v. 7) are arranged in an increasing movement of negation, beginning with the inner appreciation (‘scorn,’ ‘despise’) and moving toward explicit activities (mocking, mouthing, and shaking heads).

The Psalmist antagonizes his enemies’ theology (vv. 9-11), that is bargaining Yahweh to a bribing God. Under their shared theory, God is pleased by our religious correctness, and turns out to be just a reward or a correspondent who automatically compensates for what humans have offered to him. Instead, he presents his theology of creation. Referring to the creation of human (the Psalmist himself), he shows us the deepest ground of our salvation. It is Yahweh’s unfathomable love (taking him “from the womb”) and unparalleled mercy (keeping him “safe on my mother’s breast,” v. 9) that helps the Psalmist confess “you have been my God” (v. 10). He grounds his plea for help (v. 11) on his creator, yet the deliverance is remote and aloof, affliction is “near” and big. In his creational faith, the Psalmist refuses conditioning and favoring salvation outside God’s God-ness (creator), and he becomes human again not a worm!

As creation is of God, so is the destruction of enemies. Many bulls, bulls of Bashan (v. 12) and lion (v. 13) are representing the destructing power of the enemies. Metaphor (bulls and lion) and gradation (from “encircle” [v. 12] to “open wide with their mouths” [v. 13]) is called out to describe what situation the Psalmist is in, and how desperate it is. The enemies look to sneer him and his faith.

The Psalmist becomes totally dissembled and fractured. Degradation (“I- my bones- my heart- my mouth- my tongue”, vv. 14-15) indicates how specifically and thoroughly he was doomed. The Psalmist’s affliction is not a nightmare, but a reality. Poured water, melted wax (v. 14), and dried potsherd, sticky tongue (v. 15) are all the language of collapse and ruin, which might have been intentionally paired to add to the intensity. Dogs are indentified with “a company of evildoers” (v. 16). This identification adds to the terror. As soon as he recognized who his enemies were, his hands and feet shriveled. With their staring and gloating (v. 17) eyes only, he is being dismembered. Counting bones, and dividing/casting clothing lots (v. 18) appears to be an imagery of hunting. A hunted animal is stripped by its skin (animal’s cloths) and broken with its bones to be a meat. Perhaps dogs in v. 16 are the hunters, and the Psalmist is their prey. The Psalmist is cruelly and brutally butchered. He becomes again not human. He attributes all this to the fact that God lay in the dust of death (v. 15). This may signify the terrifying punishment wrought upon the Psalmist, yet his confession that there is no other but God who can make him afflicted also points to his faith.

“But you, O Lord!” Although the Psalmist seems to be dismantled like a slaughtered animal, his relationship with God is somehow intact. “But you” is an important faith chain linking him to Deus absconditus. In the face of adversity, the Psalmist lays claim to his covenant God, Yahweh, and his claim is contrasted with the first invocation of “my God.” He displays his conviction that he might have been abandoned, but has not been forgotten by God. once he recognized the distance and indifference from and of God, and now he sees the possibility of overcoming this distance. Four pleas for help, “do not be far away” and “help” (v. 18), “deliver” and “save” (v. 21), show that he is gradually moving forward, taking away the negativity of his initial plea. The Psalmist finally reveals the grounds on which he can make such bold requests for deliverance, the undeniable intervention of God in the past; Yahweh was the God who “has rescued me” [the Psalmist] (v. 21b). Now the objective of deliverance changes from “them” (v. 4) in the past history of Israel to “me.” Heilgeschichte incarnates into the existence of ‘I,’ and this I is bonded with the believing community of Yahweh. At this moment, we might say that a drop of “water” poured (v. 14) runs in confluence with a rushing river.

“You have rescued me” (v. 21b) can be translated in “you have answered me” also from the Hebrew verbal phrase (^anitani, VanGemeren, 208). As the Psalmist’s plea and cry are heard, his communication with God and his people is revived. He is no longer encircled by the enemies but lives in the “congregation” namely, with “brothers and sisters” (v. 22). The people of the community are called not by “they” but “you” (three times, v. 23), alluding to the distance between these two (the community and the Psalmist) was taken down, and affinity regained. Solidarity once again ties the Psalmist together with his people in praise to Yahweh, their covenant God. He immediately turns to what has made it happen. The negative words, “despise, abhor, hide” (v. 24) are in a double negation. Yahweh “did not” despise his afflicted self, and did not hide his face from him. Rather, he heard his cry, even though it seemed as if he had hidden his face from the Psalmist. As far as praise is concerned, not merely its source but also its direction greatly matters. Praise is an output of Yahweh’s presence and action, but it is also mediated through the community (“From you my praise,” v. 25a). The validity of praise should also be examined where the praise is sung. Failed praise comes out as nothing more than a subjective, psychological indulgence. We cannot identify the psalmist’s specific vows (v. 25b). The most important point here is that he made up his mind “to pay before those who fear him” (v. 25b). He never imagines that he would have to pay his vows before or to God. This probably means that his vows were not intended to bribe God. If they were bribes, they could not have been paid, even before those who fear him! Perhaps the vows which the psalmist promised were nothing less than praise itself. The praise of Israel (including both the psalmist and those who fear him) is the foremost homage to God, for he is enthroned on the praises of Israel (v. 3). The benevolent treatment of the poor (v. 26) shows that God has delivered the psalmist, who previously regarded himself as the poorest of the poor, and put him into an inseparable bond with the community.

