Christ the King 23 Nov 1997 | Comments &Questions | Return to Templestowe Uniting Church|

Do we need a king?

Do we need a king? In asking this question, I am not really interested in whether we should vote for Australia becoming a republic, or elect candidates to the Convention who will preserve the monarchy. That is an important question, and we should exercise our responsibilities as citizens to take part in the current discussions and contribute to decisions about the Australian Constitution. I do not know if what I have to say today about whether we need a king has implications for that sort of choice; but ask how it makes sense today to speak, as Christians do, of Christ the King? When few people are actually ruled by a king I do wonder how relevant it is to the way that people now think of authority, power and government to describe Jesus as King?

We began our worship today with words from the first chapter of the Book of Revelation where John the Divine greets the seven churches of Asia by giving glory to Jesus who he called the ruler of the kings of the earth.

Later in Revelation he who is described as the Word the God and the Lamb of God who shares the throne of God, is called King of Kings and Lord of Lords (Rev 17:14;19:16).

We sometimes sing of Jesus the King. In the words of Charles Wesley:

Rejoice, the Lord is King;

your Lord and King adore ...

Jesus the Saviour reigns,

the God of truth and love;

when he had purged our stains

he took his seat above:

His Kingdom cannot fail,

he rules o'er earth and heaven; ...

Or other hymns such as:

The head that once was crowned with thorns

is crowned with glory now;

a royal diadem adorns

the mighty victors brow.

Or O Jesus, King most wonderful; or Jesus shall reign where'er the sun; or Crown him many crowns. What are we thinking of when we sing songs like this, hymns of praise to Jesus as our King? Why do we have a special day to celebrate Christ the King?

This is the festival of Christ the King, the last Sunday of the cycle of the church's liturgical year, when we acknowledge Jesus the ruler of heaven and earth, the Lord, the King, triumphant, enthroned in heaven, yet Lord too of all the earth, the King of Kings. After expecting his coming in worship last Advent and celebrating his birth in humility at Christmas, we saw at Epiphany how he was revealed to the wide world, and we travelled with him to Jerusalem; we remembered his death and celebrated his resurrection; and now after studying in greater depth his life of teaching and healing, we see him at last victorious over sin and death. We acknowledge him in glory now before our regular worship leads us around again to remember the highlights of his earthly life. The feast of Christ the King, sharing something of the joyful triumph of Easter Day, is a fitting culmination of a year of worship in the name of Christ.

Yet we offer this worship using symbols which are rather distant from our experience. A long time ago, in the days of the ancient kings of Israel people used to see their king in his magnificent robes sitting on his throne with his courtiers around him, passing judgment on disputes brought to him and issuing orders, as an image of God the Creator.

So they sang

You might compare this image of God with the hymn which young people used to sing as a theme song at "Call to Youth" when I was a young student:

This, this is the God we adore:

our faithful unchangeable friend;

whose love is as great as his power,

and neither knows measure nor end. (AHB 153)

That hymn by Joseph Hart was not new in our lifetimes. It was written about 200 years before we used to sing it so lustily. It does represent a genuine part of the Christian tradition from ancient times. After all Jesus who shows us what God is like, said to his disciples "You are my friends". He was called the friend of outcasts (tax collectors and sinners Matthew 19:11) and he even said to one whom he healed, "Friend, yours sins are forgiven" (Luke 5:20). With our enthusiasm for friendship, a relationship which for us usually implies some sort of equality, we like to think of being friends, even with God. We welcome examples of the friendship of Jesus and we tend to forget that when Jesus called his disciples his friends he linked it with his right to rule, for he said,

We are his friends indeed -- if we do what he commands. So his friendship does not take away from his authority. Even when Hart wrote that verse about adoring God as our friend, he added another about Jesus, an eternal being from the beginning to the end, worthy of praise and trust, whose Spirit will be our guide:

'Tis Jesus the first and last

whose Spirit shall guide us safe home;

we'll praise him for all that is past,

and trust him for all that's to come.

So he is still one with power as well as love, like God whose love and power he showed in his earthly life. Yet again something important in the relationship between friends has happened in the life of Jesus. After he said You are my friends if you do what I command you, Jesus did recognize a new status for them as friends. He had used the word 'friend' deliberately.

So there is a new intimacy about their relationship, through which they were introduced to an intimate knowledge of God. His Word was being spoken intimately to them. It is that kind of respectful, worshipful, adoring intimacy in friendship which we enjoy when we receive the life of Christ in the Holy Communion. We know in that relationship that he is no less our Lord for all his love and friendship, and now we obey him out of love rather than fear. It is love with intimate knowledge, knowledge of his true nature, knowing the nature of God. What an enormous privilege to know God and to be friends with him through our knowledge and love of Jesus!

Love and power

When we talk in this way of our relationship with Jesus it is faith expressed in human terms of love and trust. These terms are readily understandable. People can see that it is like the relationships of love that they know in ordinary human life. The problem is that when power is added to it, love can be difficult. We are much more at home where there love between equals. Indeed we are inclined to think that any exercise of power in a relationship of love must be exploitive. So if we love one whom we call Lord and master, in our culture we may have some problems. When we speak of Christ as King, anti-authoritarian sentiments are likely to be invoked, and in some circles we might be condemned as paternalistic! Many people would rather construct an image of God within themselves and relate to Jesus like an intimate friend than they would use those images of scripture in which Jesus is pictured as a King in glory, and God is envisaged as a great and glorious King. Can we talk this way now? Are we right to allow democratic values to question our understanding of God and change the way we see Jesus?

