A Tale of Three Kings: A Study of Brokenness

This section is largely concerned with the historical narrative of David’s flight in the wilderness and the gathering of his group of followers, who would come to be called his “mighty men.” As in the previous section, the allegorical interpretation guides the presentation of the biblical story, emphasizing certain elements (David’s emotional desolation, for instance) to a somewhat greater degree than the biblical narrative does. This is the last part of the story of David’s pre-king days in A Tale of Three Kings (the subsequent chapters of Part 1 being largely a reflection and dialogue on the spiritual meanings of the narrative), and the omission of the subsequent biblical material once again highlights the guiding influence of the novel’s allegorical interpretation. The novel emphasizes that this is specifically about Leadership and the Call of God and David’s way to that through Brokenness as a Godly Virtue.

There is, for example, no articulation of the long narrative arc in the Bible that shows David in between his wilderness exile and his ascent to the kingship, when he was firmly established as the leader of a significant war band. The power dynamic between Saul and David was relatively muted by that point in the biblical text, as David was simply in a waiting game, too powerful for Saul to continue pursuing, and since the authority/submission dynamic between them was diminished in that part of the biblical record, it does not appear in A Tale of Three Kings. The novel wishes to focus on David’s spiritual desolation here to argue for Brokenness as a Godly Virtue as a balm for leadership issues, specifically within church communities. This is also a sense that David is waiting in ignorance, suffering spiritually and not knowing how the scenario will unfold. He emblematizes The Difficulty of Knowing the Will of God and responds to that difficulty with submission, with Brokenness as a Godly Virtue.

Several of the main themes of the novel appear prominently in this section. With the toxic effects of Saul’s hostility now fully evident, the connections to contemporary church life are brought into high relief. Edwards touches on the theme of Leadership and the Call of God several times, suggesting that those who are truly called to be leaders will do what David did: not seek to steal a kingdom away from someone else but, trusting in their own anointing from God, depart all alone and leave it in God’s hands to provide a place for them.

The theme of Brokenness as a Godly Virtue appears more here, too, perhaps in its strongest form in the entire book. The narrator points out how David’s experience of suffering in the wilderness was instrumental in shaping his soul into a form that could be pliable and useful in the service of God. Broken of his own pride and self-importance, David must learn to rely on God alone, and in that state, he becomes the sort of leader whom God can use to bless his kingdom. Intriguingly, Saul is not absent from this process but rather has a crucial role to play. The book suggests that Saul is God’s own instrument to craft and hone David’s soul toward brokenness with, and so even though Saul’s inner state is not what it ought to be, God can use it nonetheless to bring the divine will to bear. In the allegorical interpretation, then, this underscores the insight that even though a particular pastor or leader might not have the right kind of internal character, it does not necessarily follow that God cannot use them to bring forth good in the church. Bad leaders can be used to break prospective leaders into submission, making them good leaders.