I can almost imagine Matthew writing his gospel. I see him hunched
over his table, squinting at the letters he is inscribing on the papyrus? Matthew
has gotten to the point in the narrative of Jesus ministry of the controversy
stories. He is showing us the incidents that provide the motivation for Jesus’
arrest and prosecution. In my imagination Matthew remembers this particular
incident and chuckles. Oh Jesus, he really showed them that time.
Clearly the forces were massing against Jesus. And we know
what can happen when someone is threatening all kinds of social systems. In
pairing the Pharisees with the Herodians, we find a strange coalition. Politics
can make strange bedfellows and clearly that has happened here. The Pharisees
tended to be critical of the oppressive Roman overlords, particularly their
taxation practices that fell especially hard on the common everyday worker.
For their part the Herodians, as their name indicates tended to be the political
party that supported Rome and endorsed Herod. By having them both put the question
on taxation to Jesus, we are seeing those on both sides of the tax issue.
The air is thick with tension. On what side of the issue will
Jesus settle? How will he get out of this one? If Jesus answers that they should
not pay the taxes the Herodians will have a plausible argument to bring him
before the Roman courts on charges of sedition. If he says to pay the taxes
he will alienate the Pharisees and all the common people who labor under the
repressive burden. There seems to be no right answer.
In the masterful style of a skilled debater or diplomat Jesus
calls for a coin. Whose picture is on the coin? Caesars? Well then Give to the
emperor the things that are the emperors and to God the things that are Gods.
This is a beautiful bit of argumentation but what does it really mean. Should
we pay taxes or not? What is our role as citizens and Christians? This question
is not mere speculation for us—it comes up regularly in our day-to-day
experiences, particularly in an election year.
In a few days we will have a visitor at the church. I know
this because it has been true for at least the last four or five years. This
visitor is generally a cordial individual who will politely ask if we will pass
out some of these Christian brochures to our members before the election. The
brochures are clear about who the “Christian” candidate is in the
upcoming elections. Generally there is a checklist of those things this group
deems morally offensive to “Christians” and who supports their agenda.
That’s one side of the debate.
From the other side-- A newsletter came across my desk just last week from Bethel New Life, a very successful ministry on the west side of Chicago. The letter from the president Mary Nelson reads in part, “When my mother and brother put themselves in a little boat in the frigid Puget Sound waters in front of the Trident nuclear submarine (a first strike weapon) 20 years ago to say no to the weapons of destruction and yes to life, we wore "Bread not Bombs" sweatshirts. We at Bethel New Life know first hand the disastrous products of poverty and hunger and join in the cry, "Feed them." We know the drastic imbalance of the US budget towards military rather than education and health and jobs. We, too, would say yes to life giving action and no to the first strike weapons of destruction. We hear the echoes of Martin Luther King on the Viet Nam War, and Jesus' words, "Feed my sheep."
There is tension; there is disagreement about our appropriate
role as citizens and Christians. There are differences in how to view the government.
But this is not new. Two passages that inevitably come to mind when we think
about the relation of empire and church are Romans 13 and Revelation 13. Paul’s
letter to the Romans is supportive of government. He says “Let every person
be subject to the governing authorities; for there is no authority except from
God, and those authorities that exist have been instituted by God,” Church
and empire live here in their respective spheres. Paul was a Roman citizen who
benefited much from the Roman order of the empire in his missionary work. More
than once he is saved from mob justice and from execution by appealing to his
Roman citizenship. He sees empire as friend because the empire preserves the
basic orders of life.
It is not so with John, the author of Revelation. He depicts
the Roman Empire as “ a beast rising out of the sea having ten horns and
seven heads.” For him the empire is a ravenous animal. In John’s context
the Roman Empire has persecuted and destroyed the Christian community. The government
is evil and oppressive. It deals in death. God must bring the empire to ruin,
or there is no hope for the oppressed people of God.
Two biblical passages. Two different contexts. Two different
views of the role of the empire So we are left in tension. What is the appropriate
role of a Christian in government? How are we to look at rulers and principalities?
What stance are we to take to the government? Jesus says, ‘Give Caesar
what belongs to Caesar and to God what belongs to God. While stylistically Jesus'
answer appears to be a parallel structure giving both sides equal authority,
theologically the second half of the sentence carries far greater weight, for
everything, of course, is owed to God. No notion of an earthly kingdom and a
heavenly kingdom, which demand equal loyalty, presents itself here.
Any child of the covenant would understand Jesus words. The
law teaches that everything belongs to god. In the words of Psalm 24, “The
earth is the Lord’s and the fullness thereof.” Jesus does not make
an artificial distinction between “sacred” and “secular”.
All people and all things belong to the creator of the universe. What belongs
to Caesars? What belongs to God? And what does that mean in our day-to-day struggle
with the issues of government and citizenship? Jesus does not make a clear distinction
on this one. He gives no final answer that we can hear and then dismiss. If
anything he wants us to sort it out every single time, so that when we give
ourselves to God it is a wholehearted choice.
William Carter, a renowned preacher tells about his first day
in seminary. The dean gave the class an orientation lecture and he said two
things that have always stuck. The first thing he said was, “If you’re
wondering why you’re here, at a theological seminary, don’t worry.
In a week you’ll be wondering what some of your classmates are doing here.”
The second thing he said was much more profound. “You may be thinking “,
he said “that you have come to a Christian school, but I am here to tell
you that this seminary is not a Christian school.” Then he added, “This
seminary is not a Christian school. The best we can ever aspire to become is
a school full of Christians.”
The word Christian is a much better noun than adjective. The best we can aspire to become are people who wholeheartedly belong to God through Jesus Christ. We may differ in our politics and positions, but we are single minded in our pursuit of the mind of Christ. Ultimately that’s what matters.
Amen.