Verse-by-Verse Bible Commentary
Psalms 52:9

Clarke's Commentary

Verse Psalms 52:9. I will praise thee for ever — Because I know that all my good comes from thee; therefore, will I ever praise thee for that good.

I will wait on thy name — I will expect all my blessings from the all-sufficient Jehovah, who is eternal and unchangeable.

It is good before thy saints. — It is right that I should expect a continuation of thy blessings by uniting with thy saints in using thy ordinances. Thus I shall wait.

ANALYSIS OF THE FIFTY-SECOND PSALM

There are three parts in this Psalm: -

I. An invective against Doeg, and a prediction of his fall, Psalms 52:1-5.

II. The comfort which God's people should take in this, Psalms 52:6-7.

III. The security and flourishing state of those who trust in Good, and the psalmist's thanks for it, Psalms 52:8-9.

I. David begins with an abrupt apostrophe to Doeg: "Why boastest thou thyself in mischief, thou mighty man?" And answers that this boasting was but vain; because the goodness of God endureth continually. This was sufficient to quiet all those who might be afraid of his boasting. Having given a general character of this man, as having a delight in mischief, he enters into particulars; and especially he considers the bad use he made of his tongue.

1. Thy tongue deviseth mischief, like a razor working deceitfully. Perhaps there may be here a reference to a case where a man, employed to take off or trim the beard, took that opportunity to cut the throat of his employer. In this manner had Doeg often acted; while pretending by his tongue to favour, he used it in a deceitful way to ruin the character of another.

2. "Thou lovest evil more than good:" his wickedness was habitual; he loved it.

3. "Thou lovest lying more than righteousness:" he was an enemy to the truth, and by lies and flatteries a destroyer of good men.

4. This is expressed more fully in the next verse: "Thou lovest all deceitful words, O thou false tongue!" he was all tongue; a man of words: and these the most deceitful and injurious.

This is his character; and now David foretells his fall and destruction, which he amplifies by a congeries of words. 1. "God shall likewise destroy thee for ever." 2. "He shall take thee away." 3. "He shall pluck thee out of thy dwelling place." 4. "He shall root thee out of the land of the living." See the notes.

II. Then follows how God's people should be affected by Doeg's fall.

1. "The righteous shall see it and fear:" they shall reverence God more than formerly, as taking vengeance on this singularly wicked man.

2. They shall laugh at him, using this bitter sarcasm, "Lo, this is the man that made not God his strength," c. he trusted in his gold more than in his God.

III. But such a fearful end shall not fall on any good man: while the wicked is plucked up from the roots, the righteous shall flourish like a healthy olive-tree.

1. "As for me, I am like the green olive-tree;" ever fruitful and flourishing.

2. I am planted in the house of the Lord; and derive all my nourishment from him; through his ordinances.

3. The olive is perhaps one of the most useful trees in the world. Its fruit and its oil are of great use to the inhabitants of those countries where the olive is cultivated; and are transported to most parts of the world, where the culture of the olive is unknown.

4. The reason why he shall be like the olive: his faith in God: "I trust in the mercy of God for ever."

Hence, the psalmist's conclusion is full of confidence: -

1. "I will praise thee for ever, because thou hast done it."

2. "I will wait on thy name:" I will continue to use those means by which thou communicatest thy grace to the soul.

3. I shall do this because it is my duty, and because it is right in the sight of thy people: "For it is good before thy saints."

Bridgeway Bible Commentary

Psalms 52-54 Those who act treacherously

When David fled from Saul he obtained urgently needed provisions from the priests at Nob (1 Samuel 21:1-9). He was seen by Doeg, an Edomite and a servant of Saul, who reported the matter to Saul. In a typical fit of mad vengeance, Saul ordered Doeg to kill all the priests at Nob, something that Doeg was very willing to do (1 Samuel 22:6-23). On hearing of Doeg’s butchery, David wrote a poem against him, which has been preserved in the Bible as Psalms 52:0 (see heading).

David denounces Doeg for his pride, treachery and hatred of all that is good (52:1-4). Doeg will surely meet a terrible death, which good people will recognize as a just punishment from God (5-7). His impending ruin is in contrast to the fruitfulness of the believer, who lives his life in the fellowship of God and his people (8-9).

Psalms 53:0 is a repetition of Psalms 14:0 with minor adjustments. The purpose in repeating it here was probably to add further comment on the character of Doeg described in the previous psalm. For notes on the psalm see commentary on Psalms 14:0.

Psalms 54:0 also belongs to the time of David’s flight from Saul. It was written against the people of the town of Ziph, who betrayed David to Saul when they found that he was hiding in the wooded hills nearby (1 Samuel 23:19-24). David prays to God to save him and punish his enemies (54:1-5). Confident that God will hear him, he looks forward to the day when he can show his gratitude to God by sacrifice (6-7).

Coffman's Commentaries on the Bible

THREE MARKS OF DAVID’S GRATITUDE

“But as for me I am like a green olive tree in the house of God: I trust in the lovingkindness of God forever and ever. I will give thanks forever, because thou hast done it; And I will hope in thy name, for it is good, in the presence of thy saints.”

“A green olive tree in the house of God” Some scholars have questioned whether or not olive trees were actually planted upon the tabernacle grounds, or later upon the temple grounds; but the great likelihood is that they were indeed planted there. This verse seems to say as much.

“Herodotus tells us that there was an abundance of trees in the courts of Egyptian temples; and till this day on the site of the ancient temple there are a number of magnificent cypress, olive, and lemon trees.”Ibid. As a metaphor of the safety of God’s child, such a tree was very appropriate. It would have been protected from vandalism and would have received the very best of care.

As a consequence of God’s wonderful blessing, in spite of Doeg’s shameful deeds, David makes three pledges to God in these final two verses.

“I trust in the lovingkindness of God” (Psalms 52:8).

“I will give thee thanks forever” (Psalms 52:9).

“I will hope… in the presence of thy saints” (Psalms 52:9).

We have often observed that the word “lovingkindness” is almost a Davidic signature in the psalms attributed to him.

As McCaw wrote, “The three marks of David’s reaction are: (1) his gratitude that God had intervened for him, (2) a testimony to the loveliness of God’s character, and (3) a projected fellowship with God’s people.”The New Bible Commentary, Revised, p. 484.

