Lam 1:1

“Bringing someone to his senses is censure, which makes one think. And he does not abstain from this form of instruction either, but says by Jeremiah, "How long shall I cry, and you not hear? So your ears are uncircumcised." O blessed forbearance! And again, by the same: "All the heathen are uncircumcised, but this people is uncircumcised in heart," "for the people are disobedient children," he says, "in whom faith does not exist." … Bewailing one's fate is latent censure and artfully helps to bring salvation, albeit under stealth. He made use of this by Jeremiah: "How did the city sit solitary that was full of people! She that ruled over territories became as a widow; she came under tribute; weeping, she wept in the night." … In the end, the system God pursues to inspire fear is the source of salvation. And it is the prerogative of goodness to save: "The mercy of the Lord is on all flesh, while he reproves, corrects and teaches as a shepherd does his flock. He pities those who receive his instruction and those who eagerly seek union with him." … "For according to the greatness of his mercy, so is his rebuke." For it is indeed noble not to sin, but it is good also for the sinner to repent, just as it is best to be always in good health but well to recover from disease. So he commands by Solomon, "Strike your son with the rod, that you may deliver his soul from death." And again, "Do not abstain from chastising your son but correct him with the rod, for he will not die." For reproof and rebuke, as also the original term implies, are the stripes of the soul, chastising sins, preventing death and leading to self-control for those who are out of control.… And so we, too, who in our lives are sick with shameful lusts and reprehensible excesses and other inflammatory effects of the passions, need the Savior. And he administers not only mild but also stringent medicines. The bitter roots of fear then arrest the eating sores of our sins. This is why fear is also salutary, if bitter. Sick, we truly stand in need of the Savior; having wandered, of one to guide us; blind, of one to lead us to the light; thirsty, "of the fountain of life, of which whoever partakes shall no longer thirst"; dead, we need life; sheep, we need a shepherd; we who are children need a tutor, while universal humanity stands in need of Jesus; so that we may not continue intractable and sinners to the end and thus fall into condemnation but may be separated from the chaff and stored up in the paternal garner.”

“O how...remained lonely Jeremiah wrote the Book of Lamentations. This is the scroll that Jehoiakim burned on the brazier that was on the fire (sic). It [originally] contained three alphabetical acrostics (Lam. ch. 1): “O how...remained,” (ch. 2) “How...brought darkness,” (ch. 4) “How dim...has become,” and he added to it, (ch. 3) “I am the man,” which contains three alphabetical acrostics, as it is said (Jer. 36:32): “and there were yet added to them many words like those,” three corresponding to three. lonely solitary, devoid of her inhabitants. populous Heb. רַבָּתִי עָם, great of people. The “yud” is superfluous, like רַבַּת עָם, for her people were many. There are many Aggadic midrashim [on this verse], but I have come to explain the language of the Scripture according to its literal meaning. She has become like a widow but not really a widow; rather, like a woman whose husband went abroad and intends to return to her.”

“City. David had conquered many. Jerusalem was long considered as the finest city in those parts. — Tributary. It had been so to the Assyrians, Egyptians, and Chaldeans, 4 Kings xxiv. 1. From this and similar passages, it would seem that the city was still existing: yet in others it appears to have been demolished. Here then the prophet declares what it had been: (Calmet) unless he wrote part after the death of Josias. (Haydock) — The beholders are astonished at the change and misery of the city. (Worthington)”

“Doleful consideration and description of the dishonour that has befallen Jerusalem. In these verses the prophet, in the name of the godly, pours out his heart before the Lord. The dreadful turn that things have taken is briefly declared in Lam 1:1 in two clauses, which set forth the fall of Jerusalem from its former glory into the depths of disgrace and misery, in such a way that the verse contains the subject unfolded in the description that follows. We have deviated from the Masoretic pointing, and arranged the verse into three members, as in the succeeding verses, which nearly throughout form tristichs, and have been divided into two halves by means of the Athnach; but we agree with the remark of Gerlach, "that, according to the sense, היתה למס and not היתה כּאלמנה is the proper antithesis to רבּתי בגּוים." איכה is here, as in Lam 2:1; Lam 4:1-2, an expression of complaint mingled with astonishment; so in Jer 48:17; Isa 1:21. "She sits solitary" (cf. Jer 15:17) is intensified by "she has become like a widow." Her sitting alone is a token of deep sorrow (cf. Neh 1:4), and, as applied to a city, is a figure of desolation; cf. Isa 27:10. Here, however, the former reference is the main one; for Jerusalem is personified as a woman, and, with regard to its numerous population, is viewed as the mother of a great multitude of children. רבּתי is a form of the construct state, lengthened by Yod compaginis, found thrice in this verse, and also in Isa 1:21, elegiac composition; such forms are used, in general, only in poetry that preserves and affects the antique style, and reproduces its peculiar ring. (Note: On the different views regarding the origin and meaning of this Yod compaginis, cf. Fr. W. M. Philippi, Wesen u. Ursprung des Status constr. im Hebr. S. 96ff. This writer (S. 152ff.) takes it to be the remnant of a primitive Semitic noun-inflexion, which has been preserved only in a number of composite proper names of ancient origin e.g., מלכּיחדק, etc.]; in the words אב, אח, and חם, in which it has become fused with the third radical into a long vowel; and elsewhere only between two words standing in the construct relation see Ges. 90; Ewald, 211.) According to the twofold meaning of רב (Much and Great), רבּתי in the first clause designates the multiplicity, multitude of the population; in the second, the greatness or dignity of the position that Jerusalem assumed among the nations, corresponding to the שׂרתי במּדינות, "a princess among the provinces." מדינה, from דּין (properly, the circuit of judgment or jurisdiction), is the technical expression for the provinces of the empires in Asia (cf. Est 1:1, Est 1:22, etc.), and hence, after the exile, was sued of Judah, Ezr 2:1; Neh 7:6, and in Kg1 20:17 of the districts in the kingdom of Israel. Here, however, המּדינות are not the circuits or districts of Judah (Thenius), but the provinces of the heathen nations rendered subject to the kingdom of Israel under David and Solomon (corresponding to הגּויים), as in Ecc 2:8. Jerusalem was formerly a princess among the provinces, during the flourishing period of the Jewish kingdom under David and Solomon. The writer keeps this time before his mind, in order to depict the contrast between the past and present. The city that once ruled over nations and provinces has now become but dependent on others. מס (the derivation of which is disputed) does not mean soccage or tribute, but the one who gives soccage service, a soccager; see on Exo 1:11 and Kg1 4:6. The words, "The princess has become a soccager," signify nothing more than, "She who once ruled over peoples and countries has now fallen into abject servitude," and are not (with Thenius) to be held as "referring to the fact that the remnant that has been left behind, or those also of the former inhabitants of the city who have returned home, have been set to harder labour by the conquerors." When we find the same writer inferring from this, that these words presuppose a state of matters in which the country round Jerusalem has been for some time previously under the oppression of Chaldean officers, and moreover holding the opinion that the words "how she sits..." could only have been written by one who had for a considerable period been looking on Jerusalem in its desolate condition, we can only wonder at such an utter want of power to understand poetic language.”