Render unto Caesar: A Critical Examination of Its Interpretation and Implications for Secularism

 

The phrase "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, and unto God what is God's" from the Gospels is often cited in discussions about the relationship between religion and secularism. Secularists frequently interpret this phrase as evidence that Jesus advocated for the separation of church and state. However, this interpretation is contentious and has been the subject of much academic debate. This article argues that the early Christians' understanding of secular obedience based on this phrase is fundamentally flawed when considering the broader context of Jesus' teachings. We will explore how this interpretation arose, the influence of Paul on early Christian thought, the broader implications for understanding the relationship between religion and secularism, and the inherent contradictions in the secular interpretation.

The Gospels' Perspective on Obeying the Law

The Gospels offer a nuanced view of Jesus' stance on law and authority. Jesus emphasized the importance of obeying God's commandments, often critiquing the Pharisees for their legalistic interpretations and failure to uphold the spirit of the law.

In Matthew 5:17-20, Jesus explicitly states, "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them." This passage highlights Jesus' commitment to upholding divine law, countering Paul's assertion that the law was abolished. Jesus emphasized that obedience to God's commandments must come before any other authority.

In Matthew 15:1-9, Jesus criticizes the Pharisees for neglecting God's commandments in favor of human traditions. He rebukes them for making void the word of God for the sake of their traditions, underscoring the primacy of divine law.

In Matthew 23:1-3, Jesus acknowledges the authority of the Pharisees to teach the law but condemns their hypocrisy, advising people to observe what they teach but not follow their example.

In Mark 10:17-20, Jesus emphasizes the importance of keeping the commandments for salvation, listing several key commandments and affirming their significance.

Jesus' Role as the Messiah and Secular Authority

Jesus' role as the Messiah positioned him against Roman rule. As the king of the Jews, his mission was to establish God's kingdom on earth, making the idea of advocating for Roman authority incompatible with his role. If Jesus had promoted the idea of obeying secular laws over God's commandments, it would have attracted significant criticism from Jewish leaders, which is absent in the Gospels. This absence suggests that Jesus did not advocate for prioritizing secular laws.

Paul's Influence on Early Christian Thought

Paul's teachings significantly shaped early Christian attitudes toward secular authority. In Romans 13:1-7, Paul instructs Christians to submit to governing authorities, suggesting that all authorities are ordained by God. However, Paul's views often diverged from those of Jesus, particularly regarding the continuity of Jewish law. Paul's emphasis on faith and love led to an interpretation of Jesus' teachings that aligned more closely with secular obedience.

Transformation of Christianity and the Role of Paul

After Jesus' death, early Christianity was significantly influenced by Paul, who argued that believers should obey Roman rule and that the laws of God had been abolished. This Pauline perspective shaped the early Christian community's understanding of their relationship with secular authorities. As the Gospels were later read and interpreted through the lens of Paul's teachings, Christians began to see the scriptures with what can be described as "Pauline sunglasses," significantly altering the interpretation of Jesus' teachings.

Who First Interpreted Jesus as Advocating Secular Obedience

The idea that Jesus' phrase "Render unto Caesar" meant that people should obey secular authorities was not directly linked to Jesus' words until nearly 200 years after Paul. Early Christians who obeyed secular authorities did so primarily because of Paul's teachings. Origen, an early Christian theologian, interpreted "Render unto Caesar" as a directive for Christians to pay taxes and fulfill their civic duties without compromising their primary allegiance to God. Tertullian also argued that Christians should obey secular laws insofar as they do not conflict with God's commandments.

Potential Interpretations of "Render unto Caesar"

One interpretation is that Jesus is directly addressing the question of whether it is lawful to pay taxes to Caesar. By saying "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's," Jesus acknowledges the practical necessity of complying with tax obligations, suggesting a pragmatic approach to living under Roman rule. Another interpretation, as suggested in the Jewish Annotated New Testament, is that Jesus' response is a strategic maneuver to avoid a trap set by his questioners, allowing his listeners to interpret the statement based on their own beliefs.

Several contradictions arise if we accept the secular interpretation of "Render unto Caesar":

1. Criticizing the Pharisees: Jesus frequently criticized the Pharisees for not obeying God's laws. Advocating secular laws over divine laws would be hypocritical.
2. Holistic Nature of Divine Law: Jesus' teachings emphasize that God's laws encompass all aspects of life, making partial obedience inconsistent.
3. Primacy of God's Authority: Jesus consistently taught that God's authority supersedes all earthly authority, contradicting the idea of prioritizing secular laws.
4. Paul's Divergent Teachings: Paul's teachings in Romans 13:1-7 suggest submission to secular authorities, but his views often diverged from Jesus', creating theological inconsistency.

Conclusion

The early Christians' understanding of obedience to secular authorities based on "Render unto Caesar" is fundamentally flawed when considering Jesus' broader teachings. Jesus consistently emphasized the importance of adhering to God's commandments and maintaining inner moral integrity. The absence of criticism for advocating secular obedience and the profound nature of Jesus' teachings suggest that his message was not one of compliance with secular laws but of unwavering commitment to divine commandments. This reinterpretation is essential for understanding the true relationship between religion and secularism within the context of Jesus' teachings.