Barnes' Notes on the Whole Bible

I will praise thee forever, beause thou hast done it - Because thou art the source of my safety. The fact that I have been delivered from the designs of Saul, and saved from the efforts of Doeg to betray me, is to be traced wholly to thee. It has been ordered by thy providence that the purposes alike of Doeg and of Saul have been defeated, and I am still safe.

And I will wait on thy name - That is, I will wait on “thee;” the name being often put for the person himself: Psalms 20:1; Psalms 69:30; Proverbs 18:10; Isaiah 59:19. The language used here means that he would trust in God, or confide in him. All his expectation and hope would be in him. There are two ideas essentially in the language:

(1) the expression of a sense of “dependence” on God, as if the only ground of trust was in him;

(2) a willingness to “await” his interposition at all times; a belief that, however long such an interposition might be delayed, God “would” interfere at the proper time to bring deliverance; and a purpose calmly and patiently to look to him until the time of deliverance should come. Compare Psalms 25:3, Psalms 25:5,Psalms 25:21; Psalms 27:14; Psalms 37:7, Psalms 37:9,Psalms 37:34; Psalms 69:3; Isaiah 8:17; Isaiah 40:31.

For it is good before thy saints - God is good; and I will confess it before his “saints.” His mercy has been so marked, that a public acknowledgment of it is proper; and before his assembled people I will declare what he has done for me. So signal an act of mercy, an interposition so suited to illustrate the character of God, demands more than a private acknowledgment, and I will render him public praise. The same idea occurs in Psalms 22:25; Psalms 35:18; Psalms 111:1; Isaiah 38:20. The general thought is, that for great and special mercies it is proper to render special praise to God before his assembled people. It is not that we are to obtrude our private affairs upon the public eye or the public ear; it is not that mercies shown to us have any particular claim to the attention of our fellow-men, but it is that such interpositions illustrate the character of God, and that they may constitute an argument before the world in favor of his benevolent and merciful character. Among the “saints” there is a common bond of union - a common interest in all that pertains to each other; and when special mercy is shown to anyone of the great brotherhood, it is proper that all should join in the thanksgiving, and render praise to God.

The importance of the subject considered in this psalm - the fact that it is not often referred to in books on moral science, or even in sermons, - and the fact that it involves many points of practical difficulty in the conversation between man and man in the various relations of life - may justify at the close of an exposition of this psalm a consideration of the general question about the morality of giving “information,” or, in general, the character of the “informer.” Such a departure from the usual method adopted in works designed to be expository would not be ordinarily proper, since it would swell such works beyond reasonable dimensions; but perhaps it may be admitted in a single instance.

In what cases is it our duty to give information which may be in our possession about the conduct of others; and in what cases does it become a moral wrong or a crime to do it?

This is a question of much importance in respect to our own conduct, and often of much difficulty in its solution. It may not be possible to answer all the inquiries which might be made on this subject, or to lay down principles of undoubted plainness which would be applicable to every case which might occur, but a few general principles may be suggested.

The question is one which may occur at any time, and in any situation of life - Is it never right to give such information? Are we never bound to do it? Are there no circumstances in which it is proper that it should be voluntary? Are there any situations in which we are exempt by established customs or laws from giving such information? Are there any in which we are bound, by the obligations of conscience, not to give such information, whatever may be the penalty? Where and when does guilt begin or end in our volunteering to give information of the conduct or the concealments of others?

These questions often come with much perplexity before the mind of an ingenuous schoolboy, who would desire to do right, and who yet has so much honor that he desires to escape the guilt and the reproach of being a “tell-tale.” They are questions which occur to a lawyer (or, rather, which “did” occur before the general principle, which I will soon advert to, had been settled by the courts), in regard to the knowledge of which he has been put in possession under the confidential relation of advocate and client. They are questions which may occur to a clergyman, either in respect to the confidential disclosures made at the confessional of the Catholic priest, or in respect to the confidential statements of the true penitent made to a Protestant pastor, in order that spiritual counsel may be obtained to give relief to a burdened conscience. They are questions which it was necessary should be settled in regard to a fugitive from justice, who seeks protection under the roof of a friend or a stranger.

They are questions respecting refugees from oppression in foreign lands - suggesting the inquiry whether they shall be welcomed, or whether there shall be any law by which they shall, on demand, be restored to the dominion of a tyrant. They are questions which the conscience will ask, and does ask, about those who make their escape from slavery, who apply to us for aid in securing their liberty, and who seek an asylum beneath our roof; questions whether the law of God requires or permits us to render any active assistance in making known the place of their refuge, and returning them to bondage. When, and in what cases, if any, is a man bound to give information in such circumstances as these? It is to be admitted that cases may occur, in regard to these questions, in which there would be great difficulty in determining what are the exact limits of duty, and writers on the subject of morals have not laid down such clear rules as would leave the mind perfectly free from doubt, or be sufficient to guide us on all these points. It will be admitted, also, that some of them are questions of much difficulty, and where instruction would be desirable.

Much may be learned, in regard to the proper estimate of human conduct among people, from the “language” which they employ - language which, in its very structure, often conveys their sentiments from age to age. The ideas of people on many of the subjects of morals, in respect to that which is honorable or dishonorable, right or wrong, manly or mean, became thus “imbedded” - I might almost say “fossilized” - in their modes of speech. Language, in its very structure, thus carries down to future times the sentiments cherished in regard to the morality of actions - as the fossil remains that are beneath the surface of the earth, in the strata of the rocks, bring to us the forms of ancient types of animals, and ferns, and palms, of which there are now no living specimens on the globe. They who have studied Dean Trench’s Treatise on “Words” will recollect how this idea is illustrated in that remarkable work; how, without any other information about the views of people in other times, the very “words” which they employed, and which have been transmitted to us, convey to us the estimate which was formed in past ages in regard to the moral quality of an action, as proper or improper - as honorable or dishonorable - as conformed to the noble principles of our nature, or the reverse.

