There are a lot of stories about King David in the Bible… We hear about him playing music for King Saul, fighting the Philistine Goliath, the love between him and Johnathan while King Saul attempts to kill him, his crowning as King and many victories. We also hear about him a lot in the context of Jesus. Jesus is one of David’s descendants, and in some readings, the realization of the statements about David’s rule lasting forever. A fact that New Testament writers repeat over and over again. But then there’s the story of David and Bathsheba…
To be honest, this is a reading I have never wanted to talk about very much. However, Pr. Lyndon told me that we use the semi-continuous readings because of our relationship with the Anglicans. So, all you here from St. Luke’s, I blame you... Just kidding... About once a year, I see my social media explode with people harshly debating the story of David and Bathsheba, and whether what happened between David and Bathsheba was in any way consensual. I think (I hope) it’s obvious to us all that it wasn’t. David, we are told, is the chosen king of God. Bathsheba is the wife of Uriah, one of David’s soldiers. That is all we are told about her. From Bathsheba’s perspective, servants of this divinely chosen king show up and demand that she go to him. Did David tell his servants why he wanted Bathsheba there? If he did, did the servants tell Bathsheba? Even if he did, it would not have mattered much. There is a vast power imbalance between the two.
Not only does David summon Bathsheba and get her pregnant, but then he has her husband killed! David gives Uriah a letter ordering his own death. Adding insult to injury. Later on in the text, it is stated that once Uriah is dead, David marries Bathsheba, but God is greatly displeased at what David has done.
David does not tell his servants, ‘go and tell Bathsheba to come here and do this if she wants to.’ She never has the opportunity to say no. And these types of relationships still exist in our world today. The world has inherited the patriarchy. It would be nice if I could say it was just a western problem, or a Canadian problem, but it is the entire world. We focus on the inclusion of BIPOC and 2SLGBTQIA+ People and dismantling the systems of oppression that keep them excluded, but readings like these are an important reminder. Even with women in high positions of authority in secular politics and significant church leadership, these systems have not just ceased to exist. The patriarchy is still deeply ingrained in our society, and we need to ensure that it is not left to the side in our work for justice.
I recently had the opportunity to participate in facing and learning about these systems of oppression in the church context.
Last week, I attended the National Worship Conference titled ‘The Stones Cry Out: Praying with the Land.’ The focus of the conference was ways in which we can decolonize our liturgies and understandings of scripture. The conference was held at Luther College at the University of Regina, and it was a great time. There were three keynote speakers. Michelle Nieviadomy, who is a nehiyaw person and Assistant Director of the Edmonton Healing Centre. Dr. Becca Whitla, who is the Dr. Lydia E Gruchy Chair in Pastoral Theology at St. Andrew’s College. She also teaches worship, liturgy, and preaching! So if you have any issues with how I’m doing, you can email her… And the third keynote was Pr. Chung Yan, who is a Lutheran pastor serving at an Anglican parish in the Diocese of Ottawa. She was previously on the executive of the Canadian Council of Churches and is part of the Christian Council of the Capital Area.
Throughout the conference, participants were invited to consider ways in which we can include our more-than-human relations in worship, Indigenous ways of knowing, the colonial nature and use of some of our hymns, and the different lenses we can read scripture through. There was much much much more, but I don’t think anyone would be happy if I was up here for two hours. It was in Pr. Chung Yan’s plenary session titled ‘Decolonizing and Reframing: Listening to the Marginalized,’ that we were encouraged to read scripture from the perspective of those who are not mentioned. One reading discussed in this session was the feeding of the multitude that we see in today’s reading from John’s Gospel.
Last week, we heard that Jesus and his disciples were trying to find a quiet place to teach and learn. They cross the Sea of Galilee, however, shortly after they arrive a huge crowd approaches them. The reading tells us there are 5,000, but we also know that is only counting the men. The crowd could be double or even triple that number when women and children are considered.
The first thing that Jesus does is test the disciples and asks them where in the world are they going to find enough bread to feed all these people. Philip, being realistic, says that even six months wages couldn’t buy enough bread for everyone that’s present. Jesus takes a basket with five loaves of bread and two fish from a young boy in the crowd and tells the disciples to begin distributing it. With this little amount of food, Jesus is able to feed 10 to 15 thousand people in the crowd, and there are even leftovers. This act is a miracle, right?
Well, Pr. Chung Yan invited us to think a little differently. Is the feeding truly the miracle of the story? We considered the young boy… Why did he have the basket of food in the first place? Was he on a picnic with his family? Did he ask his parents’ permission before he gave Jesus the food, or did he simply hand it over when he heard Jesus and the disciples talking about how hungry the crowd was? Was the miracle really the spreading of the food, or was it the radical generosity shown, both by the young boy and by the crowd who gave up their leftovers without a second thought?
We can take this lesson of radical generosity away from the alternative reading. Hunger and poverty can feel like impossible tasks to even begin to confront as individuals. Just like racism, homophobia, biphobia, transphobia, and sexism in our church structures. However, we do not have to solve them on our own. In a sermon at the National Worship Conference, Bishop-Elect Rev. Ali Tote talked about micro-decolonization. He said this means “constantly recognizing that we ourselves always have something to learn from our neighbours.”
Perhaps, then, we can talk about generosity as ‘micro-generosity.’ Constantly recognizing that we ourselves always have something to give to our neighbours. It can simply be money, donating to local organizations or giving what you can to those you see in the streets. It can be time, like those in our congregation who support the Shelbourne Community Kitchen, the Truth and Reconciliation Committee who help serve Friday lunches at the Victoria Native Friendship Centre, or another local organization like Our Place Society who has volunteers to serve lunch, dinner, and coffee to those struggling with homelessness and addiction.
In his treatise, Concerning Christian Freedom, Luther writes at length about Christians doing good things, like living out generosity. Luther says that it is through faith that followers of Jesus do good things. Our faith is a gift from God, created and nurtured through the Holy Spirit acting within us. It is through God that we are inspired and driven to care for our communities.
In the story of Bathsheba, we are reminded of the harsh reality of power imbalances and oppression in our world. In the story of the feeding of the multitude, we see an acting out of radical generosity and compassion. Through these stories, we can be inspired to offer what we have. We can offer what we have when it comes to feeding and caring for our neighbours, and we can offer what we have when it comes to dismantling systems of oppression that impact those among us.
May God continue to guide our actions of generosity with compassion and kindness, as we strive to be agents of peace, care, and change in our communities. Amen.
