David is all set to build the Temple, but the Lord says that no, because David has shed so much blood, and waged wars, he shall not build the house. Rather, the job is handed to his son Solomon, who God calls a man of peace. Solomon, the man of peace is charged with building the Temple, not David, the brave king and warrior.
David was a complex person, and still a devoted servant of God. He waged wars he believed were righteous, on behalf of and to protect God’s people. And yet, it’s his violence and warring that strip him of the right to oversee the building of the great Temple.
This is a nuanced difficulty of doing God’s will. We can do all we want, pray, pursue, discern, and still we might be waging wars that ultimately are not deemed of God. How are we to know? How was David to know? I believe that David thought he was doing what God wanted him to do, with a few notable exceptions. And still, too many wars, too much blood shed.
The accompanying reflection is from Dietrich Bonhoeffer, who reflects on what constitutes goodness. We tend to decide that something is good in a manner that wholly fits nicely in our perception and conclusions. Two ways we do this is by deciding that goodness is determined by our intention. If we intend good, that’s what matters. But what about David? He may have taken actions intending good, but the outcome resulted in too much blood shed. In my life, I may choose a particular approach with my husband or kids that I intend to be good, but it definitely doesn’t have the desired outcome, despite my best intentions.
The other problem Bonhoeffer points out is that human intentions are so greatly affected by the human holding the intentions, and their background. I’ve had friends offer well intentioned counsel about my loved one that are patently not helpful. Don’t let them change the kitty litter (toxoplasmosis as cause), feed them lots of fat (keto diet will solve their problems), consider disowning them (remove me from harm’s way). These suggestions all come from a place of absolute good intentions, and these people are good hearted, mostly healthy folks. And yet their good intentions don’t translate to helpful to me. And what about people who are so broken, or dark and twisted that their ‘good’ intentions have no basis in my reality. People who give their babies alcohol to quiet them down. The point is that good intention alone cannot be the measure of what God considers good.
The other way we measure goodness is by the outcome. If something results in a good outcome, it’s good. What about policies that allow for the death of some to save the life of others? Or trying to jail or shoo away homeless people so the well-heeled can be more comfortable in their economic core? If the outcome happens to be good while the motives or means are horrid, that’s not necessarily good by God’s standard either.
The other problem with outcomes is when do we stop measuring the impact of an outcome? Take well-intentioned-but-ill-executed charity. People give Christmas presents to ‘the poor’. The donors feel good, the children may feel good. The parents, unable to care for their kids may not feel good. They may feel ashamed. Or the system may create an unintended giving up by the parents, since others will take care of that problem. I am definitely not saying these consequences happen all the time. But I am saying that we cannot stop our assessment of ‘goodness’ by the easy outcomes, or the ones we want to see.
So what are we to do with our best intentions, and our best outcomes? All of our thoughts, words and deeds need to be solely focused on loving God, and loving our neighbor. I don’t think that indemnifies us or guarantees we won’t make bad choices, but it will sure help provide guideposts along the way.
No comments:
Post a Comment