Ps. 89.30-34 (the enveloping; Pt. 1)

If his descendants / forsake my teaching
and do not follow / my commandments
if they profane / my requirements
and do not keep / my requirements

I will punish their rebellion / with a rod of iron
and their waywardness / with plagues

But / I will not break off / my loyal-love from him;
I will not betray / my fidelity to him
I will not profane / my covenant
or alter / what I have promised. 

These lines form an important crux of the psalm and we need to mention several different aspects of it. The first thing to point out is a formal one. These liens are organized as such: 4 lines (regarding the kings’ disobedience)—2 lines (detailing Yhwh’s response/punishment)—4 lines (regarding Yhwh’s faithfulness). There is a clear point being made in this arrangement—the 4 lines of the kings’ disobedience, is countered by the 4 lines of Yhwh’s faithfulness. The word usage even largely mirrors each other. For example, “if they profane my requirements” and “I will not profane my covenant”. We could put it thus: the first 4 lines are the kings ‘call of rebellion’ while the concluding 4 lines are Yhwh’s ‘answer of faithfulness’. In the middle, stands the hinge—that which addresses the disobedience and also turns toward Yhwh’s faithfulness. They will be punished but not destroyed. Perhaps more importantly still is the fact that these five verses are preceded and followed by descriptions of the covenant. The covenant, and Yhwh’s sworn oath by himself, ‘envelop’ the rebellion of the kings. In other words, the form of these verses mirror their content—the kings’ rebellion will be met by Yhwh’s faithfulness and is ‘always-already’ enveloped within the covenant with David. This dynamic is similar to the Deuteronomic one of – election, joy, fall, punishment, crying-out, election, joy…. The point in both is that the punishment/chastisement is intended to re-fold them back into the joy of the covenant. They joy-of-the-covenant is an end in itself; the wrath is not. Were it an ‘end in itself’ it would be annulling of the covenant. That is the same dynamic here—the punishment of the Davidic lineage will be redemptive, penultimate. On the one hand this ‘envelope’ of the covenant provides an astonishing (apparently absolute) security—it is not possible for the Davidic lineage to lose their election because it is premised on Yhwh’s always-already prior commitment to them, by himself. On the other hand, we need to signal how this leads to the lament—it is precisely this ‘envelope’ structure of these lines that leads to the devastating lament that concludes the psalm. What I mean is this—that David and his descendants cannot ‘fall out’ of the covenant, precisely because they are enveloped within it. But, what this means is that any ‘turning away’ from the covenant is by Yhwh himself. If the covenant ‘fails’ it fails because of the envelope, not because of the Davidic waywardness. As such, there would appear to be no way of rectifying the situation, as David and his children did not cause it.  They are left (it seems), not with sacrifice, not with penance, but only with the lament itself.