As illustrating the general sentiments of mankind in this respect, I will select “two” words as specimens of many which might be selected, and as words which people have been agreed in applying to some of the acts referred to in the questions of difficulty that I have just mentioned, and which may enable us to do something in determining the morality of an action, so far as those words, in their just application to the subject, indicate the judgment of mankind.

One of these is the word “meanness” - a word which a schoolboy would be most “likely” to apply to the act of a tell-tale or an informer, and which we instinctively apply to numerous actions in more advanced periods of life, and which serves to mark the judgment of mankind in regard to certain kinds of conduct. The “idea” in such a case is not so much the “guilt” or the “criminality” of the act considered as a violation of law, as it is that of being opposed to just notions of “honor,” or indicating a base, low, sordid, grovelling spirits - “lowness of mind, want of dignity and elevation; want of honor.” (Webster)

The other word is “sycophant.” The Athenians had a law prohibiting the exportation of figs. This law, of course, had a penalty, and it was a matter of importance to the magistrate to ascertain who had been guilty of violating it. It suggested, also, a method of securing the favor of such a magistrate, and perhaps of obtaining a reward, by giving “information” of those who had been guilty of violating the law. From these two words - the Greek word “fig,” and the Greek word to “show,” or to “discover,” we have derived the word “sycophant;” and this word has come down from the Greeks, and through the long tract of ages intervening between its first use in Athens to the present time, always bearing in every age the original idea imbedded in the word, as the old fossil that is now dug up bears the form of the fern, the leaf, the worm, or the shell that was imbedded there perhaps million of ages ago. As such a man would be “likely” to be mean, and fawning, and flattering, so the word has come to describe always a parasite; a mean flatterer; a flatterer of princes and great men; and hence it is, and would be applied as one of the words indicating the sense of mankind in regard to a “tale-bearer,” or an “informer.”

Words like these indicate the general judgment of mankind on such conduct as that referred to in the psalm before us. Of course, to what particular “actions” of the kind they are properly applicable, would be another point; they are referred to here only as indicating the general judgment of mankind in regard to certain kinds of conduct, and to show how careful people are, in their very language, to express their permanent approbation of that which is “honorable” and “right,” and their detestation of that which is “dishonorable” and “wrong.”

Let us now consider more particularly the subject with respect to “duty,” and to “criminality.” The question is, whether we can find any eases where it is “right” - where it is our duty to give such information; or, in what eases, if any, it is right; and in what cases it is malignant, guilty, wrong. The points to be considered are:

(1) When it is right, or when it may be demanded that we should give information of another; and

(2) When it becomes guilt.

(1) When it is right, or when it may be demanded of us.

(a) It is to be admitted that there are cases in which the interests of justice demand that people should be “required” to give information of others; or, there are cases where the courts have a right to summon us, to put us upon our oath, and to demand the information which may be in our possession. The courts constantly act on this; and the interests of justice could not be promoted, nor could a cause ever be determined, without exercising this right. If all people were bound in conscience to witchold information simply because they have it in their possession, or because of the mode in which they came in possession of it - or if they witcheld it from mere stubbornness and obstinacy - all the departments of justice must stand still, and the officers of justice might be discharged, since it can neither be presumed that “they” would possess all the knowledge necessary to the administration of justice themselves, nor would the law allow them to act on it if they did.

The law never presumes that a judge is to decide a case from a knowledge of the facts in his own possession, or simply because “he knows what was done in the case.” The ultimate decision must be made in view of testimony given, not of knowledge “possessed.” In most cases, however, there is no difficulty on this point. There is no necessary violation of confidence in giving this information. There have been no improper means used to obtain it. There has been only an observation of that which any other man might have seen. There has been no baseness in “spying” out what was done. There has been no “sycophantic” purpose; there is no voluntariness in betraying what we know; there is no dishonorableness in divulging what “happened” to be known to us. A man may “regret” that he witnessed the act of crime, but he does not blame himself for it; he may feel “pained” that his testimony may consign another man to the gallows, but he does not deem it dishonorable, for he has no mean purpose in it, and the interests of justice demand it.

(b) It is an admitted principle that one employed as counsel in a case - a lawyer - shall “not” be required to give up information which may be in his possession as counsel; information which has been entrusted to him by his client. It is held essential to the interests of justice, that whatever is thus communicated to a professional adviser shall be regarded by the court as strictly confidential, and that the counsel incurs no blame if he does “not” give information on the subject; or, in other words, the true interests of justice do not demand, and the principles of honor will not admit, that he should betray the man who has entrusted his cause to him. How far a man, governed by a good conscience, and by the principles of honor, may undertake a cause which, from the statements of his client in the beginning, he may regard as doubtful, or where in the progress of the case he may become sure that his client is guilty, is a point which does not come under the present inquiry, and which may, in fact, be in some respects a question of difficult solution. It must still, however, even in such a case, be held that he cannot be required to give the information in his possession, and every principle of honor or of right would be understood to be violated, if, abandoning the case, he should become a voluntary “informer.”

(c) In like manner, it is understood that the law does not require a juryman to give voluntary “information” of what may be within his own knowledge in the case that may be submitted for trial. The extent of his oath and his obligation is that he shall give a verdict according to the testimony submitted under the proper forms of law. He may not “go back” of that, and found his opinion in the verdict on any private knowledge which he may have in his own possession, and which has not, under the proper forms of law, been laid before the court; nor may what he himself may have seen and heard enter at all into his verdict, or influence it in any manner, unless it has been submitted with the other testimony in the case to the court. The verdict is to be based on evidence “given;” not on what he “has seen.” An accused man has a right to demand that “all” that shall bear on the sentence in the case - “all” that shall enter into the verdict - shall be submitted as testimony, under the solemnities of an oath, and with all proper opportunities of crossexamination, and of rebutting it by counter testimony. A juryman may, indeed, be called as a witness in a case. But then he is to be sworn and examined as any other witness, and when he comes to unite with others in making up the verdict, he is to allow to enter into that verdict “only” that which is in possession of all the members of the jury, and he is not to permit “any” knowledge which he may have, which was “not” obtained from him in giving testimony, to influence his own judgment in the case.

(d) There are cases, however, in which things entrusted to one as a secret, or in confidence, may be required to be given up. Such cases may occur in a matter of private friendship, or in a case of professional confidence.

