POLITICAL STRATEGY

POLITICAL STRATEGY

GONE AWRY

"Is it lawful for us to give tribute unto Caesar, or not?” Luke 20:22

This was a distinctly political question. At that period there were two great Political parties in Jewry, and that was a divisive question. The Pharisaic party always paid tribute under protest, affirming that the people of God had no right to be paying tribute to a pagan authority. The Sadducean party were in favor of paying tribute. They came to Jesus with this question, which, in their judgment, must involve Him in difficulty with one party or the other. If He had said it was not lawful to pay tribute to Caesar, then at once the Pharisees would have agreed with Him, and the Sadducees would have been able to report Him to Rome as preaching sedition. If He had said, Yes, it is lawful, then the Pharisees could have said, Where, then, are Your Messianic claims? They were hoping thus to deflect public favor from Him. (Which is the attempts being made today all over the world – to them it is an attempt at entrapment.) If once He admitted that it was lawful to pay tribute to Rome, in such admission, in their opinion, He would have discredited His Messianic claim with the listening crowds. The extreme cleverness and the astuteness of these men is evident.

How did He repulse their attack?

"He perceived their craftiness," and the first thing He said to them was,

"Show Me a denarius."

He compelled them to produce the coin. I think in all probability He had no denarius about His Person. I do not think He ever carried money. In that little fellowship Judas had the bag; and He was supported by a little group of wealthy women. Their names are given to us by Luke, of whom he says,

"Who ministered unto Him of their substance."

That may be the reason why He asked them to show Him a denarius. But it is remarkable that He did not ask His disciples to produce the coin. Judas might have found one. But they produced it. Look at it. It may be that you have seen a denarius of that period, as I have done, one that was actually current then. On the front of it was the embossed face of Tiberius Caesar. From the standpoint of human opinion, it is a face char­acterized by strength and magnificence. Tiberius Caesar in his youth was a man of singular physical beauty, very much debauched as time went on. On the other side there were two words, or two letters, as a monogram. Pontifex Maximus. Tiberius Caesar on one side, and his title on the other, the greatest potentate. Jesus took the coin, and said,

"Whose image and superscription hath it?" At once they answered, "Caesar's." I think there was a great hush every­where. The people were all watching as they produced that coin. It lay there on the hand of Jesus for a mo­ment, and He looked at it. This is one of the pictures I would like to see some artist paint, that scene, when Jesus had that coin lying on His hand. Very soon that hand was to be pierced by a nail under the authority of the man whose portrait He looked at. Such a picture should be so poised that that coin may be seen, with the image of Caesar uppermost. The brutal animal strength of Tiberius Caesar; let that be seen. And then Jesus looking at it. He said, Whose image and superscription is this? Caesar, Pontifex Maximus?

Now mark the underlying reasoning of what He had done. Where did the coin come from? They had produced it. What were they doing with it? Using it, trading with it; and trading with a coinage means that you are in debt to the State whose coinage you are using. He implicated them, when He asked them to produce the coin. It was their coin. They had it. They were trading with it.

—Then, when in answer to His question,

"Whose image and superscription hath it?" they said, "Caesar's," observe the fu­tility of their coalition. Every merely political party is forgotten when He brings to bear upon questions of time the principles of eternity. Still hold­ing it in His hand, perhaps handing it back as He said It, He uttered the words:

"Then render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's."

He passed behind all policies and all parties and all differing human opin­ions on the question of administration, or the question of statecraft, and de­clared a principle that applied then, and all down human history, and today;

"Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's."

That means, first, that if men live under Caesar's rule, if they are pro­tected by the legions of Caesar, if they are trafficking with Caesar's money, they are in debt for the privileges created for them, to the government under which they live.

"Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's."

Yes, but He said more.

"Render to God the things that are God's."

When He held the coin on His hand, He said,

"Whose image and superscription hath it?"

and they told Him. In what He now said to them, another question is im­plicated, and He might have asked them, Whose image and superscription is upon you? If that coin has stamped upon it the image of Caesar, and the superscription that declares him to be pontifex maximus, the greatest poten­tate on every human face is the image of God, for man is made in the image and the likeness of God; and the su­perscription on every human life is that God alone is "Pontifex Max­imus." Thus He said in effect, As is the coin to Caesar, so are you to God. Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's; but do not forget that you are to render to God the things that are God's.

The inter-relationship of these state­ments is self-evident. Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's. That is first in statement; but it is forever qualified by that which fol­lows. Render to God the things that are God's. Which does not mean we are to have a secular side to life and a sacred; which does not mean that we may be one thing politically, and another thing religiously.  Paul, the apostle of Jesus Christ, in his Roman letter, said,

"For he "—the authority—"is a minister of God, an avenger for wrath to him that doeth evil. . . . For this cause ye pay tribute also. . . . Render to all their dues; tribute to whom trib­ute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor. Owe no man anything, save to love one another."

Paul was very emphatic that all au­thority is derived from God. As though Paul had said to the Romans, God is the Pontifex Maximus, and all other authority is delegated authority. Then he went on to show that it was given for the punishment of the evil­doer and the rewarding of the good. Now, supposing the authority, whether imperator, or procurator, or any other, is not functioning according to Divine authority, is not punishing evil, but condoning it. is not rewarding the  good, but penalizing it; then what am I to do? Disobey the authority, as I obey the authority of God. There are times when rendering to God the things that are God's, make necessary the breaking of human laws. There was a moment in the history of the American Colonists of Britain, when they broke with the authority of England; and they did it because they were true to God. Thus our Lord gave a complete philosophy of statecraft, and of the relation of His own people to the State.

It is interesting to notice that the word they used about paying tribute was not the word that Jesus used. They said, “Is it lawful to give tribute," didomi, to donate it. He said, apo-didomi. The said, Shall we give tribute. He said, Give back.  The apo recognizes debt to Caesar for privileges, and to God for everything.

Luke says,

"And they were not able to take hold of the saying before the people."

There was nothing for them to take hold of.
In a world formed by theological soundness and perfection, political strategies fail every time. All political movements are found to be ministers of the Creator God whether they recognize His authority or not.