"What Should We Expect From Our Leaders"

II Samuel 11:26-12:7

August 12, 2012 + Eleventh Sunday after Pentecost

Reverend Dr. David C. Brown
Pilgrim Congregational United Church of Christ
400 Glenwood Drive, Chattanooga, TN 37404

A personal confession: I am deeply disappointed in the quality of the current presidential campaign. Both candidates and their surrogates have not really addressed the incredibly serious problems facing our country and what they believe would help to solve them. Instead we have been subjected to ads denigrating the character of each candidate. Each candidate has been accused of lacking honesty and basic integrity. In the process more and more Americans have less and less interest in what is probably the most important presidential election in years. We are now told that the selection of Paul Ryan as Mr. Romney’s Vice Presidential choice will begin a debate on what kind of America we want to be. But I worry that this may leave our country even more wounded and divided.

While the personal lives of both Mr. Obama and Mr. Romney are exemplary, this campaign season has increased public disdain for all political leaders. This has been growing for years, fueled by the sexual indiscretions of so many Presidents and politicians. I can’t believe that our political preference is any comfort when we learn the truth about the sexual escapades of former Presidents Roosevelt, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, and Clinton, not to mention Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. What a sad and shabby business! When those we have admired as national leaders are revealed to have shown a lack of integrity in their personal lives, it makes us want to question their public accomplishments, doesn’t it?

That is the problem. How should we respond to a gifted political leader or, for that matter, a leader in any area of human life – business, finance, the media, the ministry – who is revealed to be lacking in personal morals and ethics? Does it matter? Can’t we separate the public figure from the private person? Is it really anyone’s business what goes on behind closed doors between consenting adults?

Personally, I believe it does matter when there is a disjunction between a leader’s public and private behaviors. I suppose that you would expect me to say that as a minister, but let me illustrate this problem with a story from the life of King David.

When we left David last week he was on the threshold of greatness as Israel’s King. He had unified the nation both politically and religiously. Though there were still wars to be fought, the tide of victory was clearly running in Israel’s favor. The other nations of the Middle East were beginning to recognize that David was a power to be reckoned with.

But David was not simply a great military leader. He was also a great political leader. He had that certain “something” that is so difficult to define but that is instantly recognizable. Sometimes we call that quality “charisma.” Leaders who have charisma seem almost magic in their ability to inspire enthusiasm and loyalty in their followers. Strong men admire them and beautiful women adore them. David had this quality to his fingertips. To this day, he is still remembered as the greatest king Israel ever had.

It must be a very heady thing, to have this kind of approval, to have people telling you that you’re “the greatest” and that they would do anything for you. After a while, you might start to believe it yourself. You begin to think of yourself as somehow different from other people. After all, you’re the leader and no one can really understand or appreciate the stress and strain you have to bear. Surely, you’re entitled to find a little happiness where and when you can.

I have no way of knowing if such thoughts went through David’s mind. What I do know is that David was not a happily married man. His primary wife, Michal, was King Saul’s daughter and she had never accepted David as her equal. The more David was praised in public, the more she belittled him in private. The Bible never indicates his age, but I think we might fairly assume that at this time in his life, David is probably somewhere around forty and ready for what we call a “mid-life crisis.”

It happened in the spring of the year “when kings go forth to war,” except that David was sitting this war out in Jerusalem. Tough old Joab had been sent in his place to command Israel’s army. Fatigued by a day of government work and, perhaps, having had a little too much to drink at lunch, he took a late afternoon nap. It was almost twilight when he awoke. The air was sultry. The palace was quiet. Knowing their King was asleep, most of the servants were asleep themselves or had wandered off on their own.

David got up from his couch and strolled out onto the terrace of the palace. Though he was still half-asleep, he was suddenly wide-awake. There, below him, he saw her. She was standing in the interior courtyard of a private home, able to be seen only from the palace terrace. She was rinsing herself after bathing. She was exquisite. And she had all the added allure of being different. Different from his unappreciative wife, that is.We will never know what moral struggle David had with his own conscience. The Bible only tells us that after he saw her, he sent one of his servants discreetly to inquire who she was. The answer was brought back that she was Bathsheba, the wife of Uriah the Hittite, one of David’s bravest soldiers. Was it the next day or a week later that David sent for her? We don’t know, but he sent for her and she came. Perhaps, it is only fair to add here that most biblical commentators have seen Bathsheba as a very willing participant in this mutual adultery. It is suggested that she knew very well that David frequently walked on the balcony above her home and she timed her bath for the moment she knew he would see her. Who knows how many baths she took before he finally noticed her!

