But Jesus, knowing their evil intent, said, ‘You hypocrites, why are you trying to trap me? Show me the coin used for paying the tax.’ They brought him a denarius, and he asked them, ‘Whose image is this? And whose inscription?’ ‘Caesar’s,’ they replied. Then he said to them, ‘So give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s.’
Matthew 22:18-21
When I was at Primary School, many years ago, parents used to have this great little custom of attaching labels to their childrens' clothes so they knew which clothes were whose. School uniform was expensive then, and it’s worse now, so I fully understand why they would want to do something like that. It worked fine if your child has a short name. But if you decide to call your child Methuselah Mahar-Shalal-Hash-Baz Cholmondely-Warner, then you’ll have real trouble finding a label long enough, and even more trouble getting it to fit into the waist band of their shorts.
Of course, it didn’t necessarily mean that their child would actually wear the clothes. I recall, rather humiliatingly, that there was a day in Primary One when I had PE last thing. I knew I was running late, was a little flustered, and knew my parents would be getting a little impatient. So I ran to the door of the school nearest to the gate where they would be waiting, and was outside before I realised I was standing in my underwear and my trousers were still in the changing room...
We understand why young children should have their names printed on their clothes. We get it. They need to know what’s theirs.
Jesus uses this concept of ownership to answer the heinously evil question from the Pharisees. And He does so in a skilful, slick, direct and simple manner.
He asks them to give Him a denarius - the coin used to pay a day’s wages (Matthew 20:1-16) and also the coin used to pay the Romans’ oppressive and hideously unfair tax. He asks them whose name and insignia are on the coin.
The answer is obvious: Caesar’s.
So Jesus tells them they should pay the oppressor’s tax because the money belongs to him.
Let that thought drop into your consciousness for a moment. The tax is evil, unfair, unjust. The Jews are paying for the privilege of being oppressed. Yet Jesus says they should pay the tax. No boycotts. No protests. No civil disobedience. They should just pay it.
Paul and Peter, two of the pillars of the Early Church, develop this theme further:
Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended. For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also as a matter of conscience. This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God’s servants, who give their full time to governing. Give to everyone what you owe them: if you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honour, then honour.
Romans 13:1-7 NIVUK
Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human authority: whether to the emperor, as the supreme authority, or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right. For it is God’s will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish people. Live as free people, but do not use your freedom as a cover-up for evil; live as God’s slaves. Show proper respect to everyone, love the family of believers, fear God, honour the emperor.
1 Peter 2:13-17
You see, ‘giving Caesar what is Caesar’s’ is not just about paying taxes. If only it were so simple (yet many of us don’t even do this properly!). Giving Caesar what is Caesar’s is about a principle: a principle where, as Paul states, we see those who have charge over us as having given power by God Himself and respect them because of that.
For some of us, that might seem like the obvious thing to do. But in both Peter and Paul’s day, it was a startling thing to say. Both of them carried out their ministry while Emperor Nero was on the throne in Rome. Nero was the most psychotic and despotic ruler possible. He was the man who set Rome on fire and blamed it on Christians to worsen their persecution. He was the man who tied Christians to stakes and then lit them as human torches to light his garden in the evening. He was the man who invited guests to show them the splendour of his palace, and then guided them into a room where they would be confronted with hungry lion. The man was absolutely crazy.
It was under Nero that both Peter and Paul were martyred – slain for their faith.
Yet both Peter and Paul command the Early Church – being persecuted by the same madman – to respect their leaders.
That is simply astonishing.
So what’s your excuse?
Both men believe that we have a debt to our leaders – a debt to honour, respect and obey those who are in charge of us. Regardless of whether they are good or bad at it. Regardless of whether they are just or unjust; fair or unfair.
Regardless of whether or not they are a believer, or even claim to be a believer.
Regardless of their political affiliation.
And if we ever tempted to change this by saying, ‘But I can’t follow my leader like that because he or she is a...’ Then imagine this for a second:
Paul and Peter both said these words about Nero. And none of us have Nero as our leader.
So practically, what does this mean for us?
Firstly, we pay taxes, in full and on time. Paul is completely clear about that in Romans 13:6-7. As is Jesus. For every believer, paying taxes is not a matter of grudgingly and disappointedly watching on as the state takes more and more money from our salary. Paying taxes is a matter of obedience to God.
Neither is it a matter of us paying what we think is right and ‘opting out’ of the rest. The tax Jesus was saying the Jews should pay was terrifically unjust and unfair. He still said they should pay it.
Secondly, we meet all our state obligations such as national service. We do not run from them.
