I have often felt that this reading seems like such a poor choice to reflect Chris the King. It talks about him being king, but it is more a point of mocking him and the Jews. The interaction brings this divine kingdom, but it is not the image we would expect. If we look at its institution though, we see a different purpose for the selection.
The title has been around since the 3rd century, but the feast was not instituted till1925 by Pope Pius XI in the aftermath of World War 1 and the growing movement of nationalism.
Pope Pius believed that only in Christ’s Kingship could there be peace. His reasoning: “‘Christ,’ he says, ‘has dominion over all creatures, a dominion not seized by violence nor usurped, but his by essence and by nature.'” It is not that he is king, but how he has obtained this title. Jesus’ authority is a right of life. It cannot be given, or obtained through any human act. It cannot be taken away by any human act either.
Jesus crucifixion does not prove or disprove his kingship. It shows that it exists regardless of life act, or social position. Whether he lived in a castle or in the fields; whether he ate the best food or nothing at all; whether he lived a long life or died at thirty-three, Christ is King.
The celebration was drawn out of the social issues of the 1920, but we should focus on what it is the reading and celebration are wanting humanity to look at, knowing who Jesus is and who we are, no matter what the world may tell us.