In the case of a Presbyterian clergyman, it has been held that he was bound to submit a letter to the court which had been addressed to him by the accused as her pastor, and which was supposed to contain important disclosures in regard to her criminality. In this case, however, the disclosure was not originally made by the pastor; nor was the fact of the existence of such a letter made known by him. The fact that such a letter had been sent to him, was stated by the party herself; and the court, having this knowledge of it, “demanded” its production in court. It was submitted after taking legal advice, and the community justified the conduct of the pastor. So the principle is regarded as well settled that a minister of religion may be required to disclose what has been communicated to him, whether at the “confessional,” or as a pastor, which may be necessary to establish the guilt of a party; and that the fact that it had been communicated in confidence, and for spiritual advice, does not constitute a reason for refusing to disclose it.

(2) But the point before us relates rather to the inquiry when the act of giving such information becomes “guilt,” or in what circumstances it is forbidden and wrong.

Perhaps all that need to be said on this point can be reduced to three heads: when it is for base purposes; when the innocent are betrayed; and when professional confidence is violated. The illustration of these points, after what has been said, need not detain us long.

First. When it is for base purposes. This would include all those cases where it is for gain; where it is to secure favor; and where it is from envy, malice, spite, or revenge. The case of Doeg was, manifestly, an instance of this kind, where the motive was not that of promoting public justice, or preserving the peace of the realm, but where it was to ingratiate himself into the favor of Saul, and secure his own influence at court. The parallel case of the Ziphims Psalms 54:1-7 was another instance of this kind, where, so far as the narrative goes, it is supposable that the only motive was to obtain the favor of Saul, or to secure a reward, by betraying an innocent and a persecuted man who had fled to them for a secure retreat. The case of Judas Iscariot was another instance of this kind. He betrayed his Saviour; he agreed, for a paltry reward, to disclose his place of usual retreat - a place to which he had resorted so often for prayer, that Judas knew that he could be found there.

It was for no wrong done to him. It was from no regard to public peace or justice. It was not because he even supposed the Saviour to be guilty. He knew that he was innocent. He even himself confessed this in the most solemn manner, and in the very presence of those with whom he had made the infamous bargain - and with just such a result as the mean and the wicked must always expect, when those for whom they have performed a mean and wicked act have no further use for them. such, also, is the case of the “sycophant.” That a man might, in some circumstances, give information about the exportation of “figs” contrary to law, or might even be required to do it, may be true; but it was equally true that it was not commonly done for any patriotic or honorable ends, but from the most base and ignoble motives; and hence, the sense of mankind in regard to the nature of the transaction has been perpetuated in the world itself. So, in a school, there is often no better motive than envy, or rivalship, or malice, or a desire to obtain favor or reward, when information is given by one school-boy of another; and hence, the contempt and scorn with which a boy who acts under the influence of these motives is always regarded - emblem of what he is likely to meet in all his subsequent life.

Second. The innocent are never robe betrayed. The divine law pertaining to this seems to be perfectly plain, and the principles of that law are such as to commend themselves to the consciences of all mankind. Thus, Isaiah 16:3-4, “Take counsel, execute judgment; make thy shadow as the night in the midst of the noonday; hide the outcasts; bewray not him that wandereth. Let mine outcasts dwell with thee, Moab; be thou a covert to them from the face of the spoiler.” Also in Deuteronomy 23:15-16, “Thou shalt not deliver unto his master the servant which is escaped from his master unto thee: he shall dwell with thee, even among you, in that place which he shall choose in one of thy gates, where it liketh him best: thou shalt not oppress him.”

On these passages I remark:

1. That they are settled principles of the law of God. There is no ambiguity in them. They have not been repealed. They are, therefore, still binding, and extend to all cases pertaining to the innocent and the oppressed.

2. They accord with the convictions of the human mind - the deep-seated principles which God has laid in our very being, as designed to guide us in our treatment of others.

3. They accord with some of the highest principles of self-sacrifice as illustrated in history - the noblest exhibitions of human nature in giving an asylum to the oppressed and the wronged; instances where life has been perilled, or even given up, rather than that the persecuted, the innocent, and the wronged, should be surrendered or betrayed. How often, in the history of the church has life been thus endangered, because a refuge and a shelter was furnished to the persecuted Christian - the poor outcast, driven from his home under oppressive laws! How honorable have people esteemed such acts to be! How illustrious is the example of those who have at all hazards opened their arms to receive the oppressed, and to welcome the persecuted and the wronged! In the year 1685, by the Revocation of the Edict of Nantz, eight hundred thousand professed followers of the Saviour - Huguenots - were driven from their homes and their country, and compelled to seek safety by flight to other lands.

In their own country, fire and the sword spread desolation everywhere, and the voice of wailing filled the land. Those who could flee, did flee. The best people of France - those of noblest blood - fled in every direction, and sought a refuge in other countries. They fled - carrying with them not only the purest form and the best spirit of religion, but the best knowledge of the arts, to all the surrounding nations. Belgium, Holland, England, Scotland, Switzerland, opened their arms to welcome the fugitives. Our own country welcomed them - then, as now, an asylum for the oppressed. In every part of our land they found a home. Thousands of the noblest spirits - the best people of the South and the North, were composed of these exiles and wanderers. But suppose the world had been barred against them. Suppose they had been driven back again to their native land, poor persecuted men and women returned to suffering and to death. How justly mankind would have execrated such an act!

The same principles are applicable to the fugitive from slavery. Indeed, one of the texts quoted relates to this very point, and is designed to guide people on this subject in all ages and in all lands. “Thou shalt not deliver unto his master the servant which is escaped from his master unto thee.” No law could possibly be more explicit; none could be more humane, just, or proper; and consequently all those provisions in human laws which require people to aid in delivering up such fugitives are violations of the law of God - have no binding obligation on the conscience - and are, at all hazards, to be disobeyed. Acts 5:29; Acts 4:19.