That is all speculation. What we do know is that David and Bathsheba carried on their affair for some time. The Bible is discreet about the details and, frankly, I appreciate that. Are you as tired as I am of all the sexual details and lurid display we find all around us today? One of our members called my attention to a thoughtful recent article where the writer noted that in his day when things got to the “juicy” part, the author would put in three dots, “. . . later.” Nowadays, books, movies, and television tell it all and show it all. Whatever happened to decency? I really don’t believe in censorship. I think it creates more problems than it solves, but I certainly wish that our society showed more restraint these days. But that is probably a subject for another message!

What the Bible does tell us is that Bathsheba became pregnant. Then the cover-up began. David was no fool. He realized that popularity is a fickle thing. When the people learned of his adulterous liaison they might turn on him as they had turned on Saul.

David wrote to Joab and ordered him to send Uriah back home to Jerusalem. Ostensibly Uriah was to make a report from the war front. After a few questions, David sent Uriah home with the words, “Go home and wash your feet.” I do not want to become salacious here myself but honesty compels me to note that “to wash one’s feet” was an ancient Hebrew euphemism for making love. Whether you find that difficult to believe, it is clear that is what Uriah understood David meant. But he didn’t. Go home and wash his feet, that is. Instead, he slept that night in the hallway outside David’s door. When David asked him the next morning why he had slept there, Uriah responded that he couldn’t possibly think of spending a night at home with his lovely wife while his fellow soldiers were still in the field. From start to finish, Uriah displays an incredible amount of loyalty to David and his fellow soldiers. It is not fair to picture Uriah as rather dense as some commentators have done. Rather we see him as someone whose own loyalty was so genuine that he could not imagine anyone behaving disloyally toward him.

The next night, David tried another approach. He entertained Uriah at the palace and plied him with wine until the wee hours of the morning hoping that drink might soften the resolve of this iron man. But it didn’t. Once again, Uriah spent the night camped outside David’s bedroom door.

Again, it would be wonderful to know what moral struggle went on in David’s mind before he did what he did next. At least, I hope there was a struggle. Whether there was or not, David sent Uriah back to the army, back to the war, with a sealed message for Joab: “Send Uriah and a detachment of soldiers you know you can trust to a place of great danger. Then, when the enemy attacks, have the other soldiers quickly draw back and leave Uriah there alone. He is so loyal and so brave he will not think of retreating. He will fight to the death.” And that is exactly what happened. Joab was the perfect fixer for a powerful leader. He knew exactly what he was supposed to do. Even the message he sends back is a masterpiece of subterfuge. After giving the details of the battle and the names of some of the Israelite casualties he mentions, almost as an after-thought, “O, by the way, Uriah the Hittite was also killed.”

As quickly as he could, David married Bathsheba hoping people would think he had done another wonderful thing by marrying the widow of a national hero. I expect he also hoped that people wouldn’t notice the baby was born rather prematurely.

But people did notice. They always do, sooner or later. I don’t know about you but I find it very difficult to believe the protestations of ignorance by some of those around President Kennedy that they never knew about all his women. Whether the corridors of power are in 10^th century B.C. Jerusalem or 21^st  century Washington, there are always listening ears and prying eyes. And the news travels fast.

One of those who heard the story was Nathan, called “the prophet.” It is fascinating to realize that a thousand years before Christ, David was expected to hold public court just as a Saudi Arabian king today. On the appointed day, any subject was at liberty to approach the king, tell his tale of woe, and make an appeal for justice. On such a day, Nathan appears but not on his own behalf; rather, he says; on behalf of one of the “little people” of David’s kingdom. Nathan tells a heartrending story.

