Forward Thinking

Tale of Two Davids

By Daniel Goodman

  • Print
  • Share Share
jan massys/wikimedia commons
David and David: King David acted far more reprehensibly than Gen. David Petraeus. Yet the ancient Jews, to their credit, forgave their storied leader, while we cannot.

Gen. David Petraeus is not the first famous David in history to be ensnared in the web of infidelity.

King David was an adulterer and a fellow military hero as well. However, the similarities end there. While the biblical David was
 able to retain his kingship because he repented and was forgiven, the 
contemporary David knew he would likely not be forgiven and,
 consequently, felt he had to resign.


Our apparent inability to forgive, combined with modern media’s 
insatiable lust for sex scandal stories, is a troubling dilemma that will continue to plague our polity if it is not ameliorated. In a culture where privacy is nearly
 nonexistent, an inability to forgive creates a toxic brew that results
 in qualified leaders resigning from office for private indiscretions; 
it may also discourage such individuals from entering public service
 altogether.

In Petraeus, we lost one of our most accomplished, capable, and
 qualified military leaders because of a sexual indiscretion. While the general’s private actions were immoral, they had no bearing on his
 public duties. If his adultery had no bearing on his public duties, and if he sincerely repents, we should have no qualms about re-embracing him as our CIA director.

King David’s adultery was much more morally egregious than David Petraeus’s infidelity.

King David, according to the story, desired a married woman named Bathsheba. After he ordered her to be brought to his palace, he sent her husband Uriah, a soldier, to the front-lines of a raging battle (and thus to near-certain death).

The Bible does not attempt to conceal any aspects of King David’s grievous sin. But when confronted by the prophet Nathan regarding this heinous adultery and murder, David does not attempt to justify his actions.

“I have sinned against the Lord,” he exclaims, and undertakes an austere regimen of repentance comprised of prayer, fasting, wearing sackcloth, and sleeping on the ground.

God, recognizing David’s contrition and sincere repentance, forgives David. And his subjects re-embraced him.

If King David had instead been forced out of the kingship, the Jewish people would have been gravely impoverished, and perhaps would not have survived without such a capable political
 and military leader.

Gen. Petraeus is a four-star general, and by
 all accounts one of the most brilliant military minds of this
 generation. Forcing him out of this position will deprive the United
 States of one of its most capable military minds in a time when we
 still face serious security threats.

If we cannot learn to forgive, we face the prospect of driving out many more Davids from the public
 sphere.

No aspect of our culture is in more need of learning how to
 forgive than the media. If American media in the mid-twentieth century
 functioned then as it does now, two of our most capable (and most
 potentially scandalous) presidents, Franklin Delano Roosevelt and John F. Kennedy, may not have felt
 comfortable entering public service in the first place.

Whereas our culture — one which respected privacy — once 
had the capacity to forgive, our culture today has lost this quality, and consequently risks losing present-day Roosevelts and Kennedys.


Qualified public servants shouldn’t be made to feel as if a sword of Damocles were hanging over their heads whenever a private
 foible threatens to be made public. If we were able to apply the
 lessons of forgiveness from the biblical David story to the
 contemporary David story, we might be able to keep our most able commanders in office.


Would you like to receive updates about new stories?




















We will not share your e-mail address or other personal information.

Already subscribed? Manage your subscription.