Several years ago I heard this great phrase, "Jesus is Lord, Caesar
is Not." I'm not sure where it originated, but it's the title of a scholarly work
that evaluates the subject of "empire" in New Testament studies, and is
co-edited by one of my former New Testament professors, Dr. Scot
McKnight. He is one of those rare gifts of world-class academic
scholarship for the Church, who can still communicate effectively to everyday people.
Anyway,
this phrase "Jesus is Lord, Caesar is Not" has become a catchy,
Twitter-sized phrase used by theologians and bloggers that is meant to
concisely sum up the idea that Jesus and Empire do not mix very well in
their ideologies, morals, and vision for the world. One is based on
gaining political and religious power that dominates others (violently if necessary), while the other is
based on a cruciform kind of life that serves others through sacrificial love. One looks strong, the other looks weak (1 Cor. 1:18-31). Jesus faced the powerful High Priest Caiaphas and the Roman governor Pontius
Pilate, and they exerted their violent power to have him crucified. But God
raised him from the dead, vindicating his way and his teachings,
essentially saying, "I approve of Jesus's way of life rather than your
way of doing things. Everything he said and did was the truth."
Therefore, the first Christians
proclaimed that God had made this Jesus both Lord and Messiah (Acts 2:36). "Jesus is
Lord" did not simply mean "Pray to invite Jesus into your heart so you
can be forgiven," but also that the world was now under the Lordship of a new
Emperor, whose name is Jesus. And his way of ruling the world will
always look just like his life: a life of love, service, justice, and
peace for all people. If Jesus was your Lord, you followed his Way (Acts 9:2;
22:4). By their way of life, they bore witness to the true Lord even though they lived in a culture that did not honor Jesus as Lord. They were "citizens of heaven" (Philippians 3:20).
This was pretty disruptive, since it was
expected that proper homage be paid by all citizens of the Empire to the
Roman Caesars, who were considered god-like. When Christians refused to
participate in worshipful gestures to the Caesars or to honor the ways
of the Empire when it clashed with the way of Jesus, they got into
trouble. They were hated (Matthew 10:24-25), considered unpatriotic, and even called "atheists" because they rejected the gods of the Roman Empire.
Their allegiance was clear: Jesus is Lord,
Caesar is Not. If that means we suffer at the hands of the Empire for the
name of Jesus, so be it. We do not pledge ultimate allegiance to the Flag, or to
the Empire, or to the Caesar, or to any religious systems. We pledge allegiance to Jesus, period. We
will live faithfully and peacefully within the laws of the land, so long
as they do not ask us to dethrone Jesus as Lord. If and when they do, we
will obey God rather than man (Acts 5:29). That sort of stance can get you into trouble.
Jesus is shown to be the true Lord of the world when people faithfully follow his teaching, even when it clashes with the laws of the land, and even unto death. In the case of the first Christians, they were willing to suffer and even die as they refused to compromise their allegiance, or violently retaliate against those who violently persecuted them, because Jesus was their example (1 Peter 3:13-18).
In all honesty, this is way more disruptive than American Christians are used to living. We have done a good job of blending Christianity with American ideals, so that they are basically the same thing in our minds. Unfortunately, this has blinded us to a lot of things and made us ineffective witnesses. Our collusion with the powers of an empire have made us dull to the injustices and immorality that are always present in a powerful empire. We have largely lost our prophetic voice, and often we have done evil in the name of serving God.
I wonder if
Christians today are courageous enough to make this distinction between
Jesus and Caesar. Which one is Lord? We cannot serve two masters. This is where the rubber really hits the road for some of us, because anytime an idol is confronted--especially the idol of nationalism--you can expect some hard push back and a lot of misunderstanding. Just like the first Christians were accused, people will think you are unpatriotic, that you hate America, that you're just "one of those liberals," etc.
Author and pastor Greg Boyd wrote a book over a decade ago called The Myth of a Christian Nation. It confronted the idea that America is a "Christian" nation, that it ever was, or that such a thing could even really exist. It angered a lot of people, including a large group of people that left his church when he preached the content that eventually became the book. I thought the message in that book was dead on, and is sorely needed still today, because Jesus is Lord and Caesar is not.
Clearly in the minds of many today, to speak even the slightest critique of our country's agenda, its policies, its militarism, its practices, its history, is considered unpatriotic and anti-American, and is met with fierce opposition. We should expect this from the world. But when Christians are the ones who are lashing out against those who are trying to protect the vulnerable, who are decrying racism, who are speaking out against injustices (these are central Gospel issues!), then aren't we showing who our true Lord is? Is it not a classic case of "We have no king but Caesar" (John 19:15)?
This is excellent and courageous stuff, Mark. I've been prodding and poking this issue for a while, because I don't think most American Christians know where empire ends and Kingdom starts. Greg Boyd (and other anabaptists) is one of the few who lay out a truly developed theology of engagement for the Christian with politics. It ticks off many people, but I don't see many offering an alternative with a biblical basis. The ultimate question is, At what point of political engagement do we cross over and compromise our hope in and allegiance to the Kingdom of God? The answer would probably startle the masses.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Joe. It is an ongoing tension I live with almost daily. I think political engagement is good and necessary but it has to be done with the awareness that we are engaging world systems that do not, and cannot, contain the kingdom of God within them. Therefore, while we work for the kingdom "on earth as it is in heaven" we do not place our ultimate hope in these systems. That's where I'm at now, anyway.
DeleteI think you are right that there aren't very many good models. It seems the defaults have been total collusion with a political party or total disengagement from all of it.
I agree. What I'm wrestling with is how the Church, and a Christian individually, can be prophetically engaged to "speak the truth to powers", but not cross the line into total partisanship or being defined only by what we are against. It's very possible that it is a matter of the heart and is different for each person, but then that's messy as well.
Delete