Salvation extends beyond the boundaries of the community, past and present. It spreads out to “all the ends of the earth” and “all the families of the nations” (v. 27). Yahweh is not restricted to a region and a nation, nor is Yahweh’s salvation limited to a span of time. The fact Yahweh transcends all limitations in providing salvation to “who seek him” (v. 26) suggests his deliverance could not be by chance.  Neither is it a self- justification of the distressed. God will certainly save them from afflictions in the future again and again. This futuristic openness places praise (the product of Yahweh’s deliverance) on a solid foundation, and secures it from the whimsical ups and downs of human emotions. It anchors praise on the firm base of Yahweh’s mercy and grace!

Who are “all who sleep in the earth,” “all who go down the dust” (v. 29)? Why does the Psalmist invite them to worship God? Is it ridiculous, let alone the mentions of ceasing praise and worship in Sheol somewhere else (cf. Ps 6.5; 30.9; 88.10-12; 115.17), that the psalmist hurriedly complained God of his remoteness and inactiveness, as if his death could have resulted in his total annihilation, and absent of praise and worship, and that he suddenly calls for the dead to worship, if it is indubitable that “all who sleep in the earth,” “all who go down the dust” are the dead? What about interpreting these people as the inclusive referring to all humans who are supposedly to “bow down” (an authentic posture of worship)? This can be supported by the fact that the phrase “all who sleep in” can also be translated in “all the fat ones” (Heb. ak^elu; “all the rich,” NIV, VanGemeren, 211) from its Hebrew word. Reading “all who go down the dust” as “all those who are going down to the dirt kneel” (the weak in social grouping; Goldingay, 339) is one of solutions to avoid the hermeneutical difficulty of the phrase. If true, this insinuates that praise to God is mandatory for all beings. Both the fat (the rich and affluent) and the lowly and the marginal (the ones in the dust) should not be silent, for Yahweh’s salvation stretches to all nations.

While the first verse of this psalm began with the hidden presence of God, the last two verses come to an end by referring to the hidden humans; “posterity” and “future generation” (v. 30), and “people yet unborn” (v. 31). God once concealed himself in his unseen, unknowable presence; he was then revealed through his faithful deliverance in history, then in creation and in his boundless mercy to all the people. In addition to this, Yahweh is revealed now in the people, who will speak of what he has done for humans. God’s mysterious presence as well as his power to save the distressed cuts across time (past/future) and space (Israel/all the nations).

This psalm poses fundamental questions and gives profound answers concerning our quest for faith in Yahweh. First, we have to come to grips with its rapid change of mood from lament to praise. Why does the Psalmist swiftly move from lament to praise? Lament psalms can be likened to labyrinths where we sometimes encounter a dead end, and are left to say that lament is neither praise nor ‘disguised praise’. Some Christians use the word ‘disguised;’ yet ‘disguised blessing,’ ‘disguised mishaps’ and other such terms serve to degrade our faith as superstitious magic. Lament is like a touchstone by which our praise and thanksgiving can be attested ‘pure’ and ‘authentic.’ Without tests of lament, our praise and thanksgiving turn out to be religious flattery masking a hidden agenda; a desire for protection, happiness and prosperity. In contrast, let us consider the first female Nobel Prize winner in Literature, Pearl Buck, who had ten children. Nine were adopted, but the tenth was her own. But this child was severely handicapped. In her essay, The Child Who Never Grew, Buck confessed the meaning of being a mother to a handicapped child, and evaluated her sorrow as follows:

"….for endurance of inescapable sorrow is something which has to be learned alone. And only to endure is not enough. Endurance can be a harsh and bitter root in one's life, bearing poisonous and gloomy fruit, destroying other lives. Endurance is only the beginning. There must be acceptance and the knowledge that sorrow fully accepted brings its own gift. For there is an alchemy in sorrow. It can be transmitted into wisdom, which, if it does not bring joy, can yet bring happiness (Buck, 25)

 

Lament purifies our praise, which can be easily contaminated by natural theology that does not take the biblical witness into account. Praise unpaired with lament can easily result in various eulogies dedicated to ourselves, offering a projected human self up to celestial space with glamorous words of praise. There is no place for this kind of praise before Yahweh (Ps. 56.8).  Lament transforms our prattle and babble into deeply spiritual praise.

