TAX - to pay or not to pay, that is the question!

Sermon – St Matthew & St Oswald’s 20^th October 2020

Matthew 22:15-22

To say that the current political atmosphere in America is toxic is something of an understatement.

When the two candidates went head to head in a live debate recently one might have hoped for some carefully honed and thought out questions. Something that might put your opponent on the backfoot as they struggle to answer. Knowing that answer could sway the undecided voter.

Instead, sadly what happened was more playground than presidential election of one of the worlds most powerful and influential nations.

And it is power and authority that lies behind our Gospel story and the question about tax payment.

But first let me say something about this tax.

It was in 64 BCE that Rome conquered Syria and in 63 BCE, Jerusalem. So, by the time of Jesus there had been about 100 years of Roman occupation.

This tax was a business venture created by Julius Caesar, General Pompey and a wealthy Roman nobleman, Marcus Crassus. They formed the first triumvirate as Rome developed into an empire.

Marcus Licinius Crassus

The basic plan was that Crassus would invite wealthy friends to invest in the army. The army, under Caesar and Pompey would go and conquer countries who would then have to pay taxes to pay for the army who had conquered them.

So, it was not so much a tax as we might think of it, to pay for public services, but to pay for a business venture for wealthy Romans.

Little wonder it was hated and during Jesus’ childhood a tax revolt was led by a rebel leader called Judas. And with typical Roman brutality the rebellion was crushed and the hills around Galilee covered with crosses.

In Matthew’s telling of the Jesus story, he, Jesus, has entered Jerusalem in what we know as Palm Sunday. He was proclaimed as King, Son of David, Saviour by the crowd.

We then have the cleansing of the temple and a series of discourses Jesus has with the Temple authorities. 

On one of these occasions we see what might lie behind this question about taxes.  Jesus was asked directly by the Temple authorities on whose authority he was doing these things. Jesus answers this question with a question about John the Baptist, which they are unable to answer. So, he refuses to tell them by what authority he is doing things.

More sharp parables follow, check them out in chapter 21.

And then the ‘committee question.’ What a strange alliance happens here between the Pharisees and the Herodians.  That is like in the US the Republicans and the Democrats coming together to plot to overthrow a common enemy.

You can see what both sides bring to the table to frame this question that is going to put Jesus in a no-win position.

The Herodians as their name suggest, support the puppet king, Herod. And have in all respects embraced Rome and working with Rome. So, the part of the question they bring to the table is that it is right to pay the tax to Rome, no question about it.

The Pharisees are more a movement than an organised group or party. But as we know, they were keen on every jot and tittle of the law being kept. So much so, that they expanded the laws they already had, adding more causitory laws.

So, they have their question, and they approach Jesus oozing false flattery that rather gives the game away.

They did not want an answer, but rather wanted to prove a point. If he says, do not pay the tax, he can be arrested as a rebel against Rome. And if he says yes, pay the tax, then he will lose his popular support. The support that is stopping the Jewish authorities arresting him in public.

Jesus begins his answer by asking them to show him the coin used for paying the tax.

And it is important to note that Jesus asks them to bring him the coin used to pay taxes to the Romans.

The coin Jesus is given is a denarius, bearing the image of Tiberius.

It also has an inscription around the edge ‘Son of God’ – ‘High Priest.’

Can you imagine anything more detestable to a first century Jew?

They were forbidden to make any graven image, and certainly the inscription would be nothing short of blasphemy.

The fact they have one to hand implies that they have accepted the rule and governance of Rome and therefore are obliged to pay for that privilege in a tax.

Jesus is not going to fall into the trap of denouncing the Roman occupying force and give license for open rebellion.

That would only lead to bloodshed and slaughter, such as was to fall upon Jerusalem within a generation of Jesus’ crucifixion.

But Jesus seeks to bring in the Kingdom of God by a loving revelation, not a bloody revolution.

And so, whilst he cannot be accused of fermenting rebellion, he is saying in effect give this odious coinage and all it stands for back to whom it belongs.

A deep intake of breath and then comes the punch line…

   ‘and give to God what belongs to God.’

And what belongs to God?

The people there would that morning have recited the Shema…

"Hear, O Israel: the LORD God, the LORD is one"

They would also have known the call to love LORD God with all their heart, all their mind, and all their strength.

They would also have known the call to serve no foreign god – including Roman Emperors.

‘…and give to God what belongs to God.’

Well, what does belong to God?

The answer as they would have known, was everything. As the Psalmist declares…

The earth is the LORD's, and everything in it, the world, and all who live in it; Psalm 24.1

Perhaps that is why it is we read this in 1 Timothy 2.1-3

First of all, then, I urge that petitions, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgiving be offered for everyone— for kings and all those in authority - so that we may lead tranquil and quiet lives in all godliness and dignity. This is good and pleasing in the sight of God our Saviour…

Although the Herodians and Pharisees put the question not to elicit an answer, but as a trap, the question they posited remains an interesting one for us to ponder upon.

To consider if there are circumstances when our call to the Kingdom of God means, that while we may continue to pray for the ruling authority, we might actively oppose them.

However, we do need to be careful not to take a text out of context and a pretext.

In this story we see Jesus simply answering a question and not giving any kind of ongoing mandate about the relationship between church and state.

Such an idea could not have been entertained anyway. Because broadly in one way or another, everyone was a theist until the rise of deism in the 17^th century.

However, over the course of history there are some who have made great play of this paying taxes story.  Calling for a clear demarcation between Church and State, as for example in America as it developed.

The danger with that is that the Church retreats into dealing with ‘spiritual’ matters and let government get on with the stuff of the world, roads, health care, defence, etc.

But such a view is not a Biblical view which is much more holistic, and the stuff of life and the stuff of heaven exist in a symbiotic relationship.

So, a question…

Allegiance to the ruling authority or allegiance to God?

Thankfully, I do not imagine that such a conflict would arise for us in the UK. However, this is a reality for some of our brothers and sisters of the Faith. We do well to remember them and pray for them. And pray to God that should we be brought to such a test we would remain faithful…

           ‘and give to God what belongs to God.’