John Calvin Commentary Lamentations 1

The Prophet could not adequately express the greatness of the calamity, except by expressing his astonishment. He then speaks as one who, on seeing something new and unexpected, is filled with amazement. It was indeed an incredible thing; for as it was a place chosen for God to dwell in, and as the city Jerusalem was not only the royal throne of God but also, so to speak, His earthly sanctuary, the city might have been thought exempt from all danger. Since it had been said,

Here is my rest for ever, here will I dwell
(Psalms 132:14).

God seemed to have raised that city above the clouds and to have made it free from all earthly changes. We indeed know that there is nothing fixed and certain in the world, and that the greatest empires have been reduced to nothing; but the state of Jerusalem did not depend on human protection, nor on the extent of its dominion, nor on the abundance of people, nor on any other defenses whatever. Instead, it was founded by a celestial decree, by the promise of God, which is not subject to any changes. When, therefore, the city fell, uprooted from its foundations, so that nothing remained; when the Temple was disgracefully plundered and then burned by enemies; and further, when the king was driven into exile, his children slain in his presence, and also the princes; and when the people were scattered here and there, exposed to every insult and reproach—was it not a horrible and monstrous thing?

It was not without reason, then, that the Prophet exclaimed, How! For no one could ever have thought that such a thing would have happened. And then, after the event, no one with a calm mind could have looked on such a spectacle, for innumerable temptations must have entered their minds. This thought especially must have upset the faith of all: “What does God mean? How is it that He has promised that this city would be perpetual? And now there is no appearance of a city, and no hope of restoration in the future.” Since, then, this very sad spectacle might not only disturb pious minds but also upset them and sink them into the depths of despair, the Prophet exclaims, How! and then says, How sits the city solitary, which had much people!

Here, by a comparison, he amplifies the indignity of the event. For, on the one hand, he refers to the flourishing state of Jerusalem before the calamity, and, on the other hand, he shows how the place had in a way been turned into darkness. For this change, as I have said, was as if the sun had fallen from heaven; for the sun has no more secure position in heaven than Jerusalem had on earth, since its preservation was connected with the eternal truth of God. He then says that this city had many people, but that now it was sitting solitary. The verb “to sit” is used in Hebrew in both a good and a bad sense. Kings are said to sit on their thrones; but “to sit” sometimes means to lie prostrate, as we have seen before in many places. Then he says that Jerusalem was lying solitary because it was desolate and forsaken, though it had before a vast number of people.

He adds, How is she become, etc.; for the word how, אכה, aike, should be repeated and applied to both clauses. How, then, is she become as a widow, who was great among the nations! He says that Jerusalem had not only been full of citizens but had also extended its power through many nations, for it is well known that many neighboring nations paid tribute to it under David and Solomon. And to the same purpose is what follows: She who ruled among provinces is become tributary! That is, she has become subject to paying tribute. This phrase is taken from Deuteronomy 28, for the prophets were accustomed to borrow expressions freely from Moses, that chief teacher and prophet, as we will soon see again.

So now we see the Prophet's meaning. He wonders at the destruction of the city Jerusalem and regarded it as an astounding event, which not only disturbed people's minds but in a way confounded them. And by this way of speaking, he shows something of human weakness, for only those devoid of all feeling would not be seized with amazement at such a mournful sight. The Prophet then spoke not only according to his own feelings but also according to those of all others, and he deplored that calamity, so to speak, as if speaking for everyone.

But he will later apply a remedy to this astonishment. For when we exaggerate evils in this way, we at the same time sharpen our grief, and thus it happens that we eventually become overwhelmed with despair; and despair kindles rage, so that people cry out against God. But the Prophet mourned and was amazed in such a way that he did not, however, indulge his grief nor cherish his amazement; but, as we shall see, he restrained himself, lest the excess of his feelings should carry him beyond proper limits.

Jeremiah still pursues the same subject, for he could not have spoken briefly and in a few words of things so bitter and mournful; and he seems to have felt deeply the ruin of his own country. And when we wish to reach the hearts of those whose sorrow we desire to alleviate, it is necessary that they understand that we sympathize with them.

For when someone stronger than another seeks to mitigate another’s grief, he will be disregarded if what he presents seems to proceed from unfeeling barbarity. Had Jeremiah, then, spoken as if in contempt, he could hardly have hoped for any fruit from his teaching, for the Jews would have thought him lacking all human feelings.

This, then, is the reason why he bewails, as one of the people, the calamity of the city. He was not, however, insincere in any way in the history he related; but we know that God’s servants, while they speak earnestly, do not forget prudence. For they consider in this regard what is useful, and their doctrine ought to be regulated in such a way as to produce an effect on the hearers.

He then says that the weeping of Jerusalem was continual, for he says first, Weeping she wept, and then, in the night; by which words he means that there was no intermission. For the night is given to us for rest, and God intends some relaxation for people by the alternation of nights and days.

When, therefore, the Prophet says that Jerusalem, weeping, wept in the night, he intimates that her sorrow, as I have stated, was continual. Then he adds, her tears are on her cheeks. Some render it "jaws," but improperly; the word לחי, lachi, indeed means a jaw, but it is to be taken for cheeks, or cheek-bones.

