SUBSCRIBER LOGIN

Search
First Things

Loading
« Previous  |Home|  Next »         

Thursday, August 2, 2012, 9:00 AM

In Defense of Towns
Anthony Esolen, Public Discourse

To Accommodate Caesar or to Follow Consciences?
Sr. Mary Ann Walsh, USCCBlog

When We Suffer, When to Disobey
Collin Hansen, The Gospel Coalition

Romney’s Warsaw Speech
William Kristol, Weekly Standard

On Dating and Discerning
Katrina Fernandez, Crescat

3 Comments

    David Nickol
    August 2nd, 2012 | 10:20 am

    Regarding “To Accommodate Caesar or to Follow Consciences?” it should be noted that the United States government isn’t Caesar. We don’t have an emperor here (no, even Obama isn’t an emperor). We have a constitutional democracy with checks and balances. Jesus, in saying, “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesars,” was not laying out principles for the proper relationship between citizens and government. He was giving a clever answer to those who thought they had formulated a question to which either a yes or a no answer would have gotten Jesus in trouble.

    heloise
    August 2nd, 2012 | 10:57 am

    Right. Because Jesus just said that to get out of their question. Nothing important is being said at all-you know Him, just another Oscar Wilde.

    And when He held up that coin, printed with the image of and minted under the military and legal authority of the Empire, I’m sure he just meant specifically Tiberius, because He never generalized. No one but the Roman Caesars used the image of their leaders to legitimize their currency anyway, right?

    Then, of course, we couldn’t possibly take a lesson from this pert answer in asking whose image we are made in.

    And, Mr. Nickol, I’m sure we should all sleep soundly that republics and democracies have never broken down into tyrannies and their power over the minority is never ti be feared. I’m sure Jesus really wants us to trust in the authority of the worldly governments. The politicians certainly do, too.

    David Nickol
    August 2nd, 2012 | 11:43 am

    heloise,

    Extended sarcasm rarely is helpful in discovering the meaning of a biblical passage.

    There is an extremely long tradition in Christianity of respecting governmental authority. The idea that government is “Caesar” and that religion is totally separate from government is not a Christian idea. Civil authorities were regarded, from the very beginning, to derive their authority from God:

    See Romans 13:1-7:

    Let every person be subordinate to the higher authorities, for there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been established by God. Therefore, whoever resists authority opposes what God has appointed, and those who oppose it will bring judgment upon themselves. For rulers are not a cause of fear to good conduct, but to evil. Do you wish to have no fear of authority? Then do what is good and you will receive approval from it, for it is a servant of God for your good. But if you do evil, be afraid, for it does not bear the sword without purpose; it is the servant of God to inflict wrath on the evildoer. Therefore, it is necessary to be subject not only because of the wrath but also because of conscience. This is why you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, devoting themselves to this very thing. Pay to all their dues, taxes to whom taxes are due, toll to whom toll is due, respect to whom respect is due, honor to whom honor is due.

    Of course, this would not be interpreted by any Christian as a blanket command to obey civil authorities under all circumstances, but to base the approach to government on the idea that there are “Caesar’s things” and “God’s things,” and never the twain shall meet, is simply not what Christianity has done for the past 2000 years.

    I think it is misleading to refer to government as “Caesar” for any number of reasons.

=