Lectionary Year A, Proper 24
Gospel Text: Matthew 22:15-22
I was looking at my calendar from three years ago and discovered that I had preached on this exact same passage at this very location. I glanced through what I had written down and didn’t see anything that I would really change. For a brief moment I thought about using the exact same sermon to see if someone might recognize it.
However, even if the scripture is the same and most of what I had expressed then is still valid, we are in a different chronological year with some very different life circumstances. And with that in mind I dug into the text and various resources to glean new perspectives that are pertinent for us today.
I want to start out by saying that even though the question in the passage is specifically about a type of Roman tax, what I found this time isn’t really about taxes at all.
Context of Today’s Reading
In order to place today’s reading in its proper context, we have to back up all the way to the beginning of Matthew chapter 21, which begins with Jesus’ triumphal entry into Jerusalem at the start of Passion Week. On that Sunday, after his entry into the city Jesus makes his way to the Temple and drives out the money changers and the merchants who had set up their tables in the court area. He accused the temple officials of “making it [the Temple] a den of robbers.” And the officials became angry, not just because of what he did, but of the kinds of people Jesus attracted to the Temple — the blind, the lame, and children.
He leaves Jerusalem for the night but returns the following day to the Temple. The officials gather to question Jesus about the authority he exercises and from where it comes. Of course, Jesus gives a non-answer answer, but which is utterly clear to the officials what Jesus infers. And in response Jesus tells three parables.
Three Parables
The first parable is the parable of two sons where the father asks each to go work in the vineyard (which is a metaphor for Israel). One says no, but goes. The other says yes, but doesn’t. Jesus provides the explanation for this parable in which the repentance of the first son who says not, but actually does, is the way of righteousness. This is the way followed by tax collectors and prostitutes into the kingdom of heaven, but one that so far, has been rejected by the leaders and officials who are tasked with tending the vineyard of Israel.
The second parable is about wicked tenant farmers who have been leased the vineyard from the landowner, but when the landowner sends his servants to collect the proceeds due to the landowner, the tenants beat and kill the servants. The landowner finally sends his son, but the tenants kill the son and seize the vineyard for themselves. Jesus then says that the wicked tenants will be put to death and the vineyard will be leased to other tenants who will give back the appropriate produce. The leaders and officials realize Jesus is speaking of them as the wicked tenants. They wanted to arrest Jesus, but were afraid of the crowds so took no action at that time.
Jesus continues speaking in the Temple court a third parable. This one is about a wedding banquet. Invitations had already been sent, but on the day of the banquet, the king sends his servants to bring all the invited to the banquet. But those invited all refuse. More servants are sent, but the invited pay no heed, going as far as mistreating and killing the servants. The king sends his army to destroy the murderers of his servants and all their property. Then the king sends servants to the streets to bring in anyone who could be found, both good and bad.
Three Questions
It is still this same day that the Pharisees hatch another plot to discredit and destroy Jesus. In their honor-shame society, the earlier exchanges I retold have severely undermined their honor and credibility. The only way to restore their honor and eliminate their shame is by shaming Jesus and discrediting him in front of the crowds. In their plot, they bring in the Herodians, an unlikely group, to assist them. The Pharisees, at least on the surface, despised Roman subjugation of the Jews. The Herodians were more accommodationist and pragmatic, seeing Roman rule as something they benefited from.
Following this exchange about taxes, Jesus is approached by the officials and leaders two more times. The Sadducees, associated with the priestly class at this time, and pro-Roman due to their appointment by the Romans, ask Jesus about the resurrection. The Pharisees then try one more time — this final question by a lawyer to ask about the Greatest Commandment.
History and Politics
It should be noted that the Temple is not simply a religious location, but the center of Jewish politics. The Jews had some autonomy under Roman rule, and the temple and its leaders and officials were both religious and political leaders of this semi-autonomous Jewish nation.
Additionally, there have been numerous other Messiahs in their recent history. Their revolutions had, in every case, been violently and ruthlessly quashed by the Romans. It would appear to some that Jesus could be following in the footsteps of some of these revolutionary predecessors.
The Gospel Challenge
Throughout Jesus’ public ministry, the gospel challenged the status quo. He started out in the less populated and more rural Galilee region, but he has been coming closer and closer to Jerusalem. And now, he has finally reached Jerusalem and brought his radically different view of how the society should operate and how members of that society ought to relate to one another. And he was proclaiming it from the sacred precinct of the Temple itself. Jesus brought the challenge against the status quo directly to those most vested in keeping it, and he was winning the battle of competing kingdoms with his rhetoric and with the crowds.
