INTRODUCTION

The Decalogue, the Aaronic Blessing and the Twenty-third Psalm in the Old Testament, and the Beatitudes, the Lord’s Prayer and the Apostolic Benediction in the New, with perhaps two or three other passages of similar calibre, are the best-known portions of Holy Writ. They were learned by us at a mother’s knee, or at least from our earliest instructors; and they are all of sufficient substance to stand constant repetition, as solid gold is only brightened by frequent rubbing. To generations and centuries of men such scriptures have ministered "doctrine, reproof, correction, instruction in righteousness"; and, though they are the earliest efforts of memory, they will reward the maturest ponderings of the human mind. The Twenty-third Psalm, in particular, ever since it sprang into existence from the inspired genius of its author, has served to express the experience of the pious; and the modern man can measure his own progress and attainment by the extent to which he can make its sentiments his own. Not only, however, will the venerable words measure attainment, but they will stimulate it and awaken higher aspiration. Hence the psalm is worthy to be studied verse by verse and line by line.

I. Authorship.

There was a time, not very long ago, when any psalm might be quoted as a psalm of David. We have now reached a stage when it would be denied by experts of a certain class that even a single psalm can be proved to have proceeded from the Bard of Bethlehem. The one extreme is, however, as untenable as the other. When the controversy about such subjects first broke out in the Church with which I am connected, I remember a minister of saintliness and learning declaring that for him the Fifty-first Psalm would lose all its virtue if it were not from the pen of David; and some may be inclined to say the same about this Twenty-third Psalm. I should not like to say this peremptorily about any piece in the Psalter; and in general I like to think of the Psalms as proceeding from a large number and variety of voices spread at intervals over the pre-Christian centuries. But, on the other hand, when the attribution of a psalm to some known personage, or its connection with some recorded event, throws light on the whole composition, and is not inconsistent with anything in the text, it seems to me to be extinguishing the light not to take advantage of this circumstance.

Now, the reasons for believing this Twenty-third Psalm to be a legacy bequeathed to the people of God by King David are very strong indeed, and the assumption that he is the author throws light on every verse.

First, it lies on the surface that the relation of God to His people is here compared to the relation of a shepherd to his sheep; and of this David could speak from experience, as he had been a shepherd. Indeed, the suggestion has not infrequently been made that he may have composed this lyric whilst as a ruddy youth he was watching his flocks on the pastures of his father Jesse. On the other hand, however, it has been observed with truth that the experience here described is not that of a stripling or beginner, but of one mature in the life divine, who has had experience of all forms of guidance, in vicissitude as well as rest, in gloom as well as sunshine. But, even if the psalm was composed in old age or at least maturity, as it probably was, the sweet singer could make use of the experiences of his youth, which he could not have forgotten. At that time he had been a model shepherd, loving his flock and loved by them; and in the psalm the entire life of a sheep under a good shepherd is employed as an image or parable of a human life led under the guidance and protection of God.

But it may not have been noted by some readers, often as they have read and sung this psalm, that, in the second half of it, we are away from the image of the sheep altogether, and that another image is being developed. When, at v. 5, it is said, "Thou preparest a table before me in the presence of mine enemies; Thou anointest my head with oil; my cup runneth over," it is obvious that the words are put not into the mouth of a sheep, but into that of a guest, and that the person addressed is no longer conceived of as a shepherd, but as a host or entertainer. The table spread, the head anointed, the cup full to overflowing are obvious features of a banquet; and the idea is, that he who has God for his friend enjoys a continual feast, where everything is in abundance and everything is of the best The same cheerful image is kept up in the closing verse — "Goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life; and I will dwell in the house of the Lord for ever." The favourite is not only to be a guest, but one who abides in the house for ever — that is, a son.

