Render unto Caesar...
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
“Render unto Caesar…” is a phrase attributed to Jesus in the synoptic gospels. Jesus gives this answer to the question of whether it is lawful for Jews to pay taxes to Caesar. The full sentence this phrase comes from is “Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s” (“Ἀπόδοτε οὖν τὰ Καίσαρος Καίσαρι καὶ τὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ τῷ Θεῷ”) (Matthew 22:21).
This phrase has become something of an independent aphorism that expresses resignation about the inevitability of submission to authority (akin to Benjamin Franklin’s pronouncement about “death and taxes”), a belief that it is good and appropriate to submit to the State when asked, or that such demands are non-negotiable.
[edit] Context
Hostile questioners tried to trap Jesus into taking an explicit and dangerous stand on whether Jews should or should not pay taxes to the Roman occupation. The trap was that if he advocated tax-paying, he would lose his credibility as a Messiah (if not his life to a lynch mob), but that if he advocated nonpayment, the power of the Roman state could be turned against him. At first the questioners flattered Jesus by praising his integrity, impartiality and devotion to truth. Then they asked him whether or not it is right for Jews to pay the taxes demanded by Caesar. Jesus first called them out on their attempt to trap him, then asked one of them to produce a Roman coin that would be suitable for paying such a tax. One of them handed such a coin to him, and he held it up and asked them to tell him whose name and inscription were on it. They answered that these were Caesar’s and he responded “Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s.” His interrogators were flummoxed by this, and left without having succeeded in pinning him down.
[edit] The Pharisees and the Herodians
The accounts in Matthew and Mark say that the questioners were Pharisees and Herodians (Luke says only that they were “spies” sent by “teachers of the law and the chief priests”).
[edit] The coin
The inscription on this coin reads “Ti[berivs] Caesar Divi Avg[vsti] F[ilivs] Avgvstvs” or “Caesar Augustus Tiberius, son of the Divine Augustus.” This was doubly blasphemous: Tiberius was claiming to be the son of a God, and the coin itself was a graven image.
Although the events in the parable took place well into the reign of Tiberius, it is also possible that another coin still in circulation but featuring a different emperor and a different inscription would have been used in the circumstances described.
It is perhaps significant that Jesus did not have such a coin with him but that one of his questioners did.
[edit] Tax resistance in Judaea
The taxes imposed on Iudaea by Rome had led to riots.[1] New Testament scholar Willard Swartley writes:
The tax denoted in the text was a specific tax… It was a poll tax, a tax instituted in A.D. 6. A census taken at that time (cf. Lk. 2:2) to determine the resources of the Jews provoked the wrath of the country. Judas of Galilee led a revolt (Acts 5:37) which was suppressed only with some difficulty. Many scholars date the origin of the Zealot party and movement to this incident.[2]
The Jewish Encyclopedia says, of the Zealots:
When, in the year 5, Judas of Gamala in Galilee started his organized opposition to Rome, he was joined by one of the leaders of the Pharisees, R. Zadok, a disciple of Shammai and one of the fiery patriots and popular heroes who lived to witness the tragic end of Jerusalem…. The taking of the census by Quirinus, the Roman procurator, for the purpose of taxation was regarded as a sign of Roman enslavement; and the Zealots’ call for stubborn resistance to the oppressor was responded to enthusiastically.
[edit] Accusations of tax resistance against Jesus
Jesus was accused of promoting tax resistance before his execution, though Pontius Pilate was reportedly skeptical of the accusation (Luke 23:1-4):
Then the whole assembly rose and led him off to Pilate. And they began to accuse him, saying, “We have found this man subverting our nation. He opposes payment of taxes to Caesar and claims to be Christ/Messiah, a king.”
Evidence could have been presented showing that Jesus had interfered with Rome’s collection of taxes by calling Matthew (a.k.a. Levi) away from his tax booth in the midst of his duties (see Matthew 9:9, Mark 3:14, and Luke 5:27-28). He also influenced “chief tax collector,” Zacchaeus, to repent of misusing his profession for personal gain (see Luke 19:1-10). Other tax collectors not mentioned in the Gospels may have quit at the behest of Jesus.
