What do we mean by celebrating a day proclaiming Jesus “King of the Universe?”
Kings in the Bible are not well received, and they have terrible track-records, filled with wars and the acquisition of goods. When the elders of Ancient Israel came to Samuel and asked for a king it was because the sons of Samuel, who had been appointed as judges over the people in Samuel’s old age, “did not follow his example but sought illicit gains and accepted bribes, perverting justice.” (1 Samuel 8:3) Samuel did not like the people’s request. He prayed to God about it, but God told Samuel to give the people what they wanted because the people were not rejecting Samuel, they were rejecting God as King. God also told Samuel to “warn (the people) solemnly and inform them of the rights of the king who will rule them.” In verses 10-18 the rights of a king are laid out, and they include taking sons into the king’s service, establishing a military, establishing people to care for the king and the king’s property, taking daughters to serve in the king’s household, taking the best of the fruit of the people’s fields, taking a tithe from the people to pay the king’s servants, taking the best of the people’s servants etc. etc. It is not a pretty picture and yet, it was entirely true of the kings that governed nations around Israel, and it came to be the truth of the kings who ruled Israel.
The people wanted a King because other nations had them. People in other nations were not left to deal with the unruly or unacceptable behavior of a group of judges. They had a king to make such decisions and to be held accountable for success or failure. Other people had a visible leader who would take responsibility when the people did not want to or could not figure out how to do so without too much effort. Self-governance is not easy. Democracy is not easy. It is much easier to hand power over to someone else, essentially creating a pyramid structure with the King and his friends on top and everyone else somewhere down in the pile. A nation of people who knew themselves to be created in God’s image, and in relationship with the living God through a covenant that framed what it meant to live as neighbors, might have been expected to take responsibility for itself. But it did not. The elders wanted a King, a final decision maker, and a place where the buck would stop. It is easier not to make choices, to decide how to vote, to work for justice, or to be responsible for what happens.
Jesus rejected the opportunity to become King. In John 6, after Jesus has multiplied the loaves and fishes, the people who were there began to say that Jesus was the prophet predicted to come into the world. “At that, Jesus realized that they would come and carry him off to make him king, so he fled back to the mountain alone.” (John 6: 14-15) There was something about being a king that did not sit well with Jesus. Pilate asked Jesus if he was King of the Jews and Jesus said that it was Pilate who was saying that. (Mark 15: 2, Luke 23:1, Matthew 27:11-14) By the time we get to John’s Gospel (the Gospel for this weekend) the dialogue has been filled out so that Jesus is saying things like “My kingdom is not of this world…” (John 18:33b-37) It is telling however that Jesus says “if my kingdom were of this world, my subjects would be fighting for me.” I suggest that verse is simply pointing out what Kings do – they use force to get what they want. If Jesus were to be king, his kingship would not conform to what people expect from kings. Jesus called for communities of mutual care. Circle back to I Samuel. The people wanted a king in order to be like all the other nations.
The thoughtful prophets and tellers of our sacred stories down through the ages have tried to tell people that there is a better way to live and organize society, better than a monarchy which will always be about top-down authority using force (aka violence) to maintain order and get what they want. Walter Bruggemann refers to the reign of biblical kings beginning with Pharoah and including Kings Solomon and David, as well as the Caesars, as “totalizing,” that is, in control of all aspects of a nation’s life. Such totalizing rule comes from the top down and has the power to squelch any narrative, local tradition, or vision that does not agree with the official top-down position. (Tenacious Solidarity, chapter 1)
The model of monarchy, or Kingdom, has been the structure of the institutional church which is not surprising given that the Pope is said to be God’s Vicar on Earth. It is a structure that imitates top-down authoritarian rule mimicking the “divine right of kings.” The church has coronations, royal vestments, pomp, and circumstance, all designed to display power in the same way that earthly monarchies do. It is structured like a kingdom and for centuries, during the age of high Christendom, was able to wield the power of a kingdom. Pope Francis has taken steps that seem to be about dismantling the totalizing structure, although not fast enough for many people, and way too fast for others, including those lesser princes who are still vying for power.
God gave people what they asked for, a King, not because it was good for them, but because God is a God of relationship and relationships are about give and take. God was not the king that people wanted. God was not “kingly” enough. God did not force people to do anything. God could not be relied upon to crush their opponents. God created and gave people the ability to think, to feel compassion, to express mercy, and create a community based on love, dignity, and mutual respect. All of this is not pleasing for people who want an authoritarian God that is on the side of their particular authoritarian ideas. People continually wanted, and still want, to make God according to their own preferred image.
To name Jesus as King of the Universe is yet another attempt to say, our way is the only way. How different it would be to celebrate the Creator of the Universe. I miss Fr. Bob Krueger, a friend and colleague who intentionally called the last Sunday of the Liturgical year the Solemnity of Christ the Servant King in an effort to confront the ideology of divine monarchy with the Christian calling to servanthood.
I close this reflection by honoring a member of my worshipping community, John O’Rourke, who died this morning, leaving family and community to grieve and to reflect on his life of servanthood and love of those in need. His was a life led by a spirit of neighborliness, where helping others was not an obligation or a stepping- stone for self-promotion. It was simply the way one lived if one was committed to following the example of Jesus. He was a good man, a holy man. May God comfort all who mourn. John will be missed.