Psalm 109 sparked my interest in non-lectionary texts. Tough sell to read this one in church, although the NRSV and some other translations add "They say" before this snippet, so that it sounds as if the speaker is saying that his enemies are saying these things about him, instead of him cursing them.

The Book of Common Prayer, however, does not have the addition of "they say."
 

Understanding scripture is never easy. Understanding small bits such as this part of Psalm 109 is impossible out of context. In context, David, the attributed author, asks God to punish those who are speaking out against him. He complains that he is repaid evil for good then asks God to destroy them and all of their children. And then justifies his request by stating how poor and needy he is and how he, David will extol God for saving him. What a role model?
 

I love the selection in Psalm 109. There smack dab in the middle of Holy Scripture is gut wrenching honesty.

I appreciate Sid's exegetical work and get hints as to David's significance and reverence. Due to Sids comment I found that I needed to read more and found the whole Psalm fascinating. I found that this psalm points to David's significance because he constantly revealed himself to God. It is not because he was good. It was because of his continual surrender to God.

One of the most powerful spiritual stories was told to me by Prof Mary Carter Warren at St. Thomas University. She told the story of her very faithful father. One evening he came home and to her shock "prayed for those bastards at work". This floored her because she never knew her father to use such language and most times kept his cool. She asked him about it.

Her father told her that if he did not start from where he was he would never get to forgiveness.

David here is honest in prayer. He is angry. He is vengeful. He is wishing wicked things on people who do not deserve this and I would guess that God ignored it. Yet in the middle of his rage he turns to his God. In the middle of his pain he turns to his God. David surrenders himself to his God and as Sid reveals, moves from terrible rage to a point where he recognizes his powerless in life. He is tired and weary but even as he recounts his place he says something powerful of his God. David says "They curse but You bless."

How amazing is prayer that we can move from deep resentment to gratitude. How amazing is scripture that it does not try to shy away from the people we can become when locked in anger, fear, and resentment. What a model indeed! It is a prayer that allows others to see that they are no different from even David. It points us in the direction of placing our burdens on God. Instead of us returning curse for curse as we may want to do at times it shifts the emphasis. It allows the other to continue to curse and trusts that God will bless.
 

It surprises me that in Romans, God will reward those who patiently do good and "seek for glory and honor and immortality"...interesting, because if they are seeking glory and honor and immortality, then aren't their motives "self-seeking," just like those who will be punished? Do our motives and beliefs matter, or only our practice?

I am also excited that Sid started a conversation about context. One reason for meditiating on "difficult" texts like these, at least for those of us who go by lectionaries, is that in church on Sundays, we are constantly hearing texts out of context, and we skip the selections that are difficult, and thus can receive a skewed picture.

One important thing to note about Psalm 109 is that the speaker is not taking action himself against his enemies, but rather is asking God to do so. Rading psalms such as this can be a healthy way for people to express anger.
 

The most shocking part about Psalm 109 to me is the part about none pitying his fatherless children. I've never experienced hatred that intense, but I think that shows how sheltered my life as a middle-class American has been.
 

I wonder why these readings do not find themselves in the lectionary. Are we that afraid to let people see the full spectrum of emotion, opinion that expresses itself in scripture?

Granted Rom 2:1 is difficult. If it is as layed out in Rom 2:1 there is much that God will judge me for on the day of wrath. There are many times I have missed the point and been self seeking rather than servant. The way I see it there is power in the question of my misconstrued righteousness. What I find interesting is that this lesson is the application of the Adultress story. Here however we are the crowd gathered around Christ. We are the one pushing the woman to the "Rabbi" challenging him to live out the law. Challenging him to stone her as proscribed by the law.

In Rom 2:1 the reader is the crowd. It is easy to condemn the pharisee's. They will be judged by Christians till the end of time as those idiots who did not get the point. Are we so different however?

In Rom the writings are their to convict us of our falicy of false righteousness. "Let the person with out sin cast the first stone." The result is that the crowd has just been judged as sinful. They have no recourse. They are guilty.

In Rom 2 we are guilty. The message is what will we do with that fact. I am encouraged by Rom in verse 7. Our response, may it become, "those who by patiently doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality." I pray today my deeds be good.
 

Saul was a devout Jew, who from early childhood, knew that God would judge everyone by their works. Paul was unable to give up that teaching in spite of himself. Even today it is difficult to find true acceptance of Grace.We saw that same expectation of final judgement in the Psalm passage. Paul knows that we are not to judge others as the first line clearly states. But he cannot resist having the judgers also judged in the end.
 