Third. Professional confidence is not to be betrayed. We have seen, in the remarks before made, that those who are employed as counselors in the courts, cannot be required to communicate facts which are stated to them by their clients, but that confidential communications made to others may be demanded in promoting the interests of justice. The point now, however, relates only to the cases where professional confidence is voluntarily violated, or where knowledge thus obtained is made use of in a manner which cannot be sanctioned either by the principles of honor or religion. Two such instances may be referred to as illustrations:

(a) One occurs when a clergyman, to whom such knowledge is imparted as a clergyman for spiritual advice, instruction, or comfort, abuses the trust reposed in him, by making use of that information for any other purpose whatever. It is entrusted to him for that purpose alone. It is committed to him as a man of honor. The secret is lodged with him, with the implied understanding that it is there to remain, and to be employed only for that purpose. Whether at the “confessional” of the Roman Catholic, or whether made in the confidence reposed in a Protestant pastor, the principle is the same. Whatever advantage may be taken of that secret for the promotion of any other ends; whatever object the minister of religion may propose to secure, based on the fact that he is in possession of it; whatever influence he may choose to exert, founded on the assumption that he could divulge it; whatever statement he may make in regard to such a person - based on the fact that he is in possession of knowledge which he has, but which he is not at liberty to communicate - and designed to injure the person; whatever use he may make of it as enabling him to form an estimate for his own purposes of what occurs in a family; or, in general, whatever communication he may make of it, of any kind (except under process of law, and because the law demands it), is to be regarded as a betrayal of professional confidence. The interests of religion require that a pastor should be regarded as among the most faithful of confidential friends; and no people, or class of people, should be placed in such circumstances that they may, at the “confessional,” or in any other way, have the means of arriving at secrets which may be employed for any purposes of their own whatever.

(b) It is a breach of professional confidence when a lawyer is entrusted with knowledge in one case by a client, which, by being employed in another case, and on another occasion, he uses against him. The secret, whatever it may be, which is entrusted to him by a client, is for that case alone; and is, to all intents, to die when that case is determined. It is dishonorable in any way for him to engage as counsel for another party against his former client when, by even the remotest possibility, the knowledge obtained in the former occurrence could come as an element in the determination of the case, or could be made use of to the advantage of his new client. Every sentiment of honesty and honor demands that if there is a possibility of this, or if there would be the remotest temptation of the kind, he should at once promptly and firmly decline to engage against his former client.

In human nature there are two classes of propensities or principles: those which are generous, magnanimous, gentle, kind, benevolent, large-hearted, humane, noble; and those which are low, grovelling, sordid, sycophantic, mean, ignoble.

Though man is destitute of holiness, and though, as I believe, not one or all of these things which I have referred to as generous and noble can by cultivation become true religion, or constitute, by mere development, what is needful to secure the salvation of the soul, yet they are to be cultivated, for they are invaluable in society, and necessary to the happiness and the progress of mankind. On these, more than on most other things, the happiness of families, and the welfare of the world depend; and whatever may be our views of the necessity and value of religion, we are not required to undervalue “the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit,” or those virtues which we connect, in our apprehensions, with that which is manly and honorable, and which tend to elevate and ennoble the race.

Christianity has, if I may so express it, a “natural affinity” for one class of these propensities; it has none for the other. It, too, is generous, humane, gentle, kind, benevolent, noble; it blends easily with these tilings when it finds them in human nature; and it produces them in the soul which is fully under its influence, where they did not exist before. It has no more affinity for that which is mean, ignoble, morose, sycophantic, than it has for profanity or falsehood, for dishonesty or fraud, for licentiousness or ambition.

That true religion may be found in hearts where these virtues, so generous and noble, are not developed, or where there is not a little that dishonors religion as not large, and liberal, and courteous, and gentlemanly, it is, perhaps, impossible to deny mean, so sycophantic, so narrow, so sour, and so morose, that a large part of the work of sanctification seems to be reserved for the close of life - for that mysterious and unexplained process by which all who are redeemed are made perfect when they pass “through the valley of the shadow of death.” But though there may be religion in such a case, it is among the lowest forms of piety. What is mean, ignoble, and narrow, is no part of the Christian religion, and can never be transmuted into it.

There has come down to us as the result of the progress of civilization in this world, and with the highest approbation of mankind, a class of virtues connected with the ideas of honor and honorableness. That the sentiment of honor has been abused among people; that an attempt has been made to set it up as the governing principle in cases where conscience should rule; that in doing this a code has been established which, in many respects, is a departure from the rules of morality, there can be no doubt; - but still there are just principles of honor which Christianity does not disdain; which are to be incorporated into our principles of religion, and which we are to endeavor to instil into the hearts of our children. Whatever there is in the world that is “true, and honest, and just, and pure, and lovely, and of good report;” whatever belongs to the name of “virtue,” and whatever deserves “praise,” is to be blended with our religion, constituting our idea of a Christian man.

It is the blending of these things - the union of Christian principle with what is noble, and manly, and generous, and humane - which, in any case, entitles to the highest appellation that can be given to any of our race - that of the christian gentleman.

Calvin's Commentary on the Bible

9.I will praise thee, etc. He concludes the psalm with thanksgiving, and shows that he is sincere in this, by the special acknowledgement which he makes of the fact that this had been the work of God. Such is the corruption of the human heart, that out of a hundred who profess gratitude to God with their lips, scarcely one man seriously reflects upon the benefits which he has received as coming from his hand. David declares, therefore, that it was entirely owing to the divine protection that he had escaped from the treachery of Doeg, and from all his subsequent dangers, and promises to retain a grateful sense of it throughout the whole of his life. There is no religious duty in which it does not become us to manifest a spirit of perseverance; but we need to be especially enjoined to it in the duty of thanksgiving, disposed as we are so speedily to forget our mercies, and occasionally to imagine that the gratitude of a few days is a sufficient tribute for benefits which deserve to be kept in everlasting remembrance. He speaks of joining the exercise of hope with that of gratitude; for to wait on the name of God is synonymous with patiently expecting his mercy even when there is least appearance of its being granted, and trusting in his word, whatever delays there may be in the fulfillment of it. He encourages himself in the belief that his hope will not be vain, by reflecting that the name of God is good before his saints Some read, because it is good before thy saints; that is, to hope in the divine name, (Psalms 118:8.) But the other reading appears to me to be the most simple and natural, expressing the truth, that God will not frustrate the expectations of his people, because his goodness towards them is always conspicuous. The name of God may be detested by the wicked, and the very sound of it be sufficient to strike terror into their hearts; but David asserts it to be a sweet name in the experience of all his people. They are here called his meek ones, because, as I have remarked in commenting upon Psalms 16:3, they reflect in their character the kindness and beneficence of their Father in heaven.