Thirdly, no matter how evil, corrupt or incompetent our leaders are, we do not seek to undermine them and we do not seek to overthrow them. That is profoundly disrespectful, not to mention illegal in certain circumstances.
But this does not mean that we forgo the right to protest or to disagree. We can sign petitions. We can picket and march. We can write letters to our representatives. Provided we stay on the right side of the law and are respectful of our leaders, all of these are fine.
Neither does it mean that we are constrained to only ever vote for the party in power, or the administration.
Democracy did not exist in Jesus’ day. Every level of leadership was a dictatorship, benign or otherwise. So we will not see any mention of voting as a means of recognising or deposing leader.
But democracy is the best legal method we have for holding our leaders to account. Since it is enshrined in law, we can, and should, use it, particularly as many millions of people have laid down their lives for us to have this right.
I also believe that this principle of giving to Caesar what is Caesar’s does not prevent Christians from serving in an opposition party, provided they conduct themselves with dignity and respect.
King David himself is one of the single greatest examples of this principle. He already knew he would become king as Samuel had already anointed him (1 Samuel 16:1-13). Yet despite knowing that he was God’s chosen man, David made no moves at all to depose the current king, Saul.
In fact, the story becomes more interesting. Saul becomes aware of David’s rise, becomes insanely jealous of him and causes David to become a fugitive. David attracts a group of men around him who are, essentially, the poor, indebted, dispossessed and angry (1 Samuel 22:2). Twice David has the opportunity to kill Saul and take the kingship. Twice he is advised by men who are his own relatives to do it. Twice he refuses (1 Samuel 24,26).
Now, Saul’s headlong pursuit of David caused David genuine hardship. He lived in constant fear of being betrayed – and he was, on more than one occasion. He often lived in the wilderness (see Psalm 63, 1 Samuel 22:5). He twice went to live with the pagan Philistines – Israel’s main enemy at the time. He even had to feign madness to save his life (1 Samuel 21:10-15).
Yet at no point at all did David think it was the right thing to do to raise an army and take what God had said was rightfully his:
Abishai said to David, ‘Today God has given your enemy into your hands. Now let me pin him to the ground with one thrust of the spear; I won’t strike him twice.’ But David said to Abishai, ‘Don’t destroy him! Who can lay a hand on the Lord’s anointed and be guiltless? As surely as the Lord lives,’ he said, ‘the Lord himself will strike him, or his time will come and he will die, or he will go into battle and perish. But the Lord forbid that I should lay a hand on the Lord’s anointed. Now get the spear and water jug that are near his head, and let’s go.’
1 Samuel 26:8-11NIVUK
It is quite extraordinary.
So what can we say about Christians who have participated in uprisings and rebellions?
Firstly, we need to be clear about their participation. The native Hungarian pastor Laszlo Tokes is credited as the man who sparked the Romanian revolution. Yet it’s clear from his writings that he was no revolutionary. He had no violent tendencies. He simply wanted what was his legal right – to be able worship God in his native language in his church in Timisoara. The fact that this then sparked a violent revolution in which around 1,000 people died is not really anything to do with him. He was not responsible for what happened next.
The German Christian leader Dietrich Bonhoeffer was accused of being involved in a plot to assassinate Hitler, and executed for it, but this was untrue. He spoke passionately against Nazism, but made no attempt to get rid of Hitler.
And then if we go further back, to the Reformers. It’s clear from history that Martin Luther had no desire to leave the Catholic Church. Instead, the reason why he was excommunicated from the church was because he called for it to change – to be reformed – and the leadership of the church were resistant to this.
Throughout church history, time and time and time again, great Christian leaders have called for reform within their organisations and been removed from them.
But we have to bear in mind that they bore no ill-will towards the leaders of those organisations and did not seek for them to be deposed or removed. Instead, they wanted them to change. There is a whole world of a difference between men and women such as these and usurpers, insurrectionists, rebels and revolutionaries who act outside the law to dethrone the current ruler and install one to their liking instead.
So what can we say about those who invaded the US Congress on January 6 2001?
They were severely mistaken. They were not interested in the Biblical principle of giving to Caesar what is Caesar’s. They were interested in usurping democracy to get the man they wanted in position instead.
And that can never be right.
Questions
1. Why is it never right for a Christian to take part in an insurrection, no matter the cause?
2. Why should we ‘give to Caesar what is Caesar’s’? Where does their power come from? If we fail to do so, who are we rebelling against?
3. How do you ‘give to Caesar what is Caesar's'?
Comments