The point to be observed is, that this second image agrees, as well as does the first, with the experience of David. If, during the first half of his life, he was a shepherd, he was, during the second half, a king; and one of the duties of a king is hospitality. Indeed, this trait is mentioned again and again in the history as characteristic of David’s mature life; and what a fascination he exercised as a host may be inferred from the offer of two of his braves to risk their lives in order to procure what he wanted, when he expressed a desire to taste a draught of water from the Well of Bethlehem. To his guests he could supply not only the good things of the table, but, with his musical gifts, the feast of reason and the flow of soul. If David was a model shepherd at one period of life, he was a model entertainer at another; and this experience also supplied him with the means of illustrating both the behaviour of God to men and the attitude of men to God.

We shall see afterwards why it was that David found the image of the shepherd insufficient, and had to add that of the royal entertainer. But, in the meantime, we perceive how natural it was that he should employ both figures of speech. I do not deny that another poet might have hit upon the same combination without having had either experience in his own case. But to have had the double experience in the same lifetime must have been a very rare thing. It certainly adds to the value of the psalm if we assume that the sweet singer was speaking from experience in both the beginning and the end of it. There is a life-likeness which supports this view; and, though it would be of no use to affirm dogmatically the Davidic authorship, we shall assume this throughout.

II. Application.

An eccentric professor, under whom I studied at college, used to say that the most important word in a text may be the one after the last; and it is certainly true that the message of no Old Testament passage is exhausted when it has been interpreted by the mere analysis of the words and their application to the original situation. The first duty of an interpreter is to find out what the writer meant to convey at the moment when he wrote; but the words may suggest far more to a Christian reader. Of this a remarkable instance has often struck me: in the Thirty-first Psalm a saintly singer says, "Into thine hand I commit my spirit"; but our Saviour, in quoting the words on the cross, prefaced them with the word "Father," thus placing on them His own distinctive signature; and St. Stephen, in adopting them as his dying words, actually addressed them to the Saviour Himself, saying, "Lord Jesus, receive my spirit." This indicates how wide may be the scope of legitimate Christian application.

The principle applies to our Psalm also, which is a fine example of how the beautiful and profound passages of the Old Testament become far more beautiful and far more profound when read in the light of the New.

The image of the Good Shepherd, applied in the Old Testament to God, is applied in the New Testament to Christ; it is especially applied by Jesus to Himself, as when He says, "The good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep." David might have introduced this feature into the Twenty-third Psalm; because, as we know from the account he gave of himself at his first interview with King Saul, there were more occasions than one when he risked his life for the flock. He omitted it; but the Son of David could not omit it, because this was to be His most characteristic act; "for the Son of man came not to be ministered unto but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many." Some in our day are teaching that the supreme and final message of Jesus was trust in Providence — faith that the divine will, whatever it may be, is best. That is a priceless lesson; but it had been amply taught long before the Incarnation. Jesus rejoiced in it, and repeated it; but it was not His last word; it is not likely that He stopped short at such truth as had already been perfectly uttered by King David.

The other image of the Twenty-third Psalm is the Royal Entertainer; and this, too, recurs in the words of Jesus, but with a deepened meaning. He frequently, in His parables, compared the Gospel to a feast. Even in this world Christianity turns human life into a festival, and in the world to come the life of the blessed will be the Marriage Supper of the Lamb. For Christ brought life and immortality to light. He spoke of the world unseen as of a place native and familiar; and His own Resurrection and Ascension opened the gates of heaven to all believers. Thus what the Old Testament saints only groped after is now for us a sure possession.

Closely allied to this image is the institution of the Lord’s Supper, in which Christ goes down through all the centuries, to the end of time, in the character of Royal Entertainer, with these words encircling His figure, "This Man receiveth sinners and eateth with them." Of this, Sir H. W. Baker has taken advantage in the eucharistic hymn, "The King of love my shepherd is," which is a rendering, verse by verse, of our Psalm, with only a Christian touch added here and there. Hardly, indeed, were even these changes necessary; for, in its naked simplicity, the Twenty-third Psalm gives such adequate expression to Christian feeling, in even its most intimate moments, that it might compete with the Hundred-and-third or the Hundred-and-sixteenth for the title of the Psalm for the Communion Table.