Psalm 1
I have a particular zeal for Psalm 1. If this Psalm is not done well, it sets a bad tone for the rest of the Psalter.
[UPDATE: the OPC/URC committee has revised their selection in order to include “St. Petersburg” as well as “Meditation.” I am delighted to hear the news. I will not edit the following comments — but they should be read as objecting to the former proposal, not the current proposal! (April 15, 2014)]
I probably need to state up front that on Psalm 1 I have a strong objection to the current proposal in the OPC/URC project. The OPC Composition Subcommittee originally adopted the following text to “St. Petersburg,” but then, in discussion with the URC, the OPC Committee on Christian Education, replaced that text and tune with the Sing Psalms C.M. text set to “Arlington.” This post will argue that this is a serious mistake that should be corrected.
Text: 88 88 88 (Sing Psalms, 2003 – alt. MCPC, 2013)
1 How blest the man who does not walk
where wicked men would guide his feet,
who does not stand in sinners ways
nor sit upon the scorners’ seat.
2 The law of GOD is his delight,
his meditation day and night.
3 For he is like a growing tree
that’s planted by a flowing stream,
and in its season yields its fruit;
its leaves are always fresh and green.
In all to which he puts his mind
prosperity he’ll surely find.
4 Not so the wicked; they are like
the chaff the wind will blow away.
5 They will not in the judgment stand,
nor sinners with the righteous stay.
6 GOD knows the way the righteous go;
the wicked’s way he’ll overthrow.
Tune: St. Petersburg
Commentary
Throughout these notes, I will include comments about 1) the structure of the Psalm, 2) particular emphases of the translation, 3) the rationale behind the tune, and 4) any concluding comments.
Structure:
As we examined various texts for Psalm 1, we were initially attracted to a common meter text (the one used in the OPC/URC proposal), but became convinced that the text does not work well in the five or six stanza arrangement demanded by the CM text.
In our text we include the whole first sentence of the Psalm in the first stanza (verses 1-2). Then the second stanza covers verse 3 – the description of the fruitfulness and prosperity of the blessed man. The third stanza concludes the Psalm with the judgment against the wicked (verses 4-6).
Translation Notes:
With any metrical text, there are certain considerations that are important for “singing with understanding.”
Psalm 1 has a number of key words/phrases that are crucial to maintain in a metrical version.
In verse 1, there are three parallel verbs that should be retained:
“who walks not…nor stands…nor sits…”
Our 88.88.88 text says:
“who does not walk…who does not stand…nor sit…”
The CM text used in the OPC/URC proposal says:
“who turns away…who does not stand…or sit…”
“Turns away” does not convey the idea of walking. It is essential that Psalm 1 emphasize walking in the right way.
The theme of the “two ways” is at the heart of the Psalm. Therefore, I argue that any metrical translation should use the same English word to translate “derek” (way). There are three uses of “way” in verse 1 and verse 6 (2X):
the CM text says: “path…way…way”
the 88.88.88 text says: “way…way…way”
In addition, the CM text expands verse 2 with various elaborations. I realize that this is necessary sometimes to fit the requirements of meter. But the 88.88.88 text has no such need.
Likewise, “judgment” in the Hebrew of verse 5 is definite, and so should be rendered “the judgment” — with definite overtones of eschatological judgment in view.
I recognize that GOD is not as felicitous as LORD as a translation of “Yahweh,” but trying to get two syllables into those lines proved rather difficult – and the capitalization of GOD makes it very clear that the divine name is in view here.
Tune Notes:
St. Petersburg captures very nicely the pastoral setting of Psalm 1. The blessed man is not walking in the counsel of the wicked, but rather is a tree flourishing by streams of water — and so it is fitting that St. Petersburg has the feel of a stream winding through a meadow.
St. Petersburg is used with Psalm 1 in The Complete Book of Psalms for Singing (PCEA), Sing Psalms (FCS), and Sing to the Lord (RCNZ). It is also used in the 1990 Trinity Hymnal with hymns 88, 522 and 635.
Conclusion:
As I will often say in these comments, I don’t object to having alternate texts in the Psalter — but only if the better text is also available. Some tunes are so closely associated with particular Psalms that it would be cruel to eliminate them. Since Arlington and Meditation are both CM tunes, it would be easy enough to use Meditation with a CM text, and include a note saying, “May also be sung to Arlington”
For my sermon on Psalm 1, please see http://peterwallace.org/sermons/Ps01.htm
– Peter J. Wallace
Thanks for sharing your helpful thoughts on the prosody of this Psalm! I don’t have access to the OPC/URC proposal, but I like what you’ve done.
