This last Sunday of Pentecost, known as the feast of Christ the King, is always a challenge for me, for several reasons. First, Jesus put such an emphasis on being a servant, befriending the least and last in society, and rejecting any political hopes that some followers had for him. Second, he actively tried, apparently, to conceal his identity as Messiah. Third, my general impression of rulers, of kings, is not positive. The inheritance of authority, power and wealth by human beings does not often increase their compassion and dedication to the well-being of others. Likewise, those people in recent history who have become rulers or dictators by the use of force, are even worse. I am thinking of Augusto Pinochet in Chile, Idi Amin in Uganda, Pol Pot in Cambodia, and Slobodan Milosevic in Serbia, among others.

So the question I am wrestling with, is whether this feast, and this title, Christ the King, are merely a cultural holdover from the ancient world? Or is there some spiritual content to this title that I have missed? In search of answers to these questions, I have come across two new ideas, one from the Bishop of Durham, N.T. Wright, and the other from Gage McKinney, who regularly participates in the sermon discussion after the 8:00 service. In his book Jesus and the Victory of God, NT Wright introduced me to an idea I should have grasped long ago. Other Biblical scholars had mentioned it, but I had missed the signficance, because I was making a literal interpretation. Needless to say, I was shocked when this came into focus!

The mistake I made, was to assume that the Exile was over, the exile to Babylon that is, because some of the Jews came back to Jerusalem in 532 BC and built a Second Temple. There is no question about these historical facts. What Wright makes clear in his book, is that some or all, of the Jews under Roman rule, believed that the Exile was NOT over, nevermind that they were living in Judaea. The reason for their belief, was that the prophecies of restoration had not been fulfilled yet. These prophecies in the second part of Isaiah, in Jeremiah, Ezekiel and Zechariah, say that the domination of pagan culture and the power of empire would be broken, that the Lord would return to Zion, that the covenant would be renewed, that Israel's sins would be forgiven, and that the Second Temple was the true and final Temple. Many believed that fulfillment of those prophecies, would be in effect, a second Exodus, in which God's outstretched arm would be victorious, and God would become King on earth, as in heaven.

What caused the first century Jews to believe these prophecies had not been fulfilled, was a complex set of historical realities. Judaea had been ruled by Gentiles for several centuries, since Alexander the Great. Those Gentiles brought pagan practices, such as Greek athletic contests, and drama, and Roman communal bathing. They also brought pagan religions into the land. Some Jews had accommodated themselves to these pagan influences, even to the extent of working for Rome as tax collectors. Then there were the descendants of Jews who had not gone into exile, called Samaritans, whose religious belief and practice were slightly different. There were questions about the high priesthood of the Temple, which some Jews regarded as not legitimate. And if the priesthood was not legitimate, then the sacrifices might not be offered correctly, and the Second Temple itself might not be the true and final Temple.

N. T. Wright argues that the ministry of Jesus can best be understood not only within this context, but even more, as itself the return from exile. In Jesus, there is forgiveness of sins, which is the necessary condition for the covenant to be restored. In the healings of Jesus, GodŐs outstretched arm was victorious. There is that strange saying of Jesus, "Destroy this temple and I will raise it up in 3 days", in which he was referring to himself as the Temple, the place where God's presence resides. There is the claim Jesus makes to give rest (Matt 11:28), which is the function of the Sabbath. There is the multiplication of loaves and fishes, reminiscent of God's provision of manna and quail in the wilderness. There is, apparently, a welcome for Gentiles, prophesied by Isaiah and Amos. And there are the parables in which the theme of an older brother being jealous of a younger brother who has been forgiven, is intended to direct our attention to the amazing generosity of God, the father, who cares for both brothers. Above all, there is the sealing of a new covenant at the last supper. In all these ways, Jesus was both speaking, and acting, the return of GOD the King from exile. In other words, Jesus was saying that in his ministry, in his life and coming death, the whole story of IsraelŐs history is being fulfilled.

