A Partial Explanation of Psalm One By Girolamo Zanchi

by on November 11, 2025 | Comment

Introduction

By Patrick O’Banion

The “Partial Explanation of Psalm One” is the shortest and thematically broadest of the formal theological orations written by the Italian Reformed theologian Girolamo Zanchi (1516–90). Dated June 21, 1568, it was published originally in the Two Books of Letters (Hanover, 1609) following a brief oration in which Zanchi, having recently been hired to teach in Heidelberg, formally requested that its university confer a doctorate upon him.1 By this point, Zanchi had been a teacher for more than twenty-six years, and he had given his inaugural lecture for the chair of theology at Heidelberg’s Academy four months earlier. Yet, he lacked a doctoral degree that was valid in the empire, which he needed in order to join a university faculty. It was something of a joke that he, a “man of more advanced age,” should receive his degree from the hands of Pierre Bouquin, a younger man.2 But he took it in stride and joked in a letter the following day that, previously, he had been a theologian without a ring or a license or a cap but now he was a Lord Doctor—ringed, capped, and licensed.3

In the Latin version of the oration, following the words that indicate Zanchi’s receipt of the trappings of office, a break is signaled by a single black line, after which begins “A Partial Explanation of Psalm One.” This seems to suggest that Zanchi delivered the speech at his own doctoral ceremony. If so, the fact that it is merely “partial” makes it an odd choice, focusing as it does only on what the blessed man must avoid and ending abruptly. We know that in previous years, while teaching at Strasbourg, Zanchi sometimes lectured on the Psalms, although none of those manuscripts survive. It may be that this meditation on the blessed man of Psalm 1 was some of the fruit of those labors and that somehow it became connected to his promotion to the doctorate in 1568.

Whatever the case, Zanchi’s explanation of the psalm provides an excellent introduction to his orations and to his thinking about theological education. In it he reckoned that the psalmist’s main message was simply that “we should devote ourselves, with our whole soul, to the pursuit of God’s law and piety and [that] we should meditate upon that law day and night.” As simple as is this plain reading of the text, it is a keynote to which Zanchi returned over and over.

“Partial Explanation of Psalm One”

By Girolamo Zanchi

Translated by Patrick O’Banion

In this psalm, the prophet4 has a twofold aim. First, he means to dissuade each of the elect from listening to the counsels and teachings of wicked men, imitating their sinful habits, or cultivating friendship with thoroughgoing despisers of God. And second, he means to exhort them unto a serious pursuit of piety as well as love for, delight in, and careful meditation upon the Holy Scriptures. This is the aim.

The prophet, moreover, does this with two arguments, the first of which derives from utility. For he says: “Blessed will be he who follows the counsel that is set forth—not his own but the Holy Spirit’s.” The second argument derives from the rendering of judgment. For the prophet states that the wholesome life which he puts on display and which all the pious pursue is approved by God but that the customs and habits of the wicked are condemned. And he does this when he says, “For the Lord knows the way of the righteous ones,” and so forth.

The first argument establishes a twofold blessedness of the man who follows this divine counsel. First, a blessedness in this age, which consists in justification, regeneration and its fruits, and in the Holy Spirit’s continuous governance whereby the pious are ruled in such a way that everything ultimately yields their happiness. And the prophet indicates this when he says, “He will be like a tree planted next to rivers of water,” and so forth.

He also confirms what he said about this first happiness of the pious by contrasting it with the example of the wicked. Holding this wholesome doctrine in contempt, they instead pursue their own (and others’) dangerous counsels, habits, and customs. For they are truly wretched, and they’re wretched because, in God’s eyes, they’re like chaff or a feather that’s easily scattered here and there by the wind. So also, the wicked are strikingly stirred up by their own desires and by divine wrath into various factions. The prophet makes this point by saying: “Not so the wicked; not so,” and so forth.

But he teaches that a second sort of blessedness will exist in the age to come. It consists in pious men of the sort just described being established at the universal judgment, not so much as victors over all their enemies as judges of all, even the wicked. Then, having settled their cases against each one of the wicked, the latter will immediately be thrust into eternal punishment, and all the pious will be received collectively into eternal life.

The prophet teaches this when he says: “Hence, the wicked will not stand in the judgment nor sinners in the counsel of the righteous ones.” For by these words, the prophet implies two things. First, he implies that the pious will stand in the judgment (namely, the universal judgment against the wicked) and, so, will be granted eternal life. Second, he implies that the wicked will themselves fall on their own account and, so, will be condemned to eternal death. For this is the final outcome of both kinds of men. And this is the explanation of the first argument.

As for the second argument, which derives from the rendering of judgment, this is what the prophet says: “For the Lord knows the way of the righteous,” and so forth. This means that the Lord approves the way of the righteous ones, which I demonstrate here, but He disapproves of the way pursued by the wicked, which ultimately results in God saving the former and destroying the latter. This can be demonstrated by God’s many judgments and by the examples of men. Therefore, the way of the wicked should not be followed, but the other way, the way of the pious, should be pursued to completion. This is the explanation of the second argument.