Besides the other dimension of status and authority which might make people feel uneasy, we have a picture of Jesus in the Book of Revelation as an other worldly character. He is described in heaven, sharing the throne of God, and even inviting us to share it with him.

I suspect that most of us are not anxious to share the power and honour of the throne in any kingdom, let alone the Kingdom of God. As for the glory of God in heaven, the glorious light that is shed also around Christ the King, many today would prefer to put such a vision into earthly terms as Brian Wren did in his modern hymn Christ is alive (You might like to look it up, Sing Alleluia No. 18):

Christ is alive! Let Christians sing;

his cross stands empty to the sky:

let the streets and homes with praises ring;

his love in death shall never die.

Christ is alive! No longer bound

to distant years in Palestine,

he comes to claim the here and now,

and conquer every place and time.

In every insult, rift and war,

where colour, scorn or wealth divide,

he suffers still, yet loves the more,

and lives, though ever crucified.

So the poet sees Jesus the victor overcoming the causes of human suffering. At this point it is not clear whether that is by way of moral example or the action of his Spirit with an otherworldly source of power. Wren then goes on to deny explicitly that he is thinking of Jesus as a kingly character in another world, such as heaven.

Not throned above, remotely high,

untouched, unmoved by human pains,

but daily, in the midst of life,

our Saviour with the Father reigns.

Then we get the reference to his Spirit in a very immanent sense:

Christ is alive! His Spirit burns

through this and every age,

till all creation lives and learns

his joy, his justice, love and praise.

That is a modern type of devotion, celebrating the influence if not exactly the reign of Christ in the world we know and offering promise of more signs of his influence to come. The question is, are we justified in "cashing out" what we mean by the Kingship of Jesus in these earthly terms, or is there more to it? Is that how to decode the Book of Revelation, which is indeed in code? When Stephen as he was being martyred looked up to heaven and saw the glory of God and Jesus standing at the right hand of God (Acts 7:55-56) are we expected to understand that only in terms of the kind of influence Jesus was to have in human life and history; or how are we to understand what Paul wrote to the Ephesians when he said

Surely that cannot be limited to human history and experience. Those who wrote these things believed that Christ the King had both power and existence beyond this world that we know. As we have been reading lately from Hebrews, it is part of the faith of the apostles that he lives now in the heavenly realm where he continually prays and intercedes with God for us. It is very difficult, without doing violence to the obvious intention of the writers, to reduce this understanding of the risen Christ to the dimensions of our physical and social world. I don't suppose we have to put it in either in terms of the kind of world view which was commonly held by people of the Greek and Roman world 2000 years ago, but we would be poverty stricken in our spiritual lives if could not retain, in some way, the glorious transcendent other-worldly character of Christ the King, who will some day also be revealed as Lord over all the powers of this world. Friendship, immanence and this-worldly understandings in terms of love and justice are not enough, important and absolutely necessary as though they be.

What kind of king?

There may be something we can learn about this from the encounter of Jesus with Pilate. The Roman governor needed to know whether he was a king in the ordinary earthly sense. He could not afford to have any rebellious leaders running around the country and being called by people their king. That would be a challenge to the authority of the empire which he must uphold. It seems that something like that had been suggested to him about Jesus, so he said to him,

You know how it went. Jesus had to deal with Pilate's attempt to understand his kingship in the ordinary way and Jesus argued that if he was that kind of king his followers would be fighting to defend him.

Do you see the implication? What are people doing if they try to understand Jesus in terms only of human power and influence, even if it is not with violence but by humble service and example? To see his kingdom only in terms of political and social action in the world today, is to make the same mistake that Pilate appeared to make, and which he later insisted upon when he wrote "King of the Jews" on the sign attached to his cross, even though he suspected there was more to it. As Jesus plainly said his kingdom was not of (or from) this world. Of course he was a king in a way, for that is what it meant to say that he was the Messiah, so Jesus could not deny it entirely and we have that play on words about the kind of King that he claimed to be. So Pilate persisted, not knowing what he could mean about where his rule came from.

There you have it. This was the purpose of his life in human history and the basis of his authority, as a witness who had come from God and was able to testify to the truth about God. It is not a matter of one man's vision of the truth which might be compared with the views of another; and there was certainly never any suggestion that the truth about God for you was whatever seemed right to you. It was not a matter of whose truth we are talking about, as Pilate (post-modern Pilate?) implied when he added cynically, "What is truth?" It is a question of genuine authority. Of knowing what you are talking about. That is where the authority of Jesus the King comes from, his ability to bear witness to the truth because he had come from God, not from this world. So Paul sang his praise as the cosmic Christ in whom the early Christians came to believe, the same Christ as the suffering servant who emptied himself, even to the point of death, death on a cross:

All praise to you Lord Jesus Christ.



[David Beswick, Templestowe Uniting Church]

| Comments &Questions | Return to Templestowe Uniting Church|