As I consider Jesus as king and our own reactions to and expectations of ‘kingship’, Jesus does no less than turn our expectations on their head. Perhaps the most explicit moment was in John’s Gospel, where he speaks of the Last Supper. Now, John does not actually record the Last Supper, but the lead up to it. The disciples come in, and Jesus puts on the apparel of a servant, a slave, to wash their feet.
This is the
most menial level of service. Peter goes
so far as to refuse, but that brings about a sharp rebuke from Jesus. Peter then swings out as far as he can in the
other direction. He practically asks for
a bath. But Jesus corrects him from that
extreme as well.
The kingship
of Jesus is not ‘top-down’. He is not at
the lead of everything, defining what must happen by his own perfect
nature. Which would be entirely
appropriate for him to choose to do. The
Bible is clear that at the Name of Jesus, every knee will bow and every tongue
will confess. There IS no way to stand against the glory of Christ.
But neither
is the kingship of Jesus “grass roots”.
He is not the guy trying to build up local networks of believers and
followers, being ‘of the people’ in some divine way.
No, the kingship
of Jesus is bottom up. Serve where the
people need serving. Jesus does not
presume to define what somebody needs from him.
Nor does he seek to build a consensus of what is needed. When he challenges people on that question,
it is not for his own benefit, but to help the one coming to him to articulate
that need. So the father who comes to
Jesus on behalf of his child, “Lord, help me in my unbelief.” Or the woman who dared not speak to Jesus,
but only touched his cloak, believing she would be healed-and she was. It was not till Jesus sought her out that her
story could be shared.
How does this
translate to the church? Well, there was
a fascinating article on mission work in the church in the last Presbyterian
Outlook magazine that spoke to this.
Missions receive HUGE funding in the US.
But in a design that is to make the giver feel gratified, often at the
expense of those being helped.
Orphanages receive huge support, but we have been systematically
dismantling that system in the US and Europe for YEARS. Why is this system ‘better’ for those we seek
to help? How about agencies that put us
in touch with kids we can support. We
can write to our children. How about the
parent of one of those kids who really is not comfortable with adults in
another country writing letters to their 7 year old? That is the basis of many ‘highly
successful’, perhaps we should say ‘highly lucrative’ mission industries in our
country.
This comes
from a seat of privilege. We have and we
can dole out what we have, so we can define how things should work. That is NOT how Jesus used His power. The notion of ‘servant leadership’ sounds
very nice in a book title, but translating it into real action on behalf of the
church today?
In his
article, B. Hunter Farrell uses the expression ‘selfie missions’ to describe
this kind of outreach designed first for the consumption of the giver rather
than tailored to the recipient of mission aid.
I am going to have to reflect on that in its own post.
We no longer
acknowledge the expression of the ‘divine right of kings’, but it looks to me
like we, in the West, still feel we have some kind of divine right because of
the blessings we have received and the world we have exploited to maintain
those blessings. Until we can face that,
confess where it has turned us to sin, and come humbly to our Lord Jesus, how
can we come into what Jesus truly embodies as our king?
Peter Hofstra
No comments:
Post a Comment