Luke 20:20Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

They have forgotten the truth of God, who asks, ‘Who is this that hideth his intention from Me, and concealeth his words in his heart, and thinketh that he hideth them from Me? For as Solomon says, hell and destruction are open to the Lord: so how should not the minds of men also be open?’ But you approached the Savior of all, Christ, merely as a man, mistakenly believing you could deceive Him. This reflects your ignorance; yet it would be wise to remember that the Word, while being God, took on our likeness. By His divine and miraculous works, along with His majestic glory, He demonstrated that He was not merely a man like yourselves, but indeed God, as the magnificence of His deeds bears witness. Although He appeared as a man, He restored sight to the blind, raised the dead from their tombs, commanded those consumed by decay to rise to life, parted the seas, and walked on the waves while His disciples sailed on the Sea of Tiberias. It was evident, through these concrete realities, that He was both fully man and fully God.

While Mark and Luke do not include the parable of those invited to the wedding banquet, found solely in Matthew, they all converge again from the discussion of taxes to Caesar to the topic of the woman with seven husbands, without causing any dispute.

Let us reflect on the contrast between the inception of this plot and its outcome, examining the intent against the result. Above the discord of human endeavors, divine Providence operates magnificently, transforming their ill-conceived plots into shame for the instigators, and from evil, it brings forth good. The Pharisees anticipated ensnaring Jesus with a clever and deceitful remark, leading Him to destruction; however, their effort resulted in His word exposing their frailty and ridiculing their ignorance. The adversary of humanity aimed to eliminate Christ through them, intending to thwart the newly established foundation of Christ’s Church. Instead, the opportunity arose for Christ to articulate a doctrine that forever unites Church and State, promoting peace within the Church and vital to the stability and strength of the State.

The duplicity and unscrupulous nature of the Pharisees become evident even in the countenances of their messengers sent to Christ. “They sent their disciples to Him from Herodiana” (Matthew 22:16). But why did they not approach Him themselves? Likely, it was due to the calculation that should their disciples succeed, they would share in the success as if they had done it themselves; conversely, if it failed, the shame would fall on the disciples, leaving the Pharisees untouched. But why did they send their disciples accompanied by Herodians? This reveals their cunning. When Judea was brought under Roman control, the unwelcome duty of paying taxes to the Roman Cæsar generated contention: “Is it lawful to give a tribute to Cæsar, or not?” (Matthew 22:17). The Herodians, who derived their allegiance from Herod appointed by the Roman Cæsar, argued for paying taxes, labeling dissidents as rebels. On the other hand, the Pharisees, aligning with the Zealots believed that the Jewish people, as God’s chosen, ought to render tribute solely to God and His temple, as ordained in the Mosaic Law. To pay tax to the Roman Cæsar, an idolater, would be to insult the true God.

How do these opposing factions join forces? They set aside their animosity briefly to conspire against the Teacher of Truth, whom both detest. Their scheme is this: If He asserts that it is lawful to render to Cæsar, the Pharisees will accuse Him of betraying God and His people, therebydiscrediting His role as a divine messenger and undermining faith in Him. Conversely, if He claims it is not lawful to pay taxes to Cæsar, the Herodians would expose Him to the Roman authorities as a rebel, subjecting Him to capital punishment. Is it not evident that the trap is meticulously laid, “that they may have Him in the word?” (Luke 20:20).

We must take note of the sorrowful condition of the Jewish people and society, fragmented into differing opinions and beliefs. They form separate factions, undermining the unity essential for societal existence, dissipating collective strength into rival forces that weaken public trust. Instead of fostering harmony through rightful action and obedience to authority, they stir discontent, regressing society into disputes that jeopardize its foundational stability. They engage in internal conflict that surely does not promote peace or safety, often creating a hollow truce between themselves, all while rebelling against truth and righteousness.

It is beneficial for both the people and the state when a single, universal, brilliant, strong, and unifying center exists—like the sun within the universe—where the King governs, willingly restricting His unlimited power in accordance with the will of the Sovereign of Heaven, guided by wisdom, generosity, love for the people, a commitment to the common good, heeding sound counsel, and respecting the laws of His ancestors and His own. The relationship between the subjects and the supreme authority should not be rooted in ever-revived disputes or divisions, but grounded in the sacred traditions of their forebears and a profound reverence for the King of kings and Lord of lords. O Lord! You have gifted us with this grace. We must express our gratitude, nurture it, and pray: “establish, O God, these things which thou hast made in us” (Psalm 67:29).

The Pharisees, along with representatives of Herod Antipas' faction, who prioritized the maintenance of political peace to avoid giving the Romans cause for suspicion, conspired to present Jesus with a question designed to compel Him to contradict either their religious beliefs or political ideals.

They approached Him with a provocative inquiry, “Is it lawful for us (God's chosen people) to give taxes to Cæsar or not?” The challenge in this query lay in the fact that if Jesus answered negatively, He would be seen as defying Roman authority; if He responded positively, He would alienate the populace, who were led by the Pharisees to believe that their allegiance was owed solely to God as their king, viewing subservience to a foreign, pagan ruler as incompatible with their faith. Jesus’ reply encapsulated the notion that both loyalties coexist; it is essential to give back to earthly authority that which has been acquired under its protection, while still upholding the commandments of God with unwavering devotion.

The following morning, Christ entered the temple vestibule one last time with His disciples, and as He began His customary teachings, His foes arrived, intent on their treacherous scheme. This time, the Pharisees aligned themselves with the Herodians, whose principal objective was to uphold the Herodian dynasty by fostering favorable relations with the Roman imperial government, necessitating the quelling of any Jewish nationalistic aspirations. This collaboration indicated a deliberate effort to frame the case against Christ in political terms, aiming to charge Him with disloyalty to the state. They were acutely aware of Roman apprehensions concerning Messianic movements within the Jewish populace, which had required substantial resources and efforts to suppress. Recently, Christ had boldly identified Himself as the Messiah before the people; however, since this declaration had not incited any popular uprising, providing no lawful basis for His prosecution, they now sought to manufacture that basis through cunning manipulation.

They aimed to "submit Him to the rulers," believing that the most effective way to bring about His ruin was to level accusations against Him in a political context—an approach they eventually utilized when calling upon Pilate to judge Him. In framing their malicious question, they sought a statement that might incriminate Him concerning the king's authority, which they fervently desired, as demonstrated by their astonishment at His wise response. Nevertheless, they later misinterpreted His answer, accusing Him of failing to command the payment of tribute to Caesar, thus claiming He had disrespected the king's authority (Luke 23:2).