Commentaria in II Regum (II Samuelis)
23. AND THE KING SAID TO SEMEI: THOU SHALT NOT DIE,—that is, thou shalt not be killed by me to-day, nor as long as I live, lest I mar this joyful day of my return by thy slaughter; and that by this show of clemency I may recall to me all the Israelites guilty of rebellion, and therefore fearing death from me likewise. For David has regard to Abisai, who wished to kill the cursing Semei at once: whence, checking him, he says: “Shall there any man be put to death this day in Israel?” Wherefore David did not break the faith given to Semei when, dying, he ordered Solomon to kill him under some convenient pretext, 3 Kings 2. For David, giving grace and pardon to Semei, could limit it at his own pleasure; for he showed him great grace in not killing him at once, as Abisai urged, nay in leaving him untouched through all his life. That he spared Semei in life, therefore, was a work of great clemency; but that in death he ordered him to be killed was a work of justice and just chastisement. A king ought to punish the wicked: for so shameless a cursing, and so atrocious an injury to the royal majesty, ought not to be left unpunished as an example to others; lest anyone should dare thereafter to perpetrate such a thing against Solomon and other kings. So Abulensis, Question 26, where he refutes at length the opinions of others, and especially that of Cajetan, who says that Semei was killed by Solomon not for his cursing of David, but for a new sin, in that he had crossed the Jordan against Solomon’s command. For this is false: for the true cause of Semei’s death was his cursing; the pretext was the crossing of the Jordan forbidden by Solomon: for this is what David, recounting the cursing of Semei, commands Solomon, saying: “I swore to him by the Lord, saying: I will not kill thee with the sword; but thou do not suffer him to be innocent,” 3 Kings 2:9. Behold, here David clearly explains what he swore and promised to Semei, namely that he himself would not kill him with the sword, not that Solomon succeeding him would not kill him; nay he wished, intended and ordered that he should punish him with death.
Less rightly, therefore, the Hebrews in St. Jerome and Angelomus, translating for “unwashed,” “with besmeared feet,” understand by it wooden feet, which Miphiboseth had made for himself in place of the real ones, which he lacked, or could hardly use, being weak and lame. The Septuagint adds, nor had he cut his nails, that is, had not trimmed his nails in sign of mourning for David’s exile, that he might appear squalid and shaggy.
AND HE HAD NOT WASHED HIS CLOTHES;—understand the inner ones, namely the linen ones that cling to the flesh, such as shirts: for these are wont to be washed, but not the outer and woollen ones.
27. BUT THOU, MY LORD THE KING, ART AS AN ANGEL OF GOD—thou judgest and determinest most wisely; wherefore do with me what “pleaseth thee”: for whatever thou determinest I will receive as from the hand of an angel, as done most wisely and best.
29. THOU AND SIBA DIVIDE THE POSSESSIONS.—Some think that David, on account of Siba’s specious reasons, doubted whether he should believe him or Miphiboseth, and therefore halved the sentence; but David seems to have recognized the innocence of Miphiboseth, both from his squalor and uncleanness, which had no look of aspiring to the kingdom, which his servant Siba had charged him with; and because Siba the accuser, who was present, as is plain from verse 17, answered nothing to the charges brought against him by Miphiboseth. Whence many think David sinned here by injustice, in taking from the innocent Miphiboseth half his goods, and giving it to Siba his accuser: for he had too easily and rashly believed him accusing his master, and, enticed by his gifts, had handed over the goods of his master, chapter 16, verse 4. Wherefore, out of shame, lest he should seem to have erred, he was unwilling to revoke wholly the first sentence passed by him; but halved it, as also the goods, leaving half to Miphiboseth, and giving half to Siba. So Abulensis, Cajetan and others. In which matter he seems to have violated the friendship and faith pledged to Jonathan, the father of Miphiboseth. It is probable, however, as Abulensis suspects, Question 30, that David compensated this loss to Miphiboseth by another gift or benefit.
Furthermore, the Hebrews in St. Jerome, and from them Angelomus and the Gloss, think that in punishment of this injustice of David God shortly after divided his kingdom between Roboam and Jeroboam, giving ten tribes to the latter, and leaving to Roboam the tribe of Juda alone; and they say that when David had said this, a voice was heard from heaven: “Roboam and Jeroboam shall divide the kingdom.” But the cause of this division and schism was another, namely the idolatry of Solomon, as we shall hear in book 3, chapter 11. Nay, on account of David’s merits God left Roboam the tribe of Juda, which he would otherwise have taken from him with the rest, as is plain
30. LET HIM TAKE ALL.—Miphiboseth said this with a mind somewhat offended at David; whence St. Jerome and Angelomus: He said this, they say, not with a congratulating mind, but an insulting one, and as if murmuring against the Lord, that the Lord had brought David back in peace; and therefore Miphiboseth, 1 Paralipomenon 9, ...: but Miphiboseth does not seem to have wished to insult David and to murmur against God, but to have said this with a bitterer heart.
35. I AM THIS DAY FOURSCORE YEARS OLD; CAN I DISCERN BETWEEN SWEET AND BITTER?—For in old age, as Ecclesiastes says, chapter 12, verse 3: “Those that look through the holes shall be darkened,” namely the eyes, “and all the daughters of music shall grow deaf,” namely the ears, “and the caper-tree shall be scattered,” namely appetite, in whose place succeeds loathing of food, pleasures and all things; whence Solon said that “old age” is “the winter of life,” as youth is its spring. Diogenes, asked: “What is old age?” said: “It is a wintry life, exposed to storms.” The poet Alexis in old age, asked what he was doing, answered: “I die step by step,” signifying that the old do not so much live as slowly die. See what is said on Ecclesiastes 12.
37. BUT BEHOLD THY SERVANT CHAMAAM,—namely my son, as if to say: My son Chamaam, in my stead worn out by age, will accompany thee, and the benefits which thou thoughtest to repay to me, bestow on him. What thou shalt do for him, thou shalt do for me. So Abulensis, Cajetan ... “Chamaam,” he says, “is interpreted sighing: for as long as he remained with his father he was called sighing; but after he passed into the teaching of King David, he was called not Chamaam but Chamaan, which is interpreted faithful.”
43. I HAVE TEN PARTS IN THE KING MORE THAN THOU,—because in Israel there were ten tribes; in Juda only one, giving to Juda the tribe of Benjamin, says Theodoret and St. Jerome. Behold, from this strife began the dissension between Juda and Israel, which under Roboam burst into open schism, nay in the following chapter stirred up the sedition of Seba. Hence this narrative paves the way to the war which Seba raised through Israel against Juda and David. Morally, learn from this proud quarrel of Juda with Israel how true is that of Proverbs 15:1: “A mild answer breaketh wrath; but a harsh word stirreth up fury.”