'The Pharisees went and plotted to entrap
Jesus in what he said. So they sent their disciples to him, along with the
Herodians, saying, “Teacher, we know that you are sincere, and teach the way of
God in accordance with truth, and show deference to no one; for you do not
regard people with partiality. Tell us, then, what you think. Is it lawful to
pay taxes to the emperor, or not?” But Jesus, aware of their malice, said, “Why
are you putting me to the test, you hypocrites? Show me the coin used for the
tax.” And they brought him a denarius. Then he said to them, “Whose head is
this, and whose title?” They answered, “The emperor’s.” Then he said to them,
“Give therefore to the emperor the things that are the emperor’s, and to God
the things that are God’s.” When they heard this, they were amazed; and they
left him and went away.
One of the things that I love most about Jesus is that he
very seldom acted from a place of duality; that is, from an either/or
position. Jesus wasn't the kind of guy
who would say something like, "You’re either with me or against me, for
example!" Throughout his ministry,
though, Jesus dealt with people who did have this frame of mind: it’s either A or B, and there is no such thing as C! Yet Jesus always seemed to find another,
unexpected third way.
The Pharisees were the religious zealots, who pushed hard against the Roman occupation by insisting that Jews must fully embrace their Jewish identify, and how they did this was to obey every letter of the Law. To do so meant not associating with Gentiles (like the despised Romans), keeping the Sabbath holy, and obeying all of the dietary laws. The Pharisees looked at Jesus, who did not always follow these rules, and said he was bad Jew.
The Herodians were political collaborators. Their name came from King Herod, the Jewish King of Judea who had been installed by the Romans in order to appease the Jews; after all, the Jews would not abide a foreigner being in charge of them. These folks, along with the tax collectors and other collaborators, benefited from the Roman occupation. As they looked at Jesus they saw someone who was a seditionist, a trouble-maker, and they were sure that he was going to start an uprising against Rome, which would cause problems for their fellow Jews. These are the kinds of folks that Jesus finds himself caught between.
We see this play out in the Gospel, as these two groups conspire with each other to trick Jesus and humiliate him in front of a huge crowd. It is Tuesday of Holy Week when we pick up the story, and Jesus has already entered Jerusalem and flipped
over the tables in the temple. Everybody is watching him, and these two groups particularly are waiting for him to make a mistake. They then approach Jesus, butter him up a little, and then drop this bomb on him: Is it lawful to pay taxes to the emperor or
not?
An artist's rendering of Matthew 22: 15-22.
Well, this is a pickle, isn’t it? If Jesus sides with the Pharisees and says no, it’s not lawful, don’t pay taxes to the emperor, he risks
being arrested right then and there and being branded a seditionist. If he says yes and sides with the
Herodians he risks discrediting himself
with the crowd and coming off as a Roman sympathizer and a bad Jew. The mastery here of the Pharisees and
Herodians is that no matter what Jesus says the response is going to be
unpopular, and his movement may very well wither away.
This is where Jesus’ brilliance shines through, where he offers that third way. He does not actually answer their question, at least not in the manner which they expect. Jesus asks for a coin—did you ever notice he
didn’t carry any money himself??—and asks the questioners whose face and title is on it. They reply, "The emperor's." (The title, written under Caesar's image, read "Son of God.") Right there Jesus has ticked his questioners and . How?
Coins were not used as payment in most ancient cultures until the days
of great military empires like Persia and Rome.
The coins bore the image of the conquering king and were used as a means
of keeping the occupied and defeated peoples in-check. When Jews in Roman-occupied Palestine DID use
coins, though, they refused to use the ones with Caesar’s image on them because
that breaks the second commandment—“thou shalt make no graven image”—instead
they used one with a palm leaf on it, the symbol of Jewish resistance against
the Romans. The coin produced here, of course, bears the image of Caesar and
the inscription that read “long live the Son of God.” Because, remember, Caesar believed he was, in
fact, the Son of God. By having that
coin on them Jesus’ questioners are exposed as collaborators, and without even
answering their question Jesus has discredited them and the Roman occupation
that they represent.
But then he goes a little further, saying “Give to the emperor the things that are the emperor’s and
to God the things that are God’s.” (Or in the more romantic language of the King James Version: "Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's.") Do
you see what he does there? Jesus separates Caesar from God, which, again, seems obvious to us now, but during that time one did not dare make the claim (at least publicly) that the emperor and God were not one in the same; after all, every Caesar claimed to be divine. Some have
taken this phrase to mean that Jesus is saying that we Christians are, in fact, folks with dual citizenship, and as such must obey our civil authorities, just as we obey our heavenly authority. Moreover, passages like this one were preached regularly in the 1930s and 1940s during the rise of fascism in Europe, which resulted in many Christians remaining silent during some remarkably horrible times because they had been told by their preachers that Jesus intends for us to fully obey and render unto our authority figures. But this isn’t really an endorsement of Rome, hence the disinction between Caesar and God and calling attention to the fact that the denarius had false title inscribed for Caesar. Had Jesus wanted to
endorse Rome he would’ve just said, “Yes, pay taxes to Caesar.” But he doesn’t. Instead, he mocks the very institution of occupation, which Rome represents. Furthermore, as Shane Claiborne points out in his
excellent book Jesus for President, Jesus leaves it up to the hearer to
define what is Caesar’s and what is God’s.
Think about that for second. Jesus never actually says who gets what between God and the emperor. Rather, he lets the crowd discern and make that decision for themselves. This is the third way! It's a harder, more complicated way than the dualistic approach, but it is the masterful method with which Jesus weaved his Gospel tapestry!
If we think about it, what does actually belong to "Caesar?" What does actually belong to any power or
principality? Their brand may be stamped
on the money, but they can have it, Jesus says because God’s stamp is on
EVERYTHING! All things that live, move, and have their being have God's stamp on them, even those Caesars who claimed to be gods themselves. Sure, authority figures can issue money and build towers and temples and monuments to themselves, but eventually the rust and moths consume them and they fall into the dust. Yet God continues to endure! And God will continue to do what God has always done: breathe life into the dust.
Cover for Shane Claiborne's Jesus For President, which you can purchase by clicking here.