Accordingly, the argument or summary of this whole song consists in a principal theme and a twofold rationale. The principal theme is precisely this: We should not depart unto the counsel of the wicked nor stand in the way of sinners, nor sit in the seat of mockers. Rather, we should keep and establish our wills and souls in the law of the Lord and meditate upon His law day and night.

That’s the principal theme, and this is what it means: We shouldn’t listen to the counsels and teachings of the wicked. We shouldn’t imitate the life and habits of sinful men. And (finally) we shouldn’t cultivate friendship with open mockers of God or any religious scoffers, nor are we to take pleasure with them. Rather, we should devote ourselves, with our whole soul, to the pursuit of God’s law and piety, and we should meditate upon that law day and night. Now we have the prophet’s principal theme and the theme’s meaning.

What’s more, this principal theme is of a deliberative sort. Hence, it’s followed by reasons and seeks thereby to persuade. The first of these reasons, which is derived from utility, is this: “For he will be blessed who does this.” That is, he who does this truly will obtain true blessedness, both the blessedness that he can possess here and now as well as that which he will possess in the future, after the end of the age.

The second reason, which is derived from the rendering of judgment is this: “For the Lord knows the way of the righteous ones, and the path of the wicked ones will perish.” The meaning is: “God indeed approves and always has approved this way, which I advise and which the pious follow” (namely, “devotion to the Scriptures and piety”). “Consequently, those who follow it will stand in the judgment. But the other path, along which the wicked walk, is condemned and, therefore, they [who follow it] will not stand in the judgment but instead will perish. Accordingly, the way of the wicked should be abandoned and the way of the pious, which I here advise for everyone, should be pursued.” This is the argument (or summary) of this entire psalm explained analytically.5 Now, if you will, let’s take a closer look at the individual elements.

The principal theme consists of two parts. First is the negative, namely, that we should move away from partnership with the wicked. The second is affirmative, namely, that our will and soul should be devoted to God’s law. With regard to the first part, the prophet says: “Blessed is the man who does not depart unto the counsel of the wicked,” and so forth.

Literally, it says: “The blessednesses of that man. . . .” For, the prophet alludes to a double blessedness, which we will describe presently. Hence, the meaning is that he who does not assent to the counsel of the wicked will receive manifold blessings. For to “depart unto the counsel of the wicked” is to consent to their counsels, just as, in Latin, we might say “abire [to depart unto] or ire in alicuius sententiam [to enter into someone’s opinion].”

But “to stand in the way of sinners” is nothing more than to follow the habits of the wicked stubbornly. For way is taken to mean “way of life” and one’s manner of life.

But to sit in the seat of mockers is to cultivate friendship with those who mock God and scoff at all religion and to engage in pleasures with them. For by using the verb sitting, the prophet meant to indicate companionship and familiarity and a mutual partaking of the same pleasures. It’s like what he said in another psalm: “I did not sit in the counsel of vanity, and I will not enter in with those who do evil; I hated the assembly of evildoers, and I will not sit with the wicked” [Ps 26:4–5].

Moreover, the prophet uses these three words—”wicked,” “sinners,” “mockers”—to encompass all sorts of accursed men. For they can all be reduced to those three types. Some, despite appearing outwardly to live in an honest fashion, are hypocritical men of bad doctrine. Others, in addition to having bad doctrine, are openly wicked. These can be lumped together with those who lead wicked lives, despite professing good doctrine. Yet others are plain Epicureans, who care neither for religion and sound doctrine nor for an honest life. Instead, they’re enemies and mockers of all religion and every honest man.

Peter similarly marks out these three types of men in the second and third chapter of his second epistle. He writes the following of the first ones in chapter two: “And there were among us false prophets, just as also false teachers who bring in heresies . . . and many will follow their mischief … and by greed, with false words, those whose damnation is not long delayed will make merchandise of you,” and so forth [vv. 1–3]. Behold the misfortune of those who follow the counsels and teachings of wicked hypocrites.

With regard to the second type of men, in the same passage in verse 10, Peter adds these words: “But” God preserves unto the day of judgment “those in particular who, following after the flesh, walk in unclean lust and despise authority,” and He punishes them. “They will receive the recompense of injustice as those who consider their daily delights as pleasure” [2 Peter 2:10, 13].

But with regard to the third type of the wicked (that is, Epicureans and mockers and despisers of God), Peter writes the following: “You should first know this: in the last days will come mockers who walk in their own lusts and say, ‘Where is the promise of His coming?’” [2 Peter 3:4]. You know the rest.

Our prophet endeavors to indicate these three kinds of wicked people (whom the apostle described well in the above-cited passages) with the words “wicked,” “sinners,” and “mockers.” Accordingly, the meaning is: We shouldn’t listen to the teachings of hypocrites and heretics or assent to their counsels, nor should we stubbornly imitate the life and habits of the wicked, nor (finally and all the less) should we foster friendship or have any friendly relations with Epicureans, those who scorn and mock God and all religion and integrity.

