34th Sunday of Ordinary Time / The Feast of Christ the King
November 22, 2015
Ben Fischer
The opening reading is from the Book of Daniel. The Book of Daniel is the last of the Major Prophets in the Old Testament, and is notable for it’s rich and vivid imagery. The visions are similar to those in the Book of Revelation. The book is also notable for it’s clear Messianic prophecies. Two prophecies are important for today’s discussion: the reference to the Son of Man in today’s reading and a timeline that the Jews believed predicted when the Messiah was to come. And indeed, that timeline pointed to the time of Jesus, so when He walked on Earth, Messianic expectations were very high.
In today’s reading we read a portion of a vision that Daniel had. Just before today’s first reading, Daniel has a vision of four beast emerging from the waters, each more terrible than the one before. The first one was like a lion with eagle’s wings. The second one was like a bear. The third like a leopard with four wings and four heads. The fourth beast was unlike the others, “terrible and dreadful and exceedingly strong”. It had 10 horns on it’s head and as Daniel looked a new horn appeared and three others fell before it and the new horn had eyes like a man’s and a mouth which spoke boastfully. Then a throne was erected and the Ancient of Days took his place on the throne. His clothing was white as snow and his hair was white like wool. His throne was blazing with fire and countless thousands of people attended to him. Before the Ancient of Days or “Ancient One”, the fourth beast was destroyed.
Then we come to today’s reading. One, like the Son of Man, came and stood before the Ancient One and received glory and dominion over all.
This phrase “Son of Man” is the most common expression that Jesus used to refer to Himself. It is a strange circumlocution. In essence, a “son of man” is simply a man – a mortal, a mere human. It appears several places in the Old Testament and merely means that. In the case of this vision of Daniel, there seems to be additional context. In the beginning of the vision, there are a number of fantastic and unimaginable beings. The four beasts look like an amalgam of living animals and the Ancient One is only vaguely described. Is He human? Is He yet in some other form? But the one “like a Son of Man” stands before them all and and was found worthy and received dominion. This is no mere mortal. This is the essence of humanity: humanity as it was before the Fall; made in the image and likeness of God and who had been given dominion over all the Earth.
The Jews understood the “Ancient One” or “Ancient of Days” to refer to God seated on His throne. The book of Daniel goes on to interpret the beasts and the horns as referring to the pagan kings which tormented Israel. The “Son of Man” was widely accepted by the Jews as referring to the Messiah who was chosen by God to lead His people to victory. There was no expectation that the Messiah would be divine. That wouldn’t come until Jesus revealed it. The Messiah was simply an exemplar, a great leader and a great man. Very much like the vision in Daniel: someone who has been found worthy by God and who can stand before the forces arrayed against him and emerge victorious.
For Jesus to take that title for Himself seems contradictory. After all, He is the Son of God! And calling Himself “Son of Man” seems to be only partially correct since Joseph was His legal, but not biological father. The Christian interpretation is that Daniel saw one like the Son of Man. Not just a son of man. For Jesus was truly man, but also truly God.
It is believed that by using this title, Jesus was doing several things. He was identifying Himself totally with humanity; “like us in all things but sin”. We was also identifying Himself with this prophecy in Daniel. When the Jews heard Him use this phrase, they would have understood that Jesus was referring to Himself as the Messiah and as perfected humanity. He is victorious over the enemy and His words bring Eternal Life and He is the model that we need to live up to.
In the Gospel reading, this Messianic fervor brought Jesus to the ruler of the day. The Jewish authorities, fearful of what the Romans might do if Jesus’ followers got out of hand, turned Him into the local authorities with the charge of insurrection. Pope Benedict XVI wrote about this in his book Jesus of Nazareth, volume II.
The image of Pilate in the Gospels presents the Roman Prefect quite realistically as a man who could be brutal when he judged this to be in the interests of public order. Yet he also knew that Rome owed its world dominance not least to its tolerance of foreign divinities and to the capacity of Roman law to build peace. This is how he comes across to us during Jesus’ trial.
The charge that Jesus claimed to be king of the Jews was a serious one. Rome had no difficulty in recognizing regional kings like Herod, but they had to be legitimated by Rome and they had to receive from Rome the definition and limitation of their sovereignty. A king without such legitimation was a rebel who threatened the Pax Romana and therefore had to be put to death.
Pilate knew, however, that no rebel uprising had been instigated by Jesus. Everything he had heard must have made Jesus seem to him like a religious fanatic, who may have offended against some Jewish legal and religious rulings, but that was of no concern to him. The Jews themselves would have to judge that. From the point of view of the Roman juridical and political order, which fell under his competence, there was nothing serious to hold against Jesus.
