Jesus as King

I have been thinking lately about the metaphors that Christians use to talk about Jesus and how reification can be problematic. One metaphor, that of Jesus as “king”, seems to be a potential source of confusion rather than erudition, especially for folks who don’t really have much experience with monarchy. What might early Christians have meant by describing Jesus as king and talking about the Kingdom of Heaven?

Certainly, the modern constitutional monarch of the sort we have in Western Europe could not have been meant. In what way could Jesus be said to be like such figureheads? I suppose if you have a symbolic Jesus that you use for certain occasions, particularly in service of the state, that you might regard the constitutional monarch as the metaphorical equivalent of Jesus.

What about the kings of the Dark Ages, those bandits who ran protection rackets and lived as parasites on their subjects? That doesn’t sound much like Jesus at all. Jesus doesn’t need serfs to support him, and Jesus has the heart of a servant, not an overlord. Jesus does not rule by force and fraud.

What about the kings of the first century? Surely, Herod was not the template. Herod was a puppet of Rome and a tyrant. Caesar was not even a king, he was simply “Imperator”, the ultimate leader, who maintained the basic form, if not the substance, of the Republic. Imperators did not assume the title of “king” that had been abolished with the rise of the Republic. Besides, the Imperators were a sorry lot, many of them epitomes of evil, and it would be blasphemous I think to liken Jesus to a Caesar or a Tsar or a Kaiser.

Are we meant to look to the monarchs of Israel and Judah? How is Jesus supposed to be like them? Many of them were evil and experienced the wrath of God, or so the Old Testament stories tell us. Even the good ones, David and Solomon, were mighty flawed. And didn’t God, through his prophets, express disapproval of a monarchy for Israel and reluctance to endorse a king?

In my heart, I think the metaphor involves the ideal king, a benevolent monarch who, like the mythical rather than real Lionheart, works justice for Norman and Saxon alike, who embodies rather than makes the law of the realm, who is merciful and compassionate, who guards the widows and orphans, who champions the poor and meek, who insures the rights of all men. Perhaps I am reversing the metaphor and imposing on kingship a requirement that a king be Christ-like rather than having Christ be kingly.

How is Jesus like a king? Does this metaphor serve a useful purpose in American society where the idea of monarchy is almost anathema? Christians may need some better metaphors. Jesus is unlike any officeholder in the modern state. Is Jesus like the Constitution, not as it has been interpreted, but as it was intended as a limit on the power of the state? Or do we avoid blasphemy by eschewing metaphors that involve the state at all?