Smith's Bible Commentary

Shall we turn now in our Bibles to Psalms 51:1-19 .

David is surely one of the most outstanding characters of the Old Testament. He was greatly hated and greatly loved. He had the capacity to inspire tremendous emotions in people, on both ends of the spectrum. He is always talking about his enemies that are trying to do him in. But yet, there was a great number of people who really followed David with a great devotion. David was called a man after God's own heart. And this appellation was given to David, not because he was sinless, but because his heart was always open towards God. Pliable. God could work with David. God could deal with him. When David was wrong, God could deal with him. Inasmuch as none of us are sinless too, it is important that God is able to deal with us when we are in our faults, when we are in our sins, that we be open to the dealings of God.

The fifty-first psalm has as its background God's dealing with David concerning his sin. For David, one day while on his roof, which over there they have flat roofs, and they have their gardens and couches and hammocks and all out on their roofs. As he was walking on his rooftop, he spied over on a neighboring roof a beautiful lady bathing. And the lust of David's flesh got the better of him. He sent a message to her to come on over. She responded, and as the result of their encounter, she became pregnant. David tried to cover it by having her husband come home from the service for a while. But he did not cooperate in that he did not go home to be with his wife during his leave of absence from active duty. So David compounded his sin of adultery by ordering Joab to put the fellow in the place of jeopardy in the battle where he would be sure to be killed. And as a result, he was put to death by the enemy.

And at this time, Nathan the prophet came to David with a parable in which David was the character, only in a different setting. "David, there is a man in your kingdom, very wealthy, had all kinds of sheep and goods, possessions, servants. And next door to him there lived a very poor man who had only one lamb. He loved it like his own daughter. It ate at his own table. The rich man had company come. He ordered his servants to by force go to his neighbor's house and take away the lamb by force that they might kill it and feed it to his company." David became angry, and he said to Nathan, "That man shall surely be put to death." And Nathan pointed his finger at David and said, "David, you are the man."

The application was very clear. David had many wives, concubines, all that a person could desire. Yet, he took away the wife, the only wife of his neighbor. And upon hearing this, upon the sense of his own guilt, David wrote this fifty-first psalm in which he cries out for mercy. Mercy is not getting what you deserve. Justice is getting what you deserve. He's got it coming, that's justice. He has it coming; he doesn't get it, that's mercy. And David is crying out now to God for mercy.

Have mercy upon me, O God ( Psalms 51:1 ),

Not according to the fact that I am a good guy and I deserve it, but

according to your loving-kindness: according [to the abundance or] to the multitudes of thy tender mercies, blot out my transgressions ( Psalms 51:1 ).

David's prayer for forgiveness, casting himself upon the mercy of God. The Bible teaches us much about God's mercy. He declares that He is a merciful God; He will abundantly pardon. "According to the multitude of Thy tender mercies," David said, "blot out my transgressions."

Wash me thoroughly from mine iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin. For I acknowledge my transgressions: and my sin is ever before me ( Psalms 51:2-3 ).

Now David was trying to hide his guilt, but yet, you can't hide it from yourself. And David speaks about his sin being, "ever before me. I am ever conscious of my guilt." You can't run from guilt, you can't hide from guilt. It is there.

David said, "I acknowledge my transgressions." Now you are on the road back. The Bible says, "If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness" ( 1 John 1:9 ). But I have to be honest with God. I have to confess my sin. I have to acknowledge my transgression if God is going to be able to deal with me. As long as I am trying to hide my sin, as long as I am trying to justify myself, and this is one of the things that we are constantly having to deal with in our own lives, is that endeavor to justify our actions. But there isn't forgiveness in justifying your actions. The forgiveness comes when you confess your transgressions. "I acknowledge my transgressions." Good. Now God can deal with it. But as long as you are trying to hide it, cover it, excuse it, God can't deal with it. So important that we be totally open and honest with God, in order that He might deal with the issues of our lives.

Then David said,

Against thee, and thee only, have I sinned, and done this evil in thy sight ( Psalms 51:4 ):

God is the one who has established the law. Sin is against the holy law of God, the holy nature of God. Now, if we would look at this, it would seem to us that he had sinned against Uriah, the husband of Bathsheba. It would even seem that he sinned against Bathsheba, inviting her to this kind of a relationship. But David declares, "Against Thee, and Thee only have I sinned and done this evil in Thy sight."

Now, if David had been conscious of God and of the fact that God sees, if he had been more conscious of the presence of God, it could very well be that he never would have gotten into this. I think that one of the real problems that we have is our lack of the sense of God's presence with us. We forget that He's right there. Now, we oftentimes do things that suddenly we find that someone was there and watching, and we get so embarrassed because we thought that nobody knew us, or that nobody was watching. And when we suddenly find someone there.

I've had occasions in the past to have to make calls on the homes. And sometimes as I would be walking up to the door, I would hear all kinds of screaming and yelling in the house. And then, you know, you ring the doorbell and you hear a flurry of motion and all, and pretty soon the door is open and they see you and they just, you know. There have been times that I never rung the doorbell; I've just gone. I was too embarrassed. I didn't want to embarrass them. And you know, they say, "Oh, you know, we didn't know it was you." And start into all that kind of stuff. But you see, who am I? Man, I know what it is to yell and get angry. Who am I? What we need to realize is that God is there. "In Him we live and move and have our being," Paul said. We need to become more conscious of the fact that God is with us.

"Against Thee, and Thee only have I done this sin and this evil in Thy sight." God was watching. God knew all about it. David thought that he had cleverly covered his guilt. After all, Uriah has been killed in battle, so who is going to object to David taking a pretty young widow into his harem? After all, her husband was killed out fighting in one of David's wars. And David thought he had covered his tracks, but God saw. And when the prophet came to him and said, "David, you are the man," David realized that he had not hid anything from God. "I have done this evil in Your sight."