However, Jesus greatly praised John the Baptist, who advised tax collectors to “collect only what is owed,” not to quit (see Luke 3:12-13). He was known to enjoy the company of tax collectors, for instance at dinners in the homes of Matthew and Zacchaeus. He showed great compassion for tax collectors without condoning their occupation (see Luke 18:10-14), which he often equated with sinfulness (see Matthew 5:46, 9:11-13, 18:15-17, and 21:32). Ned Netterville, in a book-length essay entitled Jesus of Nazareth, Illegal-Tax Protester, postulates that Jesus was crucified primarily because of his principled stand in opposition to Rome’s taxes.
[edit] Interpretations
The gospels say that when Jesus gave his response, his interrogators “marvelled, and left him, and went their way.” They were unsuccessful in getting Jesus to unambiguously come out either in favor of paying the tribute to Rome or in favor of tax resistance. Advocates for either argument could interpret his words in either way.
Time has not resolved this ambiguity, and people continue to interpret this passage to support positions that are poles apart.
[edit] Separation of church and state
Jesus can be interpreted to be saying that his religious teachings were separate from earthly political activity. This reading finds support in John 18:36, where Jesus responds to Pontius Pilate about the nature of his kingdom, “My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But my kingdom is not from the world.” This reflects a traditional division in Christian thought by which state and church have separate spheres of influence.
Others read this passage to suggest that Jesus wanted his followers to be very careful in determining where God and Caesar came into conflict so as to be able to discriminate appropriately between what they owe to one and to the other — the very opposite of an aloof, apolitical stand, and one which was exemplified by the persecuted apostles in Acts 5, when they said, “We ought to obey God rather than men.”
[edit] Justification for obeying authority, paying taxes
Some read the phrase “Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s” as unambiguous at least to the extent that it commands us to respect state authority and to pay the taxes it demands of us.
In this interpretation, Jesus asked his interrogators to produce a coin in order to demonstrate to them that by using his coinage they had already admitted the de facto rule of the emperor, and that therefore they should submit to that rule.
One Mennonite explained why he was not a war tax resister thusly:
We are against war and do not wish to aid the war effort by conscription or by paying war taxes to the government. Doing so only helps to strengthen and perpetuate the war machine. Matthew 22:21 Jesus said “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s; and to God the things that are God’s.” Romans 13:1 “Let every person be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God and those which exist are established by God.” ¶ If the law of the land is that everyone must pay war taxes then that is what we must do. It is the law! We should however, work and pray extremely hard to change the law. The ideal situation would be to have the law abolished. The alternative would be to have a choice of designating our portion of the war tax towards efforts of peacemaking. This route would be a more lawful, constructive and positive effort.[3]
[edit] Giving God the benefit of the doubt
Mennonite pastor John K. Stoner spoke for those who interpret the parable as permitting or even encouraging tax resistance: “We are war tax resisters because we have discovered some doubt as to what belongs to Caesar and what belongs to God, and have decided to give the benefit of the doubt to God.”
[edit] Devote your life to God
One interpretation of Jesus’s words was that he was making an analogy — the coin is made on the orders of the emperor and is stamped with the image of the emperor, and the emperor may call on you to give it to him in tribute; by analogy, you were made by God and in God’s image, and you must therefore devote your life in tribute to God.
This interpretation harmonizes with some of the themes Jesus returned to frequently in his teachings.
[edit] Highlighting the dangers of cooperating with the state
Some see the parable as being Jesus’s warning to people that if they collaborate too closely with godless state authority (for instance, by using its legal tender), they become beholden to it. In Henry David Thoreau’s Civil Disobedience, he writes:
Christ answered the Herodians according to their condition. “Show me the tribute-money,” said he; — and one took a penny out of his pocket; — If you use money which has the image of Caesar on it, and which he has made current and valuable, that is, if you are men of the State, and gladly enjoy the advantages of Caesar’s government, then pay him back some of his own when he demands it; “Render therefore to Caesar that which is Caesar’s and to God those things which are God’s” — leaving them no wiser than before as to which was which; for they did not wish to know.
