Like Isaiah in his vision of the temple (see Isa 6), the writer of Psalm 93 depicts God as a robed figure on a throne. He declares, “The Lord is king . . . / He has established the world; it shall never be moved; / your throne is established from of old; / you are from everlasting” (vv. 1–2). It’s an appropriate picture for this season, as this Sunday marks the culmination of the church year with the festival variously called “Christ the King” or “Reign of Christ” Sunday.

That original language of kingship reflects the royal imagery that pervades the Bible. Psalm 93 and a fair number of other selections from the Psalter depict God as a monarch enthroned either in the heavens or in the temple. So does much of the poetic language of the prophets. The idea that God is a king is practically undisputed.

The softening of this royal language, as evidenced by the alteration to “Reign of Christ,” is a response to the critique of patriarchy by feminist theologians and others who say all the kingly imagery presents a distorted picture of God. I agree, but I don’t believe this solution goes far enough. With the revised name we are still dealing with the concept of reigning, or ruling, as Christ’s (and, by extension, God’s) way of interacting with the world. “Reign of Christ” still leaves God on a throne, and that’s a problem, at least according to my understanding of God’s nature.

As you know, I have embraced process theology as my primary framework for understanding God and God’s activity in the world. The process God does not rule. God exercises “power-with” rather than “power-over.” This means God does not employ coercive force to accomplish God’s will. Instead, God uses persuasion and loving guidance to draw creation into pathways that lead to the created beings’ full flourishing. 

So what do we do with the concept of “Christ the King,” or Psalm 93’s assertion that “The Lord is king”? I think we can continue to use this language, as long as we remind ourselves that it is metaphorical and does not declare absolute truth. Kingly imagery is so deeply ingrained in our collective mind from its centuries of use that it may be futile to try to eradicate it. But as far as it is possible, I believe we ought to replace the monarchical and patriarchal language with something more egalitarian. Instead of the kingdom of God, I propose calling the content of Jesus’s proclamation the commonwealth of God. That captures the process theology notion of partnership and cooperation between God and creation much better than the older language. It speaks of equality and community and interdependence.

In this vision God is still powerful, and God’s glory remains intact. It is still accurate to echo the psalmist, who says, “More majestic than the thunders of mighty waters, / more majestic than the waves of the sea, / majestic on high is the Lord!” (v. 4). As long as we do not take “majesty” literally to mean “royal,” but rather “awesome” or “glorious,” we stay on solid theological ground. God is all-powerful, but all-powerful in love and compassion, not in unilateral compulsion.

So let me be the first to wish you a joyous “Partnership of Christ” Sunday. May God’s commonwealth come quickly, and may the nonviolent, non-coercive God be glorified!