Attending a seminar while serving as an officer in the Army, I was both surprised and amused when the general showed on the scene. The room could hold about fifty soldiers, while approximately twenty were in attendance. As expected of adult students we made use of the ample space, spreading ourselves across the room. The morning the general was to address us the sergeants, backbones of the military, took a commanding presence. We all had to move to the front of the room, with every seat in every row occupied. The tables behind us were taken down and stored. When the general entered it appeared to be one-hundred percent participation for there were no vacant seats. What I found entertaining is that the general knew this drill, for he experienced it coming up through the ranks. Nonetheless, what transpired was a sign of respect for his authority.
General. President. CEO. Congressman. Physician. Minister. Manager. Teacher. Spouse. Parent. Coworker. These titles bear with them special courtesy and recognition. Rightfully so for the individual, male or female, who holds such a position deserves the respect displayed my classroom when the general approached. Balancing this, does the person who holds the position deserve our recognition? It is my hope that any person who holds power over another would exercise it biblically.
A minister in a church can hold one of three offices: pastor, prophet, king. Unless the individual is extremely gifted and charismatic he can only be one of the three, two at the most. The role of the pastor is to nurture people in a loving, kind, and benevolent manner. A prophet is to proclaim social justice, an activist whose confrontational personality can alienate as it liberates. The role of a king is to be an excellent administrator of the affairs of the church, a student of church polity. One may be a king and still fulfill an additional role, but pastor and prophet are mutually exclusive. A pastor soothes; a prophet agitates. I have harshly judged pastors who were exclusively kings, for I found them to view ministry as a business rather than a service, a place to be autocratic rather than sincere, a gateway to gain personal prominence at the expense of promoting others.
Jesus held all three offices, and unlike mere mortals did so in perfect equilibrium. Of the three offices, what did Jesus teach us about being a king? If you have a position of authority that dominates over others and if you accept the confession of being a Christian, you would be wise to study the role Jesus played as king. You will find that it was not one of domination, but of humility. Unlike the general in my previous scenario, when Jesus entered a room, empty seats would neither disturb him nor would it be an affront to his authority, instead his attention would be on the human beings scattered around the room.
Throughout the scriptures there are many references to the role of Jesus as king. It is most paramount for us to focus on those of the closing hours of his earthly life. This will highlight the difference between the abuse of power and the use of one’s position for the welfare of others.
The starting point is the Jewish expectation of the Messiah as a king who would militarily liberate a captive people. It was the long-held belief of the Jews that the king would come in the image of David. The king would be a great warrior who would conscript a mighty army, defeating the occupying Roman forces. Victory secured Israel would be restored as a free nation. The battle lines would not halt there as it was envisioned that all nations would come under the domain of Israel. This would not be a relationship of enslavement, but a realization that the Jews were the chosen people of God and the Promised Land encompassed all lands.
What mystified the Jews was that Jesus came as a swordless king. He was a king bringing peace and reconciliation, not adversarial relationships. The tribal group of the Zealots were most expectant of a warrior king. Judas was a member of this organization. When Judas realized that Jesus was on a mission of peace, he felt betrayed. In his own concept of eschatology, he perceived Jesus as an imposter; thus, he had no qualms instigating a plot to turn him over to the Sanhedrin for trial and execution. Judas believed that Jesus was retarding the destiny of Israel. Judas did not understand that Jesus was advocating the true concept of the kingdom of God – one of peace and harmony.
The sin of Judas was disillusionment. This does not excuse or justify his horrendous act, though it does interpret it. When Jesus failed to call down the legions of angels, Judas realized that the man he kissed on the check was not the warrior David.
Before we harshly judge his scandalous betrayal, reflect on your own life. How often have you breached the barrier into atheism due to an unanswered prayer, an irreversible life disappointment, chronic pain, or a just plain “I don’t give a damn” as you are fed up with life. The lesson we have from the swordless king is not to constrict Jesus to our image, but to have faith in the Jesus revealed in the sacred scriptures.
When Jesus stood before Pilate he was confronted with e question, “Are you the king of the Jews?” In response Jesus simply said, “You have said so.” (Mt 27:11) Was this an ambiguous answer, or is it a response to cause the questioner to engage in self-reflection? Jesus could have embarked on a long oration, but he did not since for three years he had been a walking sermon. It was now time for Pilate and the other accusers to deliberate on what they had heard and observed. The problem though was they could not see beyond their preconceived notions. So ingrained in their psyche was a king of power they could not contemplate a king whose ascendancy was one of peace. Again, the question comes back to us: Do we follow a Jesus that we use to justify our own misaligned objectives, or do we follow a Jesus for who shadows us in judgement?
Jesus entered the city of Jerusalem on a donkey. (Mt 21:1-11) When an emperor does so it is a sign of peace. Upon the back of a white stallion, Jesus would have arrived as a victor. On the back of a donkey, Jesus arrived as a humble servant. Even so, the people hailed Jesus and proclaimed him to be a king. Was their action one of understanding or exuberance? The weeks that followed exhibit the latter. Again, the question reverts back onto you and me. Do we lay palms before Jesus when all is right in our small world, only to howl crucify him when the deity does not fit our preconceived notions?
This is the issue with the title of king: the Jesus we want versus the Jesus who is.
The greatest atrocity to misunderstanding of the title of king was the crucifixion. When Jesus was on the cross it was a broken and discredited King of the Jews, and the crowds jeered. If he were truly a king, could he not come down from the cross? (Mt 27:42) But if those on whose lips the word king was a jest and mockery, there were those present who uttered a confession of faith. Was it not the thief who realized and confessed, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.” (Lk 23:42) It is in the word of this man that we truly understand the kingship of Jesus.
Kingship is not the abuse of power, but the use of power. Kingship is not to dominate, but to reconcile. Kingship is not to wage war, but to be an advocate for peace. Kingship is not to be judgmental for it is to be forgiving. Why was Pilate unable to understand? An individual in his position can seldom comprehend the words of Jesus, “My kingship is not of this world.” (Jn 18:36) Pilate lived in a world of power and self-gratification. Jesus lived in a world of harmony and forbearance.
Omar Bradley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (1949-1953), once said, “Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants.” Do we understand the meaning of kingship as interpreted by Jesus? In the image of Jesus, one can only have the power if it is balanced by ethics.