To put it another way

I don't usually write about ancient soap operas, but when I do, I write about the best.   I was struck by this read in church today.  How angry David was on the behalf of the poor man whose prized lamb had been taken from him.  How remorseful he was when he realized the prophet was talking about him.  I know this is long but context is important.

2 Samuel 11:26 - 12:13aWhen the wife of Uriah heard that her husband was dead, she made lamentation for him. When the mourning was over, David sent and brought her to his house, and she became his wife, and bore him a son. But the thing that David had done displeased the LORD, and the LORD sent Nathan to David. He came to him, and said to him, "There were two men in a certain city, the one rich and the other poor.The rich man had very many flocks and herds; but the poor man had nothing but one little ewe lamb, which he had bought. He brought it up, and it grew up with him and with his children; it used to eat of his meager fare, and drink from his cup, and lie in his bosom, and it was like a daughter to him.  Now there came a traveler to the rich man, and he was loath to take one of his own flock or herd to prepare for the wayfarer who had come to him, but he took the poor man's lamb, and prepared that for the guest who had come to him."  Then David's anger was greatly kindled against the man. He said to Nathan, "As the LORD lives, the man who has done this deserves to die;he shall restore the lamb fourfold, because he did this thing, and because he had no pity." Nathan said to David, "You are the man! Thus says the LORD, the God of Israel: I anointed you king over Israel, and I rescued you from the hand of Saul; I gave you your master's house, and your master's wives into your bosom, and gave you the house of Israel and of Judah; and if that had been too little, I would have added as much more.Why have you despised the word of the LORD, to do what is evil in his sight? You have struck down Uriah the Hittite with the sword, and have taken his wife to be your wife, and have killed him with the sword of the Ammonites. Now therefore the sword shall never depart from your house, for you have despised me, and have taken the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your wife.  Thus says the LORD: I will raise up trouble against you from within your own house; and I will take your wives before your eyes, and give them to your neighbor, and he shall lie with your wives in the sight of this very sun. For you did it secretly; but I will do this thing before all Israel, and before the sun." David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the LORD."

My first thought on this last week (when we heard the story of how David sees Bathsheba bathing on the roof and decides he needs to have her, gets her pregnant and calls her husband back from the front lines to see if he can get out of this by making it look he was around to conceive a child, and then, when all that failed, sends him to the front lines so he'll be sure and die)  was that David was behaving like a real piece of shit.   Yes, I said it, David, a man after God's own heart, was behaving like a real piece of shit.   I have a history with this story.   When I was 15 or so  I heard my first real douche bag sermon I had ever heard in my whole life and it was on this scripture.  The youth minister blamed the whole thing on Uriah's wife.  It was her fault for looking good, you see, and David couldn't help himself.    Really?  Even as a teenager, I knew that this meant that this pastor was an idiot and a cretin. Call it my first clue that non denominational churches and I were not going to be friends..

So hearing this story as an adult, I think that David is far worse than a douche bag.  He is behaving like a bad man.   I was tempted to blog on it, but I changed my mind.  Decided to let it go.  After this week, I can't though.

The story that Nathan tells him enrages him.  It's like someone holds a mirror up to his face and he's angry at what he sees.   It's almost like he didn't see it before.  He didn't really quite appreciate what he'd done.   That he'd called this poor woman to his house, used his power and influence to take her to bed, given that he was the king I'd say it was coercion at best, then tried to trick her husband into coming back from the war and sleeping with her to cover up his crime, and when that failed, he'd had the man killed in a way that covered up who was behind it.   It like he doesn't understand how hurtful what he's done is until he hears someone tell it another way.

Sometimes it takes that.  Sometimes it takes telling the story in another way like it's someone else doing it to get someone to see what they've done.   Being direct about it doesn't always work.  It makes more sense to hurt someone while you're doing it.   I want to be with that man, I want to be with that woman, and how I do it doesn't matter.   Once I've done it, I don't want anyone to know.  When subterfuge fails, the cover up is worse than the original crime.

