The Fathers on Psalm 22

This post is part of an ongoing series offering translations of various early Church father’s commentaries on the Psalms.

Psalm 22

My God, my God, why have you abandoned me?

Why so far from my call for help,

from my cries of anguish?

My God, I call by day, but you do not answer;

by night, but I have no relief.

Athanasius: “Psalm 22 describes the nature of the death from the lips of the Savior himself…. When he speaks of hands and feet being pierced, what else is meant than the cross? After presenting all these things, the Psalter adds that the Lord suffers these things not for himself, but for our sake.”[1]

Diodore of Tarsus: For a start, therefore, some commentators thought the opening and the rest apply to the Lord, since the verse in the text O God my God, attend to me: why have you abandoned me? was spoken by the Lord; but it is not possible that the rest is recited on the part of the Lord. In fact, it goes on: Why art thou so far from helping me, from the words of my groaning? David’s meaning is this: Lord, be reconciled to me and do not abandon me any further; instead, attend to me, even if my faults put me far from being saved by you (the phrase the words of my groaning meaning the failings themselves). Nevertheless, be faithful to yourself, do not case an eye on the magnitude of the sin but on the magnitude of your loving-kindness. Then the following even still more clearly applies to David than to the Lord—namely—O my God, I cry by day, but thou dost not answer; and by night, but find no rest. Cast your eye on this, Lord, that both by day and by night I cry aloud to you, and when not heard I am led to entertain foolish thoughts—not that I claim you have no providence for human affairs, knowing the reason why I am not heard, the cause being sin. How does this or the rest of the psalm apply to Christ?[2]

Pseudo-Athanasius: My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? Why art thou so far from helping me, from the words of my groaning? The psalm is sung by Christ as in the person of all humanity. It narrates what he endured from the Jews when he bore the cross for our sake. O my God, I cry by day, but thou dost not answer; and by night, but find no rest. He asks that the Father turn his face to us, and remove from us sin and the curse and teach us to be humble-minded, just as he was humbled for our sake.[3]

[1] Benjamin Wayman. Make the Words Your Own: An Early Christian Guide to the Psalms (Brewster, M.A.: Paraclete Press: 2014), 3.

[2] TLG 6. Εὐθὺς οὖν τὸ προοίμιον, ἐπειδὴ κατὰ τὴν λέξιν αὐτὴν εἴρηται καὶ παρὰ τοῦ κυρίου τὸ Ὁ θεὸς ὁ θεός μου, πρόσχες μοι, ἱνατί ἐγκατέλιπές με  νομίζουσί τινες καὶ τὸ ἑξῆς ἁρμόζειν· οὐκέτι δὲ συγχωρεῖ λέγεσθαι ἐκ προσώπου τοῦ κυρίου τὸ ἑξῆς. Ἐπάγει γάρ· Μακρὰν ἀπὸ τῆς σωτηρίας μου οἱ λόγοι τῶν παραπτωμάτων μου. Ὃ γὰρ βούλεται εἰπεῖν ὁ Δαυεὶδ τοῦτό ἐστιν ὅτι δέσποτα, καταλλάγηθί μοι καὶ μὴ ἀποστρέφου με τοῦ λοιποῦ, ἀλλὰ πρόσχες μοι, εἰ καὶ μακράν με ποιεῖ τὰ πλημμελήματά μου τῆς παρὰ σοῦ σωτηρίας. Τὸ γὰρ «οἱ λόγοι τῶν παραπτωμάτων μου» ἀντὶ τοῦ αὐτὰ τὰ παραπτώματα λέγει. Ἀλλ’ ὅμως, φησί, σὺ σαυτὸν μίμησαι, μὴ πρὸς τὸ πλῆθος ἀποβλέψας τῆς ἁμαρτίας ἀλλὰ πρὸς τὸ πλῆθος τῆς σῆς φιλανθρωπίας. Εἶτα καὶ τὸ ἑξῆς ἔτι σαφέστερον ἁρμόζει τῷ Δαυεὶδ μᾶλλον ἢ τῷ κυρίῳ. Τί γάρ; θεός μου, κεκράξομαι ἡμέρας, καὶ οὐκ εἰσακούσῃ, καὶ νυκτός, καὶ οὐκ εἰς ἄνοιαν ἐμοί. Καὶ πρὸς τοῦτο γάρ, φησίν, ἀπόβλεψον, δέσποτα, ὅτι καὶ ἐν ἡμέρᾳ καὶ ἐν νυκτὶ ἐπιβοῶμαί σε καὶ μὴ ἀκουόμενος οὐκ εἰς ἀνοήτους ἐκφέρομαι λογισμούς, οὐδὲ λέγω μὴ προνοεῖν σε τῶν ἀνθρωπίνων, ἀλλ’ οἶδα τὴν αἰτίαν δι’ ἣν οὐκ ἀκούομαι, τὴν τῆς ἁμαρτίας ὑπόθεσιν. Τοῦτο δὲ ποῦ ἁρμόζει τῷ Χριστῷ ἢ τὸ ἑξῆς τοῦ ψαλμοῦ;

[3] Syriac CSCO 387, SYRI 168 V, pg 14-15. CX. PG 27: 131- for Latin and Greek.


