Ahithophel was the king’s counselor. Hushai the Arkite was the king’s confidant. Ahithophel was succeeded by Jehoiada son of Benaiah and by Abiathar.
1 Chronicles 27:33-34 (NIV)

I’ll never forget the weekend my father and I made a trip to northwest Iowa to visit my grandfather who was well into his nineties. As we sat around the table with Grandpa V that afternoon, he began to share family stories that my dad and his brother had never heard. They were stories of the issues that had created division in the family and had partially shaped his life. But they had never been talked about.

I find it fascinating the things that people choose to talk about and those they keep secret. What is perhaps even more fascinating are the motivations that drive the silence.

In today’s chapter, the Chronicler continues his lists outlining the reign of ancient Israel’s greatest King, King David. Today’s lists are the Army divisions and their commanders, the tribal leaders, and the overseers of the King’s lands, flocks, vineyards, and storehouses. David definitely had an impressive spread.

At the very end of the chapter, the Chronicler mentions David’s counselor, Ahithophel, and then quickly mentions that Ahithophel was succeeded by Jehoiada. Once again, I find that when reading through these ancient lists the stories are in the exceptions. I always look for things that don’t fit the pattern. In this case, nowhere else in his lists does the Chronicler name someone’s successor. So, what’s up with that?

The story is found in 2 Samuel 15-17. David’s very own son, Absalom, killed his brothers and very nearly succeeded in a coup d’etat to steal his father’s kingdom away. Why? Absalom’s sister had been raped and discarded by their half-brother, the eldest of David’s sons. David, their father, did nothing. When it came to unleashing his coup, Absalom was aided by his father’s own counselor, Ahithophel. When the coup failed and Absalom was dead, Ahithophel committed suicide.

The Chronicler is silent when it comes to this story or any story that might tarnish the memory of the great King David. Some historians argue that the Chronicler’s audience knew these stories well and they didn’t need to be repeated. While that may be true, his readers also knew the stories of David’s mighty men, but he lists them anyway. I think the motivation in the Chronicler’s silence is simply that he wants the history he’s writing to inspire the work of rebuilding and restoring the Temple that was happening in his generation. He was selective in sharing the glorious bits while leaving out the things that might tarnish those memories.

“Every family has bad memories.”
Michael Corleone, Godfather Part III

This morning in the quiet I found myself pondering anew my grandfather’s decades of silence and then his confession late in life. I’m grateful to have been there to hear it, and I’m glad that he shared it. It helped me understand a lot of things about our family and about my grandfather’s life. I don’t, however, know exactly what his motivation was in never talking about it. Perhaps it’s as simple as “letting bygones be bygones.”

I get that there are a million and one “what ifs” depending on the specific skeletons in the family closet. At the same time, I have observed along my life journey that there is a common human desire to understand ourselves, our families, and the things that shaped our life experiences. Knowing the truth, even a difficult-to-hear truth, may very well be a key ingredient in that journey of understanding. I don’t want to rob my descendants of knowing a difficult truth simply to avoid personal shame.

If you know anyone who might be encouraged by today’s post, please share.