Secondly, we have to cope with the correlation between the personal/individual experience of salvation and belonging to a believing community. For the psalmist, salvation necessarily entails belonging to a community of faith. In fact, this psalm seems to suggest that salvation is not expected to be executed outside of the believing community. You might say that solidarity is the username and password to log into the safe realm where the salvation of Yahweh is effected at the time! Nevertheless, this does not necessarily imply blind collectivism. It is demanded that the restored individual (the psalmist) be in the position to lead the congregation to the appropriate praise! He must conduct the congregation and attune the people of God to his newest melodies of redemption. A creative tension between a believer and a believing community must be sustained in order to produce a burdensome corporate joy; leading the congregation into the praise, and harmonizing to a saved individual’s initiative in praise. This correlation is what we Christians are missing badly in these days in our communal life.

Thirdly, creational faith in this psalm opposes and invalidates all concepts of meritorious theology. The creational faith is a soteriological manifestation of ex nihilo. Creation zeros our humanness and levels the playing field between good/bad and right/wrong. Creation requires us to look upon the Lord unconditionally for our salvation. Where our artificiality dies out, God’s creating power emerges. So long as we can speak about creation, we will not be eliminated from the possibility of salvation. Creation is like a womb where salvation is conceptualized, in an initial but deepest sense. Let us not confuse creational faith with creationism/intellectual design, which are shamelessly asserted in some Christian circles. Creational faith does not belittle the faith in Yahweh by reducing it to that which kneels down in the shrine of science and begs some evidences, enthroning scientific evidence and elevating it to the status of god. Rather, it is the deepest proclamation that Yahweh is in control of all; life and death, creation and destruction, and salvation and doom (Deut. 32.39; 2Sam. 2.6).

The vulnerability of our faith is the fourth theme we have to address. The faith of the psalmist limps, even though he tries to rest it upon Yahweh’s grace and mercy. He is being tortured by the surrounding enemies, to the extent that he almost loses his faith at certain points. In a word, this Psalm does not take faith for granted. It drags and makes many sudden stops. When it is locked in the faithfulness of Yahweh, our faith is expected to last long, and finish well. It is thus not doubt but cheap and mystified faith that causes our hearts to stumble and paralyzes our minds. Marketing-oriented, purpose-driven, morally therapeutic, and militant-triumphalists’ approach to faith is never successful without distorting faith in Yahweh.

Finally, the dynamics between centripetality and centrifugality of salvation should be taken seriously. In this psalm, the psalmist initially tends to set up salvation in the inner circle of Israel. Personal engagement with the genuine salvation from Yahweh has to be connected with belonging to the communal and common faith, to be shared with the nation. But this centripetality breaks though the boundary. The biblical concept of salvation flows over the brims of a narrow nationalism and regionalism. Although being placed in a believing community is a vital issue in Israel’s faith, a concept like a corporate faith is by no means seen in this psalm and nowhere in the psalms. It is reported by many scholars that Christianity has never been recognized as indigenous cultural and socio-political entity as in the late 20^th century. Christianity has been more fragmentized than in any other centuries ever Christian Church brought into being (see, Jekins, 2). How can we run-over this barrier that our Americanized, British-styled or Korean-way-adjusted Christianity has made? There is no way out except turning to the centrefugality the psalmist celebrates in his praise which seemed to have been weird and exaggerating at a first impression, but definitely attributing universality to the salvation wrought by Yahweh. We cannot commission our salvation to a tribal, a region-based god, because this god cannot address the problem of human suffering, besides directing all humankind to his rules.

We dare to assert that it is a case of misuse or abuse if we Christians would mediate on this Psalm during Lent, particularly on the Good Friday, just because Christ cited some verses from it on cross (Mk. 15.37; cf. Matt. 27.50), and would leave it behind till the next Lent comes. It is, in fact, an incomparable tragedy if we would not learn from this Psalm pertaining to the essence of faith in Yahweh, and would not apply the triad (lament – trust – praise) of the Psalm to our concept and practice of every day’s worship to the Lord. It cannot be too much to say that a lament which was guided and produced by the incomprehensibility of God begets trust, then trust which was attested by trials and tribulations ferments praise successfully, which is very worth to the Lord!  

 

Bibliography

John Goldingay, Psalms; Volume 1: Psalms 1-41, Baker  (Grand Rapids, 2003)

Pearl Buck, A Child Who Never Grew, Woodbine House (Bethesda. 1992)

Peter C. Craigie, Word Biblical Commentary, Psalms 1-50, Word (Texas, 1983)

Philip Jenkins, The Next Christendom: The Coming of Global Christianity, Oxford Univ. Press (Oxford, 2002)

Water Brugemann, Spirituality of the Psalms, Fortress Press (Minneapolis, 2002)

Willem A. VanGemeren, Ed., Frank E. Gaebelein, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Psalms, Zondervan (Grand Radips, 1991)

---

 [j1]This is way beyond the word limit and I have therefore only skimmed it and not made detailed comments.  It is a good thorough study.  A