[in order] that you might be justified when you speak, and be clear when you judge ( Psalms 51:4 ).

Now David confesses, actually, the nature of sin.

Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me. Behold, you desire truth in the inward parts: and in the hidden parts thou shalt make me to know wisdom. Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean ( Psalms 51:5-7 ):

The hyssop was a little shrub that grows over there in the Holy Land and in Egypt, in those areas. And it was the little bush that they used to sprinkle the blood. When in Egypt they were to sprinkle the blood upon the lentils of the doorposts of the house, they used the hyssop bush in the sprinkling of the blood. And so, because it was the little bush that was used to sprinkle the blood, he said, "Purge me with hyssop." That would be referring to the blood of the sacrifice. "And I shall be clean."

wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow ( Psalms 51:7 ).

David's concept of God's total and complete forgiveness. And it is important that we also have that same concept of God's total and complete forgiveness. God said in Isaiah, "Come now, let us reason together, saith the Lord. Though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow. Though they be red as crimson, they shall be as white as wool" ( Isaiah 1:18 ). "Wash me, and I shall be as white as snow."

You know, there is nothing in all the world that can remove your guilt complex like just confessing to God and receiving the cleansing and the forgiveness from Him. Guilt complex is a weird thing. The guilt complex does create a subconscious desire for punishment. That subconscious desire for punishment is manifested in neurotic behavior patterns. The neurotic behavior patterns are designed to bring punishment to you. You start doing weird things. People start saying, "What is wrong with you? Why are you doing that? That is weird, man!" Well, I don't know why I am doing it, because it is a subconscious thing. I am feeling guilty over something, and I need to be punished. So I am going now into an abnormal behavior that is going to bring disapproval and punishment upon me. And I continue with this neurotic behavior pattern until someone really tells me what a nut I am, how weird, and how I belong ostracized from society or something. And I feel great because they have punished me and I feel the relief of my guilt. But there is nothing in the world like coming to God and letting Him wash you and He takes away completely that guilt complex that has been plaguing you.

David said,

Make me to hear joy and gladness; that the bones which thou hast broken may rejoice. Hide thy face from my sins, and blot out all my iniquities. Create in me a clean heart, O Lord ( Psalms 51:8-10 );

And here is the problem. David is getting right down to the issue, "O God, create a clean heart within me."

renew a right spirit within me ( Psalms 51:10 ).

How easy it is when we feel guilty to have a wrong spirit, a wrong attitude towards the saints of God, and towards God Himself. Because I am feeling guilty, I start sort of closing myself in, and my spirit gets wrong. But renew a right spirit within me.

Cast me not away from thy presence; and take not thy Holy Spirit from me ( Psalms 51:11 ).

"The wages of sin is death." Spiritual death--separation from God. "Cast me not away from Thy presence, O Lord. Remove not, or take not Thy Holy Spirit from me."

Restore unto me the joy of thy salvation; and uphold me with a free Spirit [thy free Spirit] ( Psalms 51:12 ).

So the prayer for the restoring of the joy of salvation. It is amazing the way sin can just rob you. Unconfessed sin can just rob you of God's joy in your life. There are so many Christians who are borderline Christians. They try to live as close to the world and still be a Christian as they can, and they are always just trying to find out just how close that is. Always experimenting. Just living on the edge. Flirting with the other side. And they have the dilemma of having too much of Christ to be happy in the world, but too much of the world to be happy in Christ. "Restore unto me Lord, the joy of my salvation. And uphold me with Your free Spirit."

Then will I teach transgressors thy ways; and sinners shall be converted unto thee ( Psalms 51:13 ).

In other words, once you have experienced the grace and the goodness of God, then you go out and share it with others. "I'll teach transgressors Thy ways."

Deliver me from blood guiltiness ( Psalms 51:14 ),

This is, no doubt, that being guilty of the blood of Uriah. Actually, David was a conspirator in his murder. Praying now forgiveness from that.

O God, thou God of my salvation: and my tongue shall sing aloud of thy righteousness. O Lord, open thou my lips; and my mouth shall show forth thy praise. For you don't desire a sacrifice; else I would give it: you don't delight in burnt offerings. But the sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: and a broken and a contrite heart, O God, you will not despise ( Psalms 51:14-17 ).

What God really desires is only your being broken over your sin. God isn't asking or requiring sacrifice. "God, You don't want sacrifice, else I would give it. But what You really want is just a broken spirit."

Do good in your good pleasure unto Zion: build the walls of Jerusalem. Then shalt thou be pleased with the sacrifices of righteousness, with the burnt offering, with the whole burnt offering: and then shall they offer the bullocks upon your altar ( Psalms 51:18-19 ). "

Dr. Constable's Expository Notes

Psalms 52

David contrasted his trust in the Lord with the treachery of those who have no regard for Him in this psalm of trust. The historical background appears in the title (1 Samuel 21-22). Undoubtedly Doeg the Edomite was in David’s mind as he described the wicked.

Dr. Constable's Expository Notes

2. God’s deliverance of the trusting 52:8-9

Dr. Constable's Expository Notes

The psalmist thanked God for making him like an olive tree in the Lord’s house. He acknowledged that the reason he was the man he was, and not as Doeg, was due to God’s grace, not his own works. He purposed to continue to hope in the Lord, confident that he would praise Him in spite of the opposition of treacherous enemies. Those among whom David would wait were other believers.

We, the saints, need not despair when wicked people oppose us. God will deal with our enemies. In the meantime, we should continue to trust and praise God in the company of His people.

Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible

I will praise thee for ever,.... Both in this world, as long as he lived, and had a being in it; and in the world to come, to all eternity. This is a resolution respecting what he would do, when he should be in the happy condition he was confident of;

because thou hast done [it]; the Targum interprets it, "the revenge of my judgment"; meaning the vengeance of God on Doeg; and to the same sense Aben Ezra and Kimchi: though it may refer to the comfortable and happy condition he should be in, Psalms 52:8; and which he wholly ascribes to the grace and goodness of God, and not to any merits of his own, and therefore determines to praise him for it;

and I will wait on thy name; on the Lord himself, in his house and ordinances, for his presence and fresh supplies of grace and strength, when he should be restored. Or the sense is, that in the mean while he would wait patiently on the Lord, until he had accomplished what he had promised, and David believed;

for [it is] good before thy saints; the sense is, either that it is good to wait upon the Lord and for him; which appears to be so to all the saints, by the comfortable experience they have had of it,

Isaiah 40:31; or the name of the Lord is good unto them, pleasant, delightful, and comfortable, as proclaimed, Exodus 34:6; see Song of Solomon 1:3; and also Revelation 15:4.