At this point we must pass from considerations about the person of Pilate to the trial itself. In John 18:34-35 it is clearly stated that, on the basis of the information in his possession, Pilate had nothing that would incriminate Jesus. Nothing had come to the knowledge of the Roman authority that could in any way have posed a risk to law and order. The charge came from Jesus’ own people, from the Temple authority. It must have astonished Pilate that Jesus’ own people presented themselves to him as defenders of Rome, when the information at his disposal did not suggest the need for any action on his part.
Yet during the interrogation we suddenly arrive at a dramatic moment: Jesus’ confession. To Pilate’s question: “So you are a king?” he answers: “You say that I am a king. For this I was born, and for this I have come into the world, to bear witness to the truth. Every one who is of the truth hears my voice” (Jn 18:37). Previously Jesus had said: “My kingship is not of this world; if my kingship were of this world, my servants would fight, that I might not be handed over to the Jews; but my kingship is not from the world” (18:36).
This “confession” of Jesus places Pilate in an extraordinary situation: the accused claims kingship and a kingdom. Yet he underlines the complete otherness of his kingship, and he even makes the particular point that must have been decisive for the Roman judge: No one is fighting for this kingship. If power, indeed military power, is characteristic of kingship and kingdoms, there is no sign of it in Jesus’ case. And neither is there any threat to Roman order. This kingdom is powerless. It has no legions.
With these words Jesus created a thoroughly new concept of kingship and kingdom, and he held it up to Pilate, the representative of classical worldly power. What is Pilate to make of it, and what are we to make of it, this concept of kingdom and kingship? Is it unreal, is it sheer fantasy that can be safely ignored? Or does it somehow affect us?
In addition to the clear delimitation of his concept of kingdom (no fighting, earthly powerlessness), Jesus had introduced a positive idea, in order to explain the nature and particular character of the power of this kingship: namely, truth. Pilate brought another idea into play as the dialogue proceeded, one that came from his own world and was normally connected with “kingdom”: namely, power—authority. Dominion demands power; it even defines it. Jesus, however, defines as the essence of his kingship witness to the truth. Is truth a political category? Or has Jesus’ “kingdom” nothing to do with politics? To which order does it belong? If Jesus bases his concept of kingship and kingdom on truth as the fundamental category, then it is entirely understandable that the pragmatic Pilate asks him: “What is truth?” (18:38).
It is the question that is also asked by modern political theory: Can politics accept truth as a structural category? Or must truth, as something unattainable, be relegated to the subjective sphere, its place taken by an attempt to build peace and justice using whatever instruments are available to power? By relying on truth, does not politics, in view of the impossibility of attaining consensus on truth, make itself a tool of particular traditions that in reality are merely forms of holding on to power?
And yet, on the other hand, what happens when truth counts for nothing? What kind of justice is then possible? Must there not be common criteria that guarantee real justice for all—criteria that are independent of the arbitrariness of changing opinions and powerful lobbies? Is it not true that the great dictatorships were fed by the power of the ideological lie and that only truth was capable of bringing freedom?
Benedict XVI, Pope (2011-03-10). Jesus of Nazareth Part Two, Holy Week: From the Entrance Into Jerusalem To The Resurrection (pp. 188-191). Ignatius Press. Kindle Edition.
Today is the feast of Christ the King. The feast day was originally established by Pius XI in 1925. This was in response to the rise of Fascism and Socialism after the disastrous First World War. Both political systems are inherently materialistic and atheistic. By establishing this Feast Day, Pope Pius XI hoped that
- The Church would remain free from state interference,
- That secular leaders would remember their duty to honor and respect Christ
- That the faithful would be reminded that Christ must reign in our hearts, minds, wills and bodies.
(or just Google “Quas Primas”)
Those are still relevant today. The specific political systems that were ascendant in 1925 have been replaced, but their replacements are no less materialistic or secular in outlook. And the four beasts of Daniel’s vision continue to attack our faith and our culture.
May the Son of Man conquer our enemies and rule in our hearts and minds!
Closing Prayer
Almighty, ever-living God,
it is your will to unite the entire universe under your beloved Son,
Jesus Christ, the King of heaven and earth.
Grant freedom to the whole of creation,
and let it praise and serve your majesty for ever.
Through our Lord Jesus Christ, your Son,
who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit,
one God, for ever and ever.
Amen.
The Lord bless us, and keep us from all evil, and bring us to everlasting life.
No comments:
Post a Comment