Rules and Roles for Women

I’m excited to share that my article, “Rules and Roles for Women: Vocation and Order in the Apostolic Fathers,” was recently published in the Southern Baptist Journal of Theology. This research was originally undertaken as part of a doctoral seminar at St. Louis University led by Dr. Carolyn Osiek, and I presented my findings at the Evangelical Theological Society’s regional conference in 2017.

Click here to view a PDF of my article. And click here to view the contents of the entire journal.

Thanks to the SBJT for publishing the research!

Does Church Planting Overly Innovate?

This post is part of an ongoing series looking at church planting.

As commonly framed, Christianity often has problems with new things. Whether it’s new ways of thinking about Jesus (as during those pesky Christological controversies in the early Church), framing theology (like during the Reformation), using academic scholarship to inform faith (as in the modernist-fundamentalist debates), or thinking about human sexuality (like in many contemporary churches), Christianity and newness don’t always get along. Continue reading

Why Plant a Church?

This post is part of an ongoing series looking at church planting.

Of course, there are already a lot of established churches. So why do people plant new churches?

First, church planting represents a tangible way for Christians to fulfill the Great Commission, to “make disciples of every nation” (Matthew 28:19-20). No place on earth is 100% churched. While there are plenty of locales with lots of churches, in no area does every belong to a church (let alone attend one on a regular basis). For example, St. Louis is a traditionally Christian city, with large numbers of Roman Catholic, Lutheran, and Pentecostal churches. Yet something like 80% of people living in St. Louis did not attend any sort of church last weekend.5 Continue reading

What Is Church Planting?

You’ve seen them in your community. They’re popping up in old buildings, fields, and other empty spaces. They show up with catchy names and make lots of loud noise, often attracting quite a crowd in the process. But what are they? Where do they come from? And why are they here?

I’m talking, of course, about church plants—when a new local church begins where none had previously existed. Continue reading

Book Review: Irresistible (Stanley)

Once upon a time, there existed a version of Christianity that was irresistible. Over the years, however, errors and accretions have piled up, reducing to a shadow what was once a robust proclamation of the Good News of Jesus. But now, there’s a way that the Church can return to its roots and make the gospel great again.

No, this isn’t another book about the corruptions of Catholicism that the Protestant Reformation overcame; it’s the story of American Protestantism, which has sadly lost its way in the wilderness of the Old Testament and a “Bible-before-Jesus” approach to sharing Jesus. Continue reading

Visiting with Jesus

I first caught a glimpse of him through the doorbell camera at church. He looked cold and a little scraggly, and when I went to open the door, he was shorter than I expected. But there he was: the Son of God in human flesh. We talked for a while, as anyone might when they have the chance to speak with someone so important and famous. We talked about theology, about the church, about the state of our world. Unsurprisingly, I thought about our conversation for the rest of the day and much of the following week.

I guess that’s what happens when you visit with Jesus. Continue reading

A Protestant Thinks About the Blessed Virgin Mary

Talking about Mary can feel dangerous, especially if you are a Protestant who adheres to Protestant orthodoxy. Sure, we sing about Mary at Christmas, feel her pain on Good Friday, and maybe even read a little about her in the gospels. But for most American Protestants, almost any other interaction with Mary is borderline Catholic. So we don’t talk about Mary, we don’t engage with Mary, and we don’t think about Mary. Life seems easier that way. But in truth, this approach is historically and theologically problematic.

Some Protestants are aware that there is more to the story of Mary than American Protestantism often lets on. Some might know that the Protestant reformers, for example, held views on Mary different than most Protestant churches today. Martin Luther affirmed Mary’s divine motherhood, perpetual virginity, and immaculate conception. Likewise, John Calvin affirmed the perpetual virginity and espoused (with qualifications) a view of Mary as the “mother of God.” Although these Reformers did not advocate the same robust Marian theology that Rome and the East did in the 16th century, these perspectives are nonetheless quite different than those of their spiritual descendants.

To assume—as many Protestants do—that everything the Church has always believed about Mary should be excoriated as a “Catholic corruption” is simply an error. We must take seriously the biblical and historical insights on who Mary is—and how she is to be approached. Modern Protestants cannot simply be content to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Continue reading