I agree with you, that we should be consistent in our translation of derek as “way” (too bad that neither selection of 1 in the Book of Psalms for Worship was able to do this). Would you also agree that we should also be consistent in our translation of Yehgeh (meditates/murmer) which occurs also in Psalm 2:1?
I wonder if the last line could be improved:
“the wicked’s way he’ll overthrow.” >> “but perish will the wicked’s way.”
It’s also a shame that your version doesn’t capture the dynamic of the singular man and the assembly of the righteous (v. 5, ESV “congregation of the righteous”) which the wicked cannot enter. Of course, I take the singular righteous man to be preeminently Christ. It’s only in union with Him that we can sing these words!
Anyway, thanks again for posting this! May the Lord bless you for making this study available for others to profit from!
Joe,
Thank you for your comments.
And thank you for pointing out some of the challenges of metrical translation! It would be great if we could figure out a way to maintain translation consistency throughout the Psalter. The challenge is that often a Hebrew word has a range of meaning that does not precisely match the range of meanings of any single English word. So, for instance, hegeh — which means a low rumble or growl — appears 10 times in the Psalms. The ESV translates it “meditate” (Psalm 1:2, 63:6, 77:12, 143:5), “proclaim” (Psalm 35:28), “talk” (Psalm 71:24), “make a sound” (Psalm 115:7), and “plot” (Psalm 2:1). The final usage is 38:12, where earlier translations used “plot” — but the ESV renders hegeh as “meditate treachery.” It’s not clear to me that it is either possible (or desirable) to translate the word the same in every case. I realize that there is an intentional link between Psalms 1 and 2 — and that the Psalmist is making an intentional contrast between the prosperous “hegeh” of the blessed man, and the vain “hegeh” of the nations — but it is not obvious to me what English word corresponds exactly to both activities. Do you have a suggestion? It would be especially helpful if your suggestion would fit the constraints of the meter! 🙂
But while we could not figure out how to get the word “congregation” in verse 5, I must plead “not guilty” to the charge of erasing the singular/assembly distinction. Did you not notice the verb in verse 6! The righteous are clearly identified as plural — since the singular would take the verb “goes,” whereas we speak of “the way the righteous go.”
And finally, I must admit that I cringe at the “Yoda-speak” of your proposed improvement. I agree that poetry releases us from the constraints of English (and Hebrew) prose, and so it is true that “but perish will the wicked’s way” is undoubtedly more elegant poetry than “the wicked’s way he’ll overthrow.” But elegance sometimes gets in the way of understanding — and “singing with understanding” was one of our central goals. Also, at the moment, the inflection of the line focuses on “way” and “overthrow” — whereas your proposal turns the focus to “will” and “wicked.”
If you have more comments on this — or other Psalms — I look forward to hearing from you!
Blessings,
Peter
Hi Peter,
Yes, I recognize the difficulty of working across languages (and in meter to further complicate things!). I think a word that could work in both cases is “mutter”. It has the drawback in Psalm 1 of having negative connotation (meditating on God’s Law sound’s better than muttering it), yet “mutter” also has the advantage that it captures the verbalization that the Hebrew word implies. Some English commentators have presumed because of “meditation” that Psalm 1 is intended to make all of the Psalms silent ponderings — but the Hebrew verb itself almost always implies making sound, why not singing when it precedes a book of songs?! [Michael Lefebvre’s Singing the Songs of Jesus has some helpful discussion of this very issue]. Mutter would also work perfectly well in the context of Psalm 2. That said, I still haven’t thought how it would fit in the meter.
I didn’t notice the plural verb – nice trick! I think I like it!
Lastly, cringe too at yoda speak do I also. I only like to preserve “perish” here because it is one of the prominent links between Psalm 1 and 112 (not to mention 2:12). Notice “blessed” and “perish” repeat at the head and foot of the respective Psalms (except for the hallel introducing Psalm 112).
Almost every Psalter I’ve come across had sought the best translation of each Psalm individually, which I don’t have a problem with. Each Psalm is a literary composition in itself. I’ve just been thinking more of how we haven’t received the Psalms individually, but canonically we’ve received them as a book (Jesus and the Apostles called it the Book of Psalms, for crying out loud! Luke 20:42, Acts 1:20). All that to say that I’m pondering more what a singable accurate translation would be that tried to preserve the Psalms in their Psalter context. Printing the Super/Subscriptions would be a good first step. Trying to preserve parallels between Psalms by retaining phrases, even similar tunes, would be another. Of course, I understand that that’s probably not a primary goal for the OPC/URC Psalter Hymnal.
Again, I really appreciate your commentary on these Psalms. If anything I have greater appreciation for the talents and gifts of others in the Church which I do not possess. The Lord’s blessings to you!