So when we say that Christ is King, we are saying that in and thru Christ, the reign of God has begun to be established here on earth. But what, exactly, does that mean? This is the point at which we must pay close attention to the words of Jesus at his trial: "My kingdom is not of this world" (John 18:0) Kingship that IS of this world means the enforcement of laws. It means the power of the state over individuals and groups. Kingship of this world would establish one true religion and banish all others. It values money, and success, and luxury. Kingship not-of-this-world must be different: the principle of "love your neighbor" but no law and no enforcement. Kingship-not-of-this-world is open, invitational, creative, forgiving, helping, and serving.

What does this mean for us today? I think we might be able to identify the kingship of this world in some of its more obvious manifestations. First there are the movies and TV shows which show us characters motivated by desire for wealth, and desire for power. Then there is the incredible emphasis on marketing, advertising and buying, which is so important on Thanksgiving weekend. There is a growing assumption in our culture that everyone wants to be entertained. And there are the efforts of special interest groups at both ends of the political spectrum, to legislate their version of how people ought to live. Kingship not-of-this-world can also be identified in the choices people make to give their time, energy and expertise to benefit others. On Wednesday I heard an interview on "Talk of the Nation" with Mohammed Yunus, the winner of this year's Nobel Peace Prize. The interviewer was asking Yunus why someone would choose to invest in the Grameen Bank, if he got no return in interest. Yunas explained that the investor would be helping a poor person to set up a business, and when the money was paid back, they could reinvest it to help another person. The interviewer didn't seem to grasp the idea of helping others as an investment strategy, so finally Yunas said, "we are sent to this earth to do good".

So behind these two kingships are two very different attitudes toward life: one attitude is organized around myself and my wants, the other attitude is organized around giving to and serving others. When we look at what Jesus did, we don't see a program, we see him welcoming individual people. He didn't make judgements about what groups or categories each person belonged to. Jesus gave God's love and forgiveness to particular people, most of whom we know only by description: the woman at the well, and the paralyzed man. Jesus offered what help he could give: some accepted his help and some refused. He did not run after those who refused. Jesus at dinner with all sorts and conditions of people, and he did not require agreement with his theology before he sat down with them. Jesus invited his followers to share in his ministry, and offered them neither power, nor money, nor entertainment, but only the joy of living in the kingship of God.

I am most grateful to Gage McKinney for giving me an image of the reign of God which makes it a little more concrete. It seems that his name, Gage, comes from the medieval practice of pledging loyalty to an overlord--whether it be a squire or duke or a king. The word we use for the promise to marry: engagement, comes from this source, as does the word mortgage, which means a promise of payment that dies when it is fulfilled. In the medieval system, if a man promised loyalty to a duke, and the duke had promised loyalty to the king, the original man's loyalty could also be claimed by the king. And if the duke called on the man to undertake a task, he most likely would be working with others who had the same commitment of loyalty.

From this point of view, the kingship, or reign of God has indeed begun on earth, because there are people everywhere who have promised loyalty to Christ. That is, in baptism, we have promised to follow Christ, to bear witness to the Gospel, to participate in the breaking of the bread, and to love our neighbors as ourselves. Even as our pledge of loyalty is to Christ, we are able to recognize others who have also made that pledge, and work with them in the reign of God. those of us who were baptized as infants, had parents and godparents who made those promises for us. The church gives us an opportunity to restate our commitment to those promises in the sacrament of Confirmation. In this sacrament, the candidates stand before the representative of Christ, the bishop, to personally give that gage, that promise, to follow Christ as our Lord and Savior. We only ever know part of what that promise will entail in the years to come, yet we put our faith in a king who was humble and lowly, and whose throne was the cross. Even when Christ asks us to do impossible things, we trust him to give us strength and courage, and the support of others who have made the same promise. For the reign of God is in the world, but not OF the world. It is a vast invisible network of promises made to Christ, in which we are sent forth to create the community of peace and justice intended by the King.