The scribes and the chief priests sought to lay hands on him at that very hour, for they perceived that he had told this parable against them, but they feared the people. So they watched him and sent spies, who pretended to be sincere, that they might catch him in something he said, so as to deliver him up to the authority and jurisdiction of the governor. So they asked him, "Teacher, we know that you speak and teach rightly, and show no partiality, but truly teach the way of God. Is it lawful for us to give tribute to Caesar, or not?" But he perceived their craftiness, and said to them, "Show me a denarius. Whose likeness and inscription does it have?" They said, "Caesar's." He said to them, "Then render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's." And they were not able in the presence of the people to catch him in what he said, but marveling at his answer they became silent.
...............
If Jesus had a Facebook account, this would have been the perfect moment for him to post a pithy political argument or lambast the government of his day. If Luke, the reporter here, had an axe to grind against the first century Roman authority, this would have been a great time to strike out against the heathen state. But, they didn't. In fact, the New Testament here and throughout is strangely devoid of political commentary, choosing rather to respect and honor the pagan state in multiple passages.
In Luke 20, the religious leaders were salivating over their own cleverness: they had devised the perfect unanswerable question, which, in their minds, had only two damnable responses.
"Should believers pay taxes to an ungodly government?"
Response 1: Yes, because the government has authority over religious institutions - the government is the de facto highest human authority.
Now, you and I know that Jesus would never say this. But, the leaders would have jumped on any affirmative response as an affirmation of a heathen king, which would call Jesus' loyalty to God into question. Any association with Caesar would be a repudiation of Jesus and his ministry.
Response 2: No, because religious institutions have the ultimate authority over human government - the temple or church is the highest authority.
Again, Jesus would never say that, but again, any answer in the negative would have been twisted into an insurrectionist claim. The religious leaders would have their immediate open door to turn Jesus over to the Romans and see him finally dealt with.
These two answers represent the typical confusion over spheres of authority in every generation, whether the first century or the 21st. To demand that either the church or the state have final authority is a basic misunderstanding of how the world has been structured by God to function in various spheres.
The Bible describes at least three spheres or categories of human authority: the family, the church, and the state. There are two main ways to understand the relationship between these spheres:
1. Sphere Subsidiarity
2. Sphere Sovereignty
The first option is the narrow view of the Jewish leaders in Jesus' day, who could only conceive of one overriding human institution which must have authority over all others. This view has prevailed at various times in human history, notably in the Middle Ages when the Roman Catholic Church exercised immense political authority, enforced religious practice with state power, and fundamentally undermined the essence of the good news of Christ by replacing the message of reconciliation with the sword of government coercion.
The second option for how to understand the spheres is to see each as independently sovereign in their own area of influence. In this model, one person could hold positions of authority in multiple spheres, but would exercise that authority differently in each. A man could have authority in his family by leading his wife and children with servant-hearted decision making (Eph 5:22-6:4), while equipping and guiding his church as an elder and shepherd (Eph 4:1-5:21), while simultaneously serving God as a faithful employer or civic leader (Eph 6:5-9).
Notice that God alone is the ultimate authority in ALL these spheres (Matt. 28:18-20), so each of these are truly spiritual and sacred in essence. What humans accomplish in these spheres is truly worship and service to him, which undercuts anyone who might think their particular church or state position of authority makes them more pleasing or valuable in God's kingdom.
So, how can we apply this concept of sphere sovereignty today? Notice how Jesus replies to the religious leaders:
Then render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's.
Jesus is not implying that God and Caesar are separate but equal authorities. What he is stating here is that the temple and Caesar are separate and valid authorities, each with its own influence and jurisdiction. God is over them both, but the temple or church has no business exerting authority over state taxes. Again, God informs people in his word on how we should function in community under human government, but he did not create His church as an institution to make decisions in that sphere. In other words, I can be a Christian serving God in paying my taxes, serving in the military (Luke 3:10-14), or respecting and praying for my nation and even honoring and submitting to its ungodly leaders (1 Peter 2:13-17; 1 Tim 2:1-7; Rom 13:1-7). There will be times when my Spirit-informed conscience cannot allow me to obey a certain law or regulation, but these will be exceptions to the rule. Even in these cases, we have glorious examples in history to help us navigate the times when spheres of authority overlap and conflict:
-Martin Luther and other 16th Century reformers refused to submit to Catholic political authority when the gospel itself was in jeopardy. These men put God's Word in the common language and reaffirmed the sacredness of family and work, often at great expense to their own lives. We enjoy great freedom today thanks to the price they paid.
-Roger Williams, John Leland, and other early Americans carried the reformation to the next level by influencing leaders at a moment in history when a new nation was being formed and religious liberty could be written into the fabric of our constitution and our national conscience.
-William Wilberforce saw his position of state authority as a sacred trust and led a lifetime quest to end slavery in Britain, serving God by using government authority to extend love and justice to those made in God's image, regardless of race or color.
-Eric Liddell delayed a call to missions because he knew God had called him to Olympic track running. His refusal to run in an Olympic event on a Sunday was how he put God's authority over that of the state, declining the king's direct request with respect and dignity. God honored his choice and he went on to be a sports legend and eventually gave his life in the mission field.
-Deitreich Bonhoeffer, as a last resort in a desperate time, practiced civil disobedience by conspiring to overthrow the vile Nazi regime in Germany. He was arrested and executed for his attempts, but he is remembered for his prophetic voice and courageous stand against a thoroughly corrupt and unjust state.
Notice how each time and place may require a different approach. At times, we can strive to further God's kingdom within our government through activism, influence, or holding office. At other times, a government authority may be so corrupt and antithetical to a godly moral order that Christians may be called to physically fight for freedom and justice, though not at the direction of a religious authority or institution.
The complexity and nuances of sphere sovereignty require sensitivity and discernment. But the effort pays off in a comprehensive vision for the authority of Jesus in all things, the sacredness of every human endeavor, and the absolute necessity for each sphere of life to function independently of the authority of the other. I pray that each of us learn, not to trap each other in power plays between spheres of authority, like the religious leaders attempted with Jesus, but to render to the family what is the family's, to the church what is the church's, and to the state what is the state's - all under the good and ultimate authority of God alone.