Mennonite Dale Glass-Hess wrote:
It is inconceivable to me that Jesus would teach that some spheres of human activity lie outside the authority of God. Are we to heed Caesar when he says to go to war or support war-making when Jesus says in other places that we shall not kill? No! My perception of this incident is that Jesus does not answer the question about the morality of paying taxes to Caesar, but that he throws it back on the people to decide. When the Jews produce a denarius at Jesus’ request, they demonstrate that they are already doing business with Caesar on Caesar’s terms. I read Jesus’ statement, "Give to Caesar…" as meaning “Have you incurred a debt in regard to Caesar! Then you better pay it off.” The Jews had already compromised themselves. Likewise for us: we may refuse to serve Caesar as soldiers and even try to resist paying for Caesar’s army. But the fact is that by our lifestyles we’ve run up a debt with Caesar, who has felt constrained to defend the interests that support our lifestyles. Now he wants paid back, and it’s a little late to say that we don’t owe anything. We’ve already compromised ourselves. If we’re going to play Caesar’s games, then we should expect to have to pay for the pleasure of their enjoyment. But if we are determined to avoid those games, then we should be able to avoid paying for them.[4]
[edit] Give to Caesar only what you actually owe him
Ned Netterville, who has written at length about what Jesus taught about paying taxes, argues:
The words Jesus spoke do not need to be interpreted by or for anyone. They are a plain evocation and restatement of his Father’s command: Thou shall not steal. Jesus meant precisely what he said, to wit: Give the man Caesar (or the state’s tax collector) what belongs to him. The obvious corollary, omitted from the Bible merely by ellipsis, is, if you have nothing belonging to Caesar, give him that — nothing! Those “spies” who were trying to trap Jesus were discumbobulated by their own dishonesty, not by Jesus’ plain-spoken words. Many misinterpretations of Jesus’ plain statement by Christian exegetes, which condone forcible taxation and endeavor to place Jesus' imprimatur on the violent state, have all come about since the time of Constantine and the enthrallment of the Church by the state. Their interpretations say more about the Church’s dependence on tax revenues than the intendment of Jesus’ words.[5]
[edit] Non-instructional, merely adroit
Some people consider this parable as not primarily instructional but as an example of Jesus’s skill in thinking on his feet. His questioners tried to trap him between the horns of a dangerous either/or question, and he deftly gave an answer that seemed to meet the question head-on but actually avoided taking a position.
In another incident (Matthew 21:23-27, Luke 20:1-8, Mark 11:27-33), Jesus reverses the roles — putting his critics between the horns of a dilemma when he asks "John’s baptism — was it from heaven, or from men?":
They discussed it among themselves and said, “If we say, ‘From heaven,’ he will ask, ‘Why didn’t you believe him?’ But if we say, ‘From men,’ all the people will stone us, because they are persuaded that John was a prophet.” So they answered, “We don’t know where it was from.”
Perhaps the incident with Caesar’s coin is merely meant to highlight Jesus’s superior debate skills, not what position Jesus had on taxation or on the proper relationship of people to their conquerors.
Having this as an additional purpose would not be inconsistent with any of the other purposes proposed.
[edit] Indifference to Wealth
This phrase can also be interpreted as Jesus saying that, since the money belongs to the government (the government made the money and thus is the real owner of it), and that the government mandates that one must pay taxes, then one should not resist and simply pay the tax, rather than be upset over having to give it up and coveting the money, since money is nothing but an earthly distraction.
[edit] Christian anarchists and tax resisters
Dorothy Day of the Catholic Worker movement put it this way: “If we rendered unto God all the things that belong to God, there would be nothing left for Caesar.” She also advocated a life of voluntary poverty by saying “the less you have of Caesar’s, the less you have to give to Caesar.”