"For he will repay according to each one's deeds"--interesting to read this, especially after studying last night for the NT final today, including Letter of James and whether it contradicts Paul's teaching in Romans and Galatians. Our professor asserts that it's not contradictory; that James was clearing up a misunderstanding about the interpretation of Paul's teaching on grace. Works/deeds DO matter. "Each will be repaid according to his deeds"... So I'm in trouble because I think about things, and especially criticize things, more than I do them.
 

My reflection today revolves no so much around the individual texts but the connection between Rom 2:1 and Christ's response to the crowd who had gathered to stone the adultress. I think what triggered this connection is a combination of reading Rowan Williams and verse 2:3.

"3 Do you imagine, whoever you are, that when you judge those who do such things and yet do them yourself, you will escape the judgment of God?" Rowan Williams writes in Resurrection in effect that Jesus judgment is this radical acceptance. The judgement however convicts. In conviction the sinner recognizes his culpability. The sinner comes face to face with his violence (large or small). It is only at this point of self understanding can the sinner seek out the divine as on their own they are lost. So Jesus first brings judgment. I think of prodigal and his recognition of a life of dishonor. I think of the elder son and the admission of resentment. I think of the crowd about the adultress coming face to face with their violence. I think of the woman at Jesus feet face to face with her adultery. All must face their own selves. None are turned away. "Neither do I (the one who could but did not) condemn you."

As in the prodigal son, the story of the adultress reveals God's judgement in this amazing forgiveness and mercy. "Neither do I condemn you." ("and forgive us as we forgive those who trespass against us.")
_________

As a little side note if this line "Neither do I condemn you" comes from the mouth of Jesus then this is not some wise man or teacher. This points to either lunacy or divinity. I think of CS Lewis and his claim that either Jesus is a lunatic or God. There is no in between.

This
 

Per the comments on 109 -
While we're talking about putting verses in context, I struggle with the idea of David as a hero or role model. We've all talked about his issues with Bathsheba; it's one of the best known cases of adultery and murder in our tradition. And, frankly, I cannot admire a man who reacts the way he did to the situation with Amnon, Tamar, and Absalom - he turned a blind eye as his daughter was violated by his son (who happened to be the oldest), and when Amnon's younger brother, Absalom, tried to call his attention to the situation, Absalom was banished and silenced by the courts. In a case like that, I would be sorely tempted to start a popular revolution as well.
Knowing that all this was going on in David's courts, it's very hard for me to read verses where David whines about his critics. Corruption was rampant throughout his reign, it showed itself even within his own family, and yet instead of listening to his detractors and wrestling with how to truly make his own environment better fitted to the heart of God he was supposedly pursuing, the man asks that God strike down his enemies. Finally, David as someone weak and powerless, the "needy one" (v 31) simply is not a convincing picture.
I guess, for me, Psalm 109 shows how our self perception of our spiritual life can vary in the extreme to the perception of those around us; when David is trying to be Godly and humble, he comes across as immature, with an inability to acknowledge his own flaws.
In that way, instead of a role to mimic in the faith, it's an accurate picture of the types of things we say about our own spiritual lives that may or may not be verified by the actions around us.
And so, it ties in nicely with the Romans verse; David is most certainly passing judgment on his critics while ignoring his own role in the destructive forces in Israel. I do wish he'd been able to sit down and have a nice, long conversation with Paul about these issues. Then, maybe, there would have been fewer lives shed in ancient Israel.
 

I think Amy brings up a legitmate point. David is no angel. I think our Christian idea of sainthood becomes mixed with Israel's version of Hero.

It always amazes me that biblical hero's often are scoundrals.

Abraham- attempted patricide
Moses- murderer, coward, terrible speaker
Jacob- identity theft
Peter- coward
Paul- religious mercenary

I'm not defending bad behavior here. I'm not endorsing them and I would guess they may not either. They all were failures in the human sphere. They only find strength in God and that I think is the point. God seems to work through the meek and scoundral because not only does God change lives but these type of folks so reveal God in their midst.

Who else but God can be seen at work. If you start with characters who seem and demonstrate having it all together one might attribute the strength to the creature. When you take a train wreck and the train wreck rights itself the train and the community observing the train are more likely to understand where the power is coming from.