Regarding the label “King”

Regarding the label “King”: In my understanding and imagining of Jesus, made over years of study, questions and thought, I firmly believe, that title, rank, adoration, attention or allegiance to him personally, was not of any concern to him. His was a greater selfless mission - that of a self-actualized role of modeling - in words and behavior - that all power as a human being is best contributed to life on Earth by being a conduit for the Great Spirit of Love. That is - choosing the inner grace and perception that creates and motivates the choices made to always place loving behavior into the world - always: This includes empathy, kindness, charity, forgiveness, comfort, creativity and non-violence. Jesus’ inner world was not (I believe,) a world of personal acquisition of either authority or possession. He never used the powers he had to place himself in any position of being perceived as a King, a ruler, or a political authority above any other person – an expression of power that in those times, might have given him a larger, more aggressive following. This was a historical time where lineage, power, strength, brutality and fear of death were used to keep people lawful and in line with a wealthy ruling class. Trusting that his lineage was the most pure and divine, would have made wishing to be "King" a sign of being psychologically frail and insecurely human. For being a King is a structured title that only after his death, has been imposed on him by those perhaps, who need a proclamation of hierarchy to feel safe, happy or appropriately reverent and appreciative. But (I think) to Jesus, being worshiped or bowed to as a King was not necessary nor what he wanted to see. He wanted to empower people not subjugate them. I have always imagined that Jesus, in an inspired self-understanding, knew that he was the archetypal example of the ultimate truths regarding human behavior. He therefore placed his words and recommendations into a small and powerful collection of concepts representing supernal choices of how to think, feel and behave. He then, simply, asked anyone who would listen, to follow those choices, to choose, answering internally and eternally only to an onlooking Great Spirit, not ultimately, him. Because, as a mortal presence with Divine instruction and intention, Jesus understood he would not be around very long – hence, it was more lasting and more convincing to exemplify inner power, albeit, very risky and without guarantees. And, thus, in action, he illustrated his own faith and assurance, that the medium of his behavior was the complete message. I believe he had even more faith in the resilience of his words and actions and in the memories of his life to be shared over time, and be compelling enough to live and breathe after his death, and remain in service of the greater good. He completely trusted that this direct cause-and-effect was correct and enough. I like to think of his example as being the ultimate expression of his purpose, not his rank or superiority. Jesus was NEVER (I believe,) concerned with personal power or notoriety. He was mission driven to demonstrate the integration of love into every human action from that moment on Earth into eternity. And modeling that he was proving, with courage and humility, that we are ALL capable of his example - but that it is a choice - a choice that is potentially a death sentence waged against evil - but in its truth, integrity and practice, is truthful, beautiful and of Divine and lasting power. So, I believe we are asked to emulate Jesus' example, not pontificate. The Pope is doing a good job at this. Martin Luther King did so too.

© 2016 Christopher Limber

#Christianity #Humanism #Biographical