“It seems,” says Nathan, “that in a certain city in the kingdom there are two men. One of them is rich, the other poor. The rich man has everything. The poor man has nothing. Nothing that is, but a little lamb that is not intended for food but as his personal pet. His life is so limited that this is really the only source of joy he has. One day, the rich man – displaying all the insensitivity for which the rich and famous are noted – decides to have a dinner party. Not wanting to kill one of his own flock he simply takes the poor man’s lamb and serves it to his guests.”

As David hears the story, he’s outraged. “Tell me the name of the man who has done this thing. He deserves to die. How could he have done it? Didn’t he have any pity? Who is he? “Nathan turns on David and responds with an answer which is even more abrupt in Hebrew than in English: “Lo-haish!” “You are the man!”

There is an important postscript to the story which describes David’s contrition. David is truly sorry for what he has done. He wants to make amends. But it is far too late for that. Nathan tells David that the price of his adultery will be the death of his newborn son.

Friends, permit me a personal “Midrash” here, a personal interpretation. I do not believe God kills babies because of the sins of their parents. Such a God would be a monster and unworthy of our love and devotion. But I do believe that innocent people suffer because of what guilty people do. Life is not always fair. People who do bad things do not always get what they deserve. But the longer I live the more I am convinced that there is a kind of divine economy regarding evil as well as goodness. Someone has to pay and someone does. The awful thing is that too often the wrong person gets stuck with the check. I think that is part of what the story of the death of David and Bathsheba’s baby is all about.

Let me close by drawing a few conclusions that I believe to be important as we ponder: “What should we expect from our leaders.”

First, I think we have a right – even a duty – to expect that our leaders display both public excellence and private integrity. Using women or men for sexual gratification or abusing the opportunity of one’s position for personal gain has no excuse. What Nathan did in confronting David was to draw an exact connection between the public and private man. In betraying Uriah, David had not simply committed a serious personal sin; he had also betrayed a public trust. Let me risk an analogy: a lack of integrity in what we do privately is like an unseen cancer growing within; sooner or later it will have a profound effect on what we do in public. And whoever learns of such a breach of trust has an equal moral responsibility to confront the one responsible.

I hope to God there are still one or two Nathans in Washington who have the courage to do what he did. What troubles me is the way our leaders tend to insulate themselves from criticism or confrontation. Do you recall the furor that erupted several years ago when an Episcopal priest in Kennebunkport dared to suggest in a sermon before President Bush that our country was going in the wrong direction? Personally, I think we need more preachers, pundits, and politicians with the courage to speak out even if it does offend the “high and mighty.”

I have an equally important second conclusion: we have no right to expect more of our leaders than we expect of ourselves. Friends, I am distressed by the hypocrisy in much of the media these days. There seems to be a positive delight in ferreting out and broadcasting to the world every real and imagined fault in our leaders. Who among us could stand up to such relentless scrutiny? Is it any wonder that some of our ablest men and women have no interest in public service? I see no contradiction from what I said a moment ago. Nathan confronted David not to destroy him but to correct him. I am sure Nathan admired and supported David for his valuable national leadership. He spoke because he believed this serious personal matter could have diminished or even destroyed David’s effectiveness. The nation needed David and Nathan was determined to get him back on the right track again.

That leads to my final thought. The last and best word is this: God always works for good in human life no matter how foolishly or how tragically we mess things up. God always gives sincere penitents another chance. Even though God knows only too well what we have done and whom we have hurt, God doesn’t give up on us. How then do we dare give up on our leaders . . . or ourselves?!

One of my favorite books are the Sherlock Holmes stories by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. In “The Adventure of the Three Students” Holmes is called upon to discover which of three university students has stolen a look at the test questions before an important exam. Before Holmes can identify the culprit, one of the students comes forward and confesses. The last words of the story, spoken by Holmes to the student, are almost like a benediction: “As to you, sir, I trust that a bright future awaits you in Rhodesia. For once you have fallen low. Let us see in the future how high you can rise.”

The good news in the story of David is that he did go on to higher and better things and Israel never forgot his wonderful leadership. The same can be true today for our leaders when they stub their moral toe. Best of all, it is also true for you and me. Perhaps God only knows the secret sin we are carrying right now. But believe this: if we are truly sorry and put it behind us, our life will have a peace and joy we cannot begin to imagine.