Henry's Complete Commentary on the Bible

      6 The righteous also shall see, and fear, and shall laugh at him:   7 Lo, this is the man that made not God his strength; but trusted in the abundance of his riches, and strengthened himself in his wickedness.   8 But I am like a green olive tree in the house of God: I trust in the mercy of God for ever and ever.   9 I will praise thee for ever, because thou hast done it: and I will wait on thy name; for it is good before thy saints.

      David was at this time in great distress; the mischief Doeg had done him was but the beginning of his sorrows; and yet here we have him triumphing, and that is more than rejoicing, in tribulation. Blessed Paul, in the midst of his troubles, is in the midst of his triumphs, 2 Corinthians 2:14. David here triumphs,

      I. In the fall of Doeg. Yet, lest this should look like personal revenge, he does not speak of it as how own act, but the language of other righteous persons. They shall observe God's judgments on Doeg, and speak of them, 1. To the glory of God: They shall see and fear (Psalms 52:6; Psalms 52:6); that is, they shall reverence the justice of God, and stand in awe of him, as a God of almighty power, before whom the proudest sinner cannot stand and before whom therefore we ought every one of us to humble ourselves. Note, God's judgments on the wicked should strike an awe upon the righteous and make them afraid of offending God and incurring his displeasure, Psalms 119:120; Revelation 15:3; Revelation 15:4. 2. To the shame of Doeg. They shall laugh at him, not with a ludicrous, but a rational serious laughter, as he that sits in heaven shall laugh at him,Psalms 2:4. He shall appear ridiculous, and worthy to be laughed at. We are told how they shall triumph in God's just judgments on him (Psalms 52:7; Psalms 52:7): Lo, this is the man that made not God his strength. The fall and ruin of a wealthy mighty man cannot but be generally taken notice of, and every one is apt to make his remarks upon it; now this is the remark which the righteous should make upon Doeg's fall, that no better could come of it, since he took the wrong method of establishing himself in his wealth and power. If a newly-erected fabric tumbles down, every one immediately enquires where was the fault in the building of it. Now that which ruined Doeg's prosperity was, (1.) That he did not build it upon a rock: He made not God his strength, that is, he did not think that the continuance of his prosperity depended upon the favour of God, and therefore took no care to make sure that favour nor to keep himself in God's love, made no conscience of his duty to him nor sought him in the least. Those wretchedly deceive themselves that think to support themselves in their power and wealth without God and religion. (2.) That he did build it upon the sand. He thought his wealth would support itself: He trusted in the abundance of his riches, which, he imagined, were laid up for many years; nay, he thought his wickedness would help to support it. He was resolved to stick at nothing for the securing and advancing of his honour and power. Right or wrong, he would get what he could and keep what he had, and be the ruin of any one that stood in his way; and this, he thought, would strengthen him. Those may have any thing that will make conscience of nothing. But now see what it comes to; see what untempered mortar he built his house with, now that it has fallen and he is himself buried in the ruins of it.

      II. In his own stability, Psalms 52:8; Psalms 52:9. "This mighty man is plucked up by the roots; but I am like a green olive-tree, planted and rooted, fixed and flourishing; he is turned out of God's dwelling-place, but I am established in it, not detained, as Doeg, by any thing but the abundant satisfaction I meet with there." Note, Those that by faith and love dwell in the house of God shall be like green olive-trees there; the wicked are said to flourish like a green bay-tree (Psalms 37:35), which bears no useful fruit, though it has abundance of large leaves; but the righteous flourish like a green olive-tree, which is fat as well as flourishing (Psalms 92:14) and with its fatness honours God and man (Judges 9:9), deriving its root and fatness from the good olive, Romans 11:17. Now what must we do that we may be as green olive-trees? 1. We must live a life of faith and holy confidence in God and his grace? "I see what comes of men's trusting in the abundance of their riches, and therefore I trust in the mercy of God for ever and ever--not in the world, but in God, not in my own merit, but in God's mercy, which dispenses its gifts freely, even to the unworthy, and has in it an all-sufficiency to be our portion and happiness." This mercy is for ever; it is constant and unchangeable, and its gifts will continue to all eternity. We must therefore for ever trust in it, and never come off from that foundation. 2. We must live a life of thankfulness and holy joy in God (Psalms 52:9; Psalms 52:9): "I will praise thee for ever, because thou hast done it, has avenged the blood of thy priests upon their bloody enemy, and given him blood to drink, and hast performed thy promise to me," which he was as sure would be done in due time as if it were done already. It contributes very much to the beauty of our profession, and to our fruitfulness in every grace, to be much in praising God; and it is certain that we never want matter for praise. 3. We must live a life of expectation and humble dependence upon God: "I will wait on thy name; I will attend upon thee in all those ways wherein thou hast made thyself known, hoping for the discoveries of thy favour to me and willing to tarry till the time appointed for them; for it is good before thy saints," or in the opinion and judgment of thy saints, with whom David heartily concurs. Communis sensus fidelium--All the saints are of this mind, (1.) That God's name is good in itself, that God's manifestations of himself to his people are gracious and very kind; there is no other name given than his that can be our refuge and strong tower. (2.) That it is very good for us to wait on that name, that there is nothing better to calm and quiet our spirits when they are ruffled and disturbed, and to keep us in the way of duty when we are tempted to use any indirect courses for our own relief, than to hope and quietly wait for the salvation of the Lord,Lamentations 3:26. All the saints have experienced the benefit of it, who never attended him in vain, never followed his guidance but it ended well, nor were ever made ashamed of their believing expectations from him. What is good before all the saints let us therefore abide and abound in, and in this particularly: Turn thou to thy God; keep mercy and judgment, and wait on thy God continually,Hosea 12:6.