He means, then, that tears were so profuse as to wet the whole face. It is possible in weeping to restrain tears; but when they flow over the whole face and cover the cheeks, it is evidence of great mourning. This, then, is the reason why the Prophet says that tears were on her cheeks, for he wished to show that tears were profusely shed.

He says further, She has no comforter. And this circumstance should be noted, for nothing is more timely in grief than to have friends near us to show us kindness, to share our sorrow, and to offer what comfort can be found. But when no one feels for us in our afflictions, our sorrow is much more increased.

The Prophet then says that there was no one seeking to soothe the griefs of Jerusalem. He adds, of all your friends. Had Jerusalem always been forsaken, she could have borne it better when no comforter was present.

For we see that miserable people are not so soft and tender when very grievous calamities happen to them; they do not look here and there for friends to come to them, and why? Because they have always been disregarded. It is, then, nothing new to them, even in the greatest adversities, to have no one to show them any tokens of kindness.

But when those who have had many friends, and thought that they would always be ready to bring them aid, see themselves forsaken, their sorrow becomes much more grievous. This, then, is what the Prophet means in saying that of many friends there were none to comfort Jerusalem in her miseries.

There is no doubt that he indirectly reproved Jerusalem; and by אהבים, aebim, he understood lovers, as we have seen in other places. For as they thought themselves safe by means of ungodly treaties, the prophets say that they were like harlots who everywhere prostitute themselves, make gain by their lasciviousness, and allure lovers on every side.

The Prophet was, therefore, right to remind the Jews in this place of that wickedness: that they had sought to win the favor of the Egyptians at one time, and the Assyrians at another, like an impudent woman who is not satisfied with her own husband but draws lovers from all quarters.

However this may be, he no doubt understands by friends those who confederated with them. And who were these? They were those with whom the Jews had connected themselves, having disregarded God, for they had been sufficiently warned by the prophets not to form connections with the heathens.

But, at the same time, Jeremiah highlights the atrocity of the situation by saying that none of all her friends was a comforter to Jerusalem, because all her friends had acted perfidiously.

Interpreters apply this, but in my view improperly, to the captivity of the people. On the contrary, the Prophet means that the Jews had been scattered and sought refuge when oppressed, as they often were, by the tyranny of their enemies. Then, by degrees, he advances to their exile, for he could not have said all things at the same time.

Therefore, let the order in which he speaks be observed. Before he bewails their exile, he says that Judah had been scattered, for many, fleeing the cruelty of enemies, went into voluntary exile. We have previously seen that many concealed themselves with the Moabites, nor is there a doubt that many went into Egypt. In short, there was no country in which some of the Jews were not fugitives.

Therefore, the real meaning of the Prophet here is that the Jews had migrated—that is, had left their own country and fled to other countries—because they were subjected to miseries and cruel servitude.

Some interpret the words in a passive sense, meaning that Judah migrated because they had inhumanly oppressed their servants.

But I suspect what has led them astray is that they thought exile is meant here, and then one mistake produces another. For it would have been absurd to say that the Jews had migrated into exile on account of affliction and had migrated willingly, since we know that they were violently driven by the Chaldeans.

Therefore, they did not willingly migrate. When these two things could not be connected, they thought it referred to the cruelty the Jews had exercised towards their own brethren.

But the migration of which the Prophet speaks is improperly applied, as I have said, to the captivity. On the contrary, he means those who had moved to different parts of the world because this was more tolerable than their condition in their own country.

And from this we learn how severely they had been harassed by the Chaldeans, for they had willingly fled, though, as we know, exile is hard. We therefore conclude that it was a barbarous and violent oppression, since the Prophet says that the Jews thus went into exile of their own accord and sought hiding places either in Egypt, in the land of Moab, or among other neighboring nations.

Afterwards, he adds another evil: that they never found rest, and lastly, that they had been taken by their enemies between straits, so that no escape was possible.

It must have been a sad condition for the people to live in a foreign land, for we know that such a precarious life differs little from death. Furthermore, there were no contiguous nations that did not hate the Jews.

So, when they fled to such people, it was no small evil. But when they had no quiet abode anywhere, the indignity was still greater, and this is what the Prophet now refers to.

But when we flee and tremblingly turn here and there, it is one of the greatest evils to fall into the hands of enemies and to be taken by them when we are enclosed, as it were, between two walls, or in a narrow passage, as some explain the word.

Jeremiah refers here to another cause of sorrow: that the worship of God had ceased, having been interrupted; indeed, it seemed to have become extinct forever. He then says that the ways of Zion mourned because no one came to the feasts. These words are figurative, for we know that ways do not possess feelings; but the Prophet ascribes feeling to what is inanimate. And this sort of personification is more emphatic than if he had introduced the people as mourning.

But when the Jews saw that God’s worship had fallen, it was more grievous to them than to find themselves deprived of children or wives, or plundered of all their possessions. For the more precious God’s worship was to them, and the more highly religion was esteemed—in which the eternal salvation of their souls consisted—the more severe and mournful it was to see the Church so scattered that God could no longer be worshipped and invoked.