Imagine yourself in a similar situation.   I've been in one, actually.   When I was in grade school, I decided I needed new friends.  I wanted to be one of the cool kids.  So I did something terrible:  I ditched my two girlfriends because they were too nerdy.  Little did I know back then that I was the geekiest of us all and just hadn't figured it out yet but I digress.  It wasn't until after I did it that I realized what a horrible thing it was and what a horrible way I had done it.   My response?  Going to another elementary school the next year.  I thought I was going to make friends.   Instead, I mouthed off in the cafeteria one day and became a pariah there.   I deserved what I got and then some.

I did learn a valuable lesson though.  Being cruel to people to get something you want is a horrible idea.  It hurts them, it hurts you, and the universe will get you back.  There are lots of ways to be cruel to people to make yourself look good to other people.  One of those ways is siding with a bully by choosing not to get involved.   So you don't like gay people, or you don't like gay marriage, or think gay men are weird.  So what?  They exist.  The groups Dan Cathy is funding is kicking it up more than a notch.  They're behaving like pieces of shit and wrapping their cruelty up in righteousness and seasoning it with plenty of god-talk to make it seem irreproachable.  So quit hiding behind free speech (feel free to tell the mayors of those cities that banning douche bag business owners is unconstitutional though) and differences of opinion and either admit you like greasy damn fried chicken so much that you don't care who you hurt to get it and you just don't care about other people who happen to be different than you, or take a stand and turn around.

Relationships.

I was reading my email this morning when I came across this article that the Archbishop of Canterbury has decided that he's had enough of the silly American church and their refusal to play the game the way he decided they should. To be fair, what the article actually says is:

Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams is proposing that representatives currently serving on some of the Anglican Communion's ecumenical dialogues should resign their membership if they are from a province that has not complied with moratoria on same-gender blessings, cross-border interventions and the ordination of gay and lesbian people to the episcopate.

Really? I didn't know you had any real authority over here, Rowen. I'm also starting to think the relationship between the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion has become abusive. Let me explain what I mean: The moratoria on same gender blessing etc was not decided on by our church. That was their idea. What were we supposed to do? Tell the Holy Spirit to wait just a little while longer on this because these folks haven't grown up yet? We don't run around telling other provinces in the church what to do. We haven't tried to strong arm anyone else into respecting women, ordaining women, or giving equal consideration to gay and lesbian folks who are called to ordained ministry.

He wants us to leave the playground because we didn't play his little game and quite frankly, I'm so far past giving a crap what the Worldwide Anglican Communion thinks it's not even funny. I don't care if my church has a relationship with a diocese in Africa anymore. I stopped giving a rip about that when they started sending missionaries to us a few years ago. As for Canterbury, it's not like this position is getting them record numbers of people in the pews every week--they have a lower attendance rate than the US church--even with all our bad habits like being nice to queers.

I'm so sorry that these people are too stupid to figure out that Jesus of Nazareth was a liberal. (I would say is a liberal, but the Lord hasn't sent out any political memos lately.) It's not my fault they're too stupid to realize what they're reading when they crack open the gospels. Of course, there are Christians out there who are too stupid to realize Jesus of Nazareth was a Jew, so I suppose I should cut them some slack for figuring this out. At least, I think they've figured this out. I have been wrong before.

I think telling them to have it their way (without resigning of course, that makes it look like we think we did something wrong) is the best course of action at this point. I'm just one woman but I think we've gotten to a point in this relationship where we've all stopped hearing each other. Some distance might be a good thing.

Is it a sign that I'm jaded that I'm at the point where when someone wants to walk out of my life I just let them? I'm so over begging people to love me. It's never done me a bit of good. I just hope the Church figures that out before she ceases being The Church. You can't please everybody. Impressing people has never been our business.

Speaking of that, can somebody please talk about the Gospel sometime instead of who's sleeping with who and whether or not that person is wearing a clerical collar?