Thomas Aquinas, on Ps 52:1

“Unto the end, for Maeleth, understandings to David. The fool said in his heart: There is no God.”

“"The fool has said." Above, the Psalmist rebuked the wickedness of sinners from the side of their affection for sin; here he rebukes their wickedness from their contempt of God. The title: "Unto the end, for understanding, of David, for Amalek." The history of this is found in 1 Sam. 30, when David, fleeing, came to Achish, king of the Philistines, who gave him the city of Ziklag, and it happened that the Amalekites, in his absence, burned the city; eventually David pursued them and recovered the spoil. Mystically, by David is signified Christ; and as the Gloss says, the Amalekites -- "a people licking blood" -- signify the Antichrist and his followers, who with affection "lick" carnal things. Mt. 16: "Flesh and blood," etc. Therefore, as their malice is interpreted, from this they are led against Christ. Augustine says "for Maeleth," which is interpreted as "suffering and giving birth"; and it signifies the Church, of which Jn. 16 says: "A woman, when she is in labor, has sorrow," etc.; and so the Psalm is for the tribulations which the Church suffers from the evils of the world. And this, therefore, is through Korah, who was one of the chief singers; and so this Psalm was sung by his ministry. Likewise it should be known that this Psalm was set forth above at Psalm 13; yet the context is not the same, nor are all the verses, and there it is introduced on account of the first coming of Christ, here on account of the coming of Christ for judgment. And concerning this he does two things. First he sets forth the malice of sinners. Second he introduces the divine judgment, at "The Lord from heaven." Concerning the first he does two things. First he sets forth the root of evil, namely contempt. Second he shows what follows from such a root, at "They are corrupt." It should be known that wisdom, if properly understood, differs from knowledge, because wisdom is about the knowledge of divine things, while knowledge is about the knowledge of human things. The foolish man despises the knowledge of divine things. Job 21: "Depart from us, and we desire not the knowledge of your ways." Rom. 1: "Their foolish heart was darkened," etc. Therefore "the fool has said"; that is, he has despised God and the knowledge of God; and he did this "in his heart," he said: "There is no God." Against this, Anselm says that no one can think that God does not exist. It must be said that something can be unknown to us in two ways. In one way, on its own account; in another way, on our account. In the first way, those things are unknown to us which have their primary existence, such as contingent things, prime matter, motion, and time. In the second way, those things are unknown to us which exceed our knowledge. I say, therefore, that if we consider God according to himself, it cannot be thought that he does not exist, and no proposition is more known than one whose predicate is included in the subject. The existence of God is his essence, and therefore this proposition, "God exists," is maximally self-evident; yet as regards us, the essence of God is not known to us, but is made known to us through his effects. And from this it is the case that whoever denies certain effects of God -- for example, his providence over good and evil men and all things universally, and the miracles of God, and that he is omnipotent -- denies God, and says in his heart -- because it is from God in the hearts of all that God exists -- what no one indeed wishes: he is considered a fool for saying that God does not exist. Or "the fool," that is, the Jew. Ps.: "Understand, you fools"; who said that Christ is not God. Jn. 10: "You, being a man, make yourself God."”

Imported from an open dataset — not yet checked against the printed edition.