Ammon Hennacy was on trial for civil disobedience and was asked by the judge to reconcile his tax resistance with Jesus’s instructions. "I told him Caesar was getting too much around here and some one had to stand up for God." Elsewhere, he interpreted the story in this way:
[Jesus] was asked if He believed in paying taxes to Caesar. In those days different districts had different money and the Jews had to change their money into that of Rome, so Jesus asked, not for a Jewish coin, but for a coin with which tribute was paid, saying “Why tempt me? ” Looking at the coin He asked whose image and superscription was there inscribed and was told that it was Caesar’s. Those who tried to trick Him knew that if He said that taxes were to be paid to Caesar He would be attacked by the mobs who hated Caesar, and if He refused to pay taxes there would always be some traitor to turn Him in. His mission was not to fight Caesar as Barabbas had done, but it was to chase the moneychangers out of the Temple and to establish His own Church. Whether He winked as much as to say that any good Jew knew that Caesar did not deserve a thing as He said, “Render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s and unto God what is God’s,” or not, no one knows.
…Despite what anyone says each of us has to decide for himself whether to put the emphasis upon pleasing Caesar or pleasing God. We may vary in our reasons for drawing the line here or there as to how much we render unto Caesar. I make my decision when I remember that Christ said to the woman caught in sin, “Let him without sin first cast a stone at her.” I remember His “Forgive seventy times seven,” which means no Caesar at all with his courts, prisons and war.[6]
[edit] Versions
| King James Version of the Bible: | Matthew 22:15-22 | Mark 12:13-17 | Luke 20:20-26 |
| New International Version: | Matthew 22:15-22 | Mark 12:13-17 | Luke 20:20-26 |
The extracanonical Gospel of Thomas also has a version, which reads in the Scholar's Version[3] 100:
They showed Jesus a gold coin and said to him, "The Roman emperor’s people demand taxes from us.” He said to them, “Give the emperor what belongs to the emperor, give God what belongs to God, and give me what is mine.”
The fragmentary Egerton Gospel in the Scholar's Version translation (found in The Complete Gospels) 3:1-6 reads:
They come to him and interrogate him as a way of putting him to the test. They ask, “Teacher, Jesus, we know that you are [from God], since the things you do put you above all the prophets. Tell us, then, is it permissible to pay to rulers what is due them? Should we pay them or not?” Jesus knew what they were up to, and became indignant. Then he said to them, “Why do you pay me lip service as a teacher, but not [do] what I say? How accurately Isaiah prophesied about you when he said, ‘This people honors me with their lips, but their heart stays far away from me; their worship of me is empty, [because they insist on teachings that are human] commandments […]’”
[edit] References
- ^ Marshall, I.H. Gospel of Luke: A Commentary on the Greek Text p. 735
- ^ Swartley, Willard M. The Christian and the Payment of Taxes Used For War 1980 [1]
- ^ Sawatzky, Anne, quoted in Peachey, Titus Silence and Courage: Income Taxes, War and Mennonites 1940-1993 MCC Occasional Paper #18, August 1993, p. 34
- ^ in Peachey, Titus Silence and Courage: Income Taxes, War and Mennonites 1940-1993 MCC Occasional Paper #18, August 1993, p. 29
- ^ Netterville, Ned Jesus of Nazareth, Illegal-Tax Protester, p. 36ff[2]
- ^ Hennacy, Ammon The Book of Ammon (5th printing, Feb. 1970), p. 393-4
[edit] See also
[edit] External links
- What belongs to God? by Marcus Borg, Beliefnet
- Render Unto Caesar: The Place of Politics in Modern Christianity — a conservative American Christian viewpoint
- The Picket Line: 16 Jan. '04 — A tax resister’s point-of-view
- Render to All What Is Due Them: What Every Christian Needs to Know about Honoring Civil Authority and Paying Taxes, Part 2 by David G. Hagopian — advancing the argument that Jesus commanded people to pay taxes to their de facto rulers