But take note here how briefly and elegantly the prophet describes various kinds of wickedness (namely, the beginning, progress, and end thereof) whereby the wicked are led unto eternal destruction. In the beginning one exposes oneself to bad counsel and false teaching. Eve and Adam exhibit this. For the beginning of sin in Eve was that she listened to the serpent’s counsel. In Adam, it was departing unto his wife’s wicked counsel. The prophet expresses this beginning when he says: “Blessed is the man who does not depart unto the counsel of the wicked.” Therefore, cursed is he who does depart, that is, who listens and assents. This is the beginning.

One progresses [toward eternal destruction] by abandoning oneself to flagrant sins and clinging to them tenaciously. For unless you stand against bad counsels and depraved teachings from the beginning, wickedness advances through outright sin. The prophet indicates this progress when he says: “And he did not stand in the way of sinners.” Accordingly, cursed is he who does stand in the way of sinners, for the way of sinners is a life full of sin. And to “stand” in that “way” is to live obstinately in sin. Moreover, our life is called “a way” because it leads us either unto life (if it’s good) or unto destruction (if it’s evil).

But wickedness ends in outright contempt for God and scorn for all religion. This is Epicureanism. For this is Satan’s desired result for his depraved counsels and wicked doctrines and for your habit of sinning. He wants to lead you into open contempt for God and, ultimately, to a profession of Epicureanism. This is what the prophet means when he says “sitting in the seat of mockers.”

And this is the terminus of all wickedness, contempt of God, and mockery of divine judgment and all religion. Hence, blessed is he who does not ultimately allow himself to be drawn to or set upon this seat. And he won’t be drawn to it if he doesn’t stand in the way of sinners. But he won’t stand in the way of sinner if he doesn’t depart unto the counsel of the wicked. So, the beginning of the pursuit of salvation and blessedness is not assenting or giving ear to the counsels and teachings of the wicked.

And this is the first part of the prophet’s most holy counsel, whereby he teaches what we must avoid. And it corresponds to what Peter said in the first chapter of his first epistle [that is, 1 Peter 3:11]: “Let him turn from evil.”

There follows the second part, the affirmative part, wherein is taught what should be done. And it corresponds to Peter’s second point in that same passage: “And let him do good” [1 Peter 3:11]. Accordingly, this is what the prophet says: “But his delight is in the law of the Lord,” and so on.

Notes

  1. Epistolarum libri duo (Hanover, 1609), 553–57 (for the oratiuncula) and 557–64 (for the explanation of Psalm 1). Subsequently, this meditation appeared with the other orations in Omnia Opera Theologicorum, 3/8:225–26. Zanchi’s petition has not been included here, but it was made both for himself and the Englishman George Withers (1540–1604), who shortly after receiving his degree precipitated a controversy over church discipline into which Zanchi was unhappily drawn. See Charles Gunnoe, Thomas Erastus and the Palatinate: A Renaissance Physician in the Second Reformation, Brill’s Series in Church History 48 (Brill, 2010), 163–209.
  2. Epistolarum libri duo, 555 (OOT, 3/8:224).
  3. Zanchi to Lavater, June 22, 1568 (OOT, 3/8:185).
  4. That is, the psalmist.
  5. ἄναλυτικος.

©Patrick O’Banion. All Rights Reserved.

Editor’s Note: This translation is part of Patrick O’Banion’s volume Blessed Is the Man: Orations on Theological Education (Merchant Royal Press, 2025) and appears here with his permission.

RESOURCES

Heidelberg Reformation Association
1637 E. Valley Parkway #391
Escondido CA 92027
USA
The HRA is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization

    Post authored by:

  • Girolamo Zanchi
    Author Image

    Girolamo Zanchi (February 2, 1516 – November 19, 1590) was an Italian Protestant Reformer, clergyman and educator who influenced the development of Reformed theology during the years following John Calvin’s death.

    More by Girolamo Zanchi ›
  • Patrick J. O’Banion
    Author Image

    Patrick J. O’Banion graduated from Westminster Seminary California (MA, Historical Theology) and earned his PhD in history at St Louis University. He was professor of History at Lindenwood University (St. Charles, MO) 2009–19. He has also published three books on early Modern Spain and numerous articles in academic journals. He is the translator of Girolamo Zanchi, The Spiritual Marriage between Christ and His Church and Every One of the Faithful. Patrick was ordained as a ruling elder in the PCA in 2008 and he is now licensed to preach by the Siouxlands Presbytery, PCA.

    More by Patrick J. O’Banion ›

Subscribe to the Heidelblog today!


Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comments are welcome but must observe the moral law. Comments that are profane, deny the gospel, advance positions contrary to the Reformed confession, or that irritate the management are subject to deletion. Anonymous comments, posted without permission, are forbidden. Please use a working email address so we can contact you, if necessary, about content or corrections.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.