It is indeed true that God’s worship was not tied to ceremonies, for Daniel never ceased to pray, and he was heard in his exile just as much as if he had come to the sacrifices with great solemnity to make an offering in the Temple. This is undoubtedly true. However, since God had not instituted these duties and rites of religion in vain, the Prophet portrays the reality itself through its symbols. Therefore, as feasts were testimonies of God’s grace, it was as if the Jews were called together by a banner being raised, and as if God appeared in their midst. Hence, the Prophet, referring to these external symbols, shows that the worship of God had, in a sense, ceased.

Her gates are solitary, or desolate; her priests are in mourning, her virgins in afflictions; she is in bitterness. Now this passage reminds us that when God afflicts His Church, however grievous it may be to see innocent men slain, blood shed indiscriminately, both sexes—men and women—killed indiscriminately; and though it is a sad spectacle to see houses robbed and plundered, fields laid waste, and all things in confusion—yet when all these things are compared with the abolition of God’s worship, this passage reminds us that all these things ought to appear light to us.

Though David greatly deplored his condition because he was banished from the Temple and, as usual, did not lead the assembly there (even though he was not the only one expelled from God's sanctuary), yet when the sanctuary itself was destroyed, along with the altar, when there were no sacrifices, no thanksgiving, no praises—in short, no prayer—it was surely much more bitter.

This lamentation of the Prophet should then be carefully noted, when he says that the ways of Zion mourned, that no one went up to the feasts. What follows I pass over; I will dwell more on these things later as we advance towards the end of the narrative.

He first says that her enemies had become the head; and by this expression he undoubtedly means power. This way of speaking he borrowed from Moses, for these are his words:

“Thou shalt be the head and not the tail,
in a high place, not obscure” (Deuteronomy 28:13).

He then says that enemies were the head, that is, ruled over them. And the opposite of that is to be understood: that they had become the tail, that is, were under the feet, so to speak, of their enemies. And he says that her enemies had acted successfully, even because Jehovah had afflicted her.

He here laments according to the common practice, as ungodly men are accustomed to do; but he mixes instruction with his mourning and shows that God, in a state of things so turbulent and confused, appeared as a righteous judge. He then recalled them to the consideration of God’s hand when he said that her enemies had acted successfully because God had afflicted her.

Jerome renders the words, “because Jehovah has spoken.” He derives the verb from הגה, ege, which means to speak or to meditate. But this is an evident mistake, as we shall find another soon in this very chapter. There is no doubt that the Prophet intimates that the cause of all evils was that God had afflicted her, even on account of the greatness of her impieties, or of her sins.

He now then begins to show that there is no reason why the Jews should be swallowed up with grief and despair, if only they considered from where their evils proceeded. He thus begins to call their attention to God’s judgment. This indeed of itself would not have been sufficient, but he afterwards points out a fruitful source of consolation. We shall see these things mentioned in their due order.

Prayer:

Grant, Almighty God, that as the deformity of your Church at this day is sufficient to dishearten us all, we may learn to look to your hand, and know that the reward of our sins is rendered to us, and that we may not doubt that you will be our physician to heal our wound, provided we flee to your mercy. And so retain us in the assurance of your goodness and paternal care, that we may not hesitate, even in extreme evils, to call on you in the name of your only-begotten Son, until we shall find by experience that the prayers of those who, relying on your promises, patiently look for a remedy from you alone, are never in vain, even in extreme evils, and also in death itself. — Amen.

[Exposition continues from previous day's lecture]

We began yesterday to explain the passage where the Prophet says that the enemies of Jerusalem had become the head and had been successful. It was a trial that must have grievously assailed the minds of the faithful when they saw their enemies having fortune, as they commonly say, so to speak, in their own hand, for it appeared as though God showed himself favorable to them.

Hence the Prophet assigns the reason, lest the faithful should fall away from religion and the fear of God, and says that the whole of this proceeded from the just vengeance of God, it being his purpose to afflict his own Church. He states not this alone, but adds, on account of the greatness of her iniquities.

For ungodly men sometimes acknowledge that they have to do with God, but yet they murmur and think that God is unjust and cruel. Hence the Prophet not only taught the Jews that God was the author of the calamities that had happened, but at the same time reminded them that they were worthy of such a reward—not only because they had transgressed, but because they had added sins to sins. For this is what he means by the greatness of iniquities.

But he will soon repeat this sentence and enlarge upon it; it is then enough now to state his object. It was for this cause, then, as he says, that her little ones went into captivity before the adversary.

It was, indeed, an indignity calculated to embitter the minds of the faithful to see not only their young men but also infants so cruelly treated. For men always think that they have some just cause to contend with God, especially when the case of infants is brought forward. Who, then, is not disposed to say that God’s vengeance exceeds its due limits? “If his purpose is,” they say, “to punish men for their wickedness, why does he not restrain his wrath regarding the innocent? For how have miserable infants sinned?” But the Prophet here checks such audacity and says that God had just reasons for extending his vengeance even to the little ones.