Jesus’ message was good news to all who had nothing and nothing to lose. It was good news to those who were already outcasts, marginalized, and oppressed. Jesus’ message of inclusive society, egalitarianism and shared resources was good news to those who fought for every scrap they needed to stay alive another day.
But the same message was not nearly so good news to those who would see those they had looked down upon be granted the same level of honor and privilege. Power and privilege only mean something when there exists those who are “less than.” The leaders and officials might be under the thumb of the rule of Rome, but at least they were in possession of power and privilege over others in this current social order. To accept Jesus’ way would mean giving all that up. Not only that but if Jesus’ movement resulted in another revolution, it could destroy the social fabric and stability they depended upon to maintain what they possessed. They certainly didn’t possess everything they wanted, but what little they had, they were vested in protecting.
Jesus must go. He cannot be allowed to continue spreading his anti-social order message.
Desire to Maintain the Status Quo
This first question about taxes is framed as a question about the interpretation of the Torah, the Law, but it is a political one. And it doesn’t matter if Jesus loses credibility with his followers, or if Jesus’ response prompts action from the Romans. Either way, Jesus and his message is destroyed.
On surface their initial addressing of Jesus looks like flattery, but it is contempt. In a society where adherence to tradition and authority is valued, their words accuse Jesus of disregarding tradition, operating without proper sanction, and committing the sin of independence.
“What do you think? Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar?” they ask.
They are the experts in the law and politics. They have trained for debates and have long experience with rhetoric. This is supposed to be a “Gotcha” question. It is designed to have just two possible responses.
But first, Jesus calls them out on their motives. And then he pulls out a new option. He asks for a coin. He himself does not possess one, nor probably any of his disciples. But the questioners seem to easily produce one.
Jesus asks whose image and inscription is on the coin, a Roman silver denarius. The only coin authorized to pay the poll tax which is under question. They respond, “The emperor’s.”
The whole point of having money changers at the temple was because the Pharisees and others committed to keeping the law found the denarius and other Roman coins offensive. They featured images of the emperor and the inscription “son of a god.” The Romans permitted the Jews to mint their own copper coins which did not contain any offensive features. These were the coins typically used by Jews, especially within the temple grounds. There was no practical need to carry anything else.
To possess a Roman silver denarius within the temple grounds meant at least some of them were violating their own traditions. It also suggests that they had enough wealth to casually carry around coins of higher denominations than necessary for daily commerce. It may be a metaphor for where their true allegiance lies.
Jesus declares, “Give therefore to the emperor the things that are the emperor’s, and to God the things that are God’s.”
This might sound like two separate realms and a person is obliged to both. But Psalm 24:1 reads
The earth is the LORD’s and all that is in it,
the world, and those who live in it. (NRSV)
and earlier in Matthew (6:24) Jesus has already stated that
“No one can serve two masters; for a slave will either hate the one and love the other, or be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and wealth.” (NRSV)
In light of this the response Jesus gave is, on its literal face, ambiguous, but to those who knew the scriptures and had been listening to his teachings, the implied answer is clear: all things belong to God. Payment or non-payment of civil taxes levied must be decided in light of how will or will not serve God. The leaders understood what Jesus meant, and can be inferred from the Lucan gospel (23:2) where they charge Jesus before Pilate saying, “We found this man perverting our nation, forbidding us to pay taxes to the emperor.” (NRSV)
I also find it interesting that the betrayal of Jesus is paid for with thirty silver coins from the temple treasury. Although the text doesn’t specify the exact coin, some commentators suggest that the silver coins were most likely to be Roman denarii. If that were indeed the case, how ironic and absolutely hypocritical to have the ostensibly despised Roman coin in the heart of the temple.
What About Our Status Quo?
In our present time, the year 2020 has been an year of unplanned upheavals. For a great many, the previous status quo has been broken. From pandemics and its direct effects on society, to economic upheavals, to the increasing racial and socio-economic tensions, this has been a revelatory year.
There is a great and strong desire to “return to normal.” But I would dare ask these questions: Was the previous normal good for all humanity? How many of us were beneficiaries of a status quo maintained at the expense of other human beings?
The gospel of Jesus Christ is the breaking and dismantling of all human-based systems of society. It is the breaking in of a new kind of society that can only be birthed and maintained by Christ and through the Spirit of Christ.
There is frequently talk of having to find a “new normal.” Will that new normal be more equitable, more egalitarian, more like the society proclaimed by Jesus?
No comments:
Post a Comment