More on Meditative Poetry

The poem I posted on Saturday by Mary Sidney Herbert is an example of meditative poetry. As a paraphrase of Psalm 58, its purpose was to express biblical ideas using a contemporary style. Herbert simplified the Psalm by using word pictures that related to her audience’s culture. This technique (an example of mastering the metaphor) made her poem meaningful to her readers.

King David originally authored this Psalm, and the words he used are representative of his time and culture. For example, his first lines read: ‘Do you rulers indeed speak justly? Do you judge uprightly among men?’ David was only the second king of Israel. Before God had anointed Saul, his predecessor, the country’s rulers were called judges. Judges did not make new laws or institute new customs. Their primary responsibility was to interpret and apply the law of God to the affairs of the entire nation of Israel. Some of Israel’s greatest heroes had been judges (Gideon, Samson, Deborah), and the people of Israel must have identified very much with this type of rule. Though they now had a king rather of a judge, his responsibilities were not essentially different. Instead of creating laws, the king’s job was to obey the laws God had already given Israelites. The phrase ‘judge uprightly among men’ is accurately descriptive of the king’s perceived role. The language David used must have resonated with those who heard his Psalm.

Herbert’s version expresses the same idea, but in different words. ‘And call ye this to utter what is just/Ye who of justice hold the sovereign throne?’ In Elizabethan England, the populace’s perception of kingship was very different than that of the Israelites. Centuries of monarchy had developed the belief that the king was absolute sovereign over most areas of life. In the eyes of the people, the king certainly had a right to create laws, and the throne had become a powerful symbol. Herbert’s words ‘the sovereign throne’ convey to the reader the amazing responsibility associated with kingship during the Elizabethan age.

To modern Americans, who, as a rule, do not support kingship of any kind, neither version of this Psalm appears contemporary. However, Eugene Peterson, like Mary Sidney Herbert, paraphrased Psalm 58 in a way that speaks specifically to Americans of the 21^st century: ‘Is this any way to run a country? Is there an honest politician in the house?’ In our culture, the word ‘politician’ has replaced the word ‘king,’ and Peterson, recognizing this shift, has presented a modern interpretation that takes the transition into account.

This is both interesting and potentially controversial. I believe firmly in the verbal, plenary inspiration of Scripture, so correctly translating David’s exact words is important to me, even though they are representative of another culture. However, paraphrasing Bible passages makes a lot of intuitive sense. At this point, I look at books like Peterson’s The Message as useful tools, but certainly not as replacements for the Bible. What do you think?