ACC ~ Matthew 17 v24 - 27

OVERVIEW:

The half-shekel was the amount that the law had established for those serving in the temple for the redemption of soul and body, and for rich and poor alike (HILARY OF POITIERS, CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA). The giving of the half-shekel is a symbol of true redemption, and the shekel is for the redeemed soul (APOLLINARIS). Rightly understood, the Lord is free from paying tribute, and yet he must fulfill all righteousness (CHRYSOSTOM). We are like fish caught by the apostles, in whose mouths we display Christ the royal coin, who rendered payment of our debt for two things, our soul and our body (CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA). It was no small thing to predict that the fish carrying the tribute would be the first one caught in those depths or that the net thrown into the deep would obey his command and would bring in the fish carrying the coin (CHRYSOSTOM). Since Jesus is the image of God the unseen and did not have stamped upon him the image of Caesar, he took the image of Caesar from a suitable place in the sea, so as to pay it to the kings of the earth as the contribution of himself and his disciple. He did this so that those taking the half-shekel might not suppose Jesus to be in debt either to them or to the kings of the earth (ORIGEN).

17:24 | Does Not Your Teacher Pay the Tax?

THE HALF-SHEKEL INTERPRETED CHRISTOLOGICALLY

APOLLINARIS: This tax of the half-shekel was the law, defined by Moses, who said, “Each will give as redemption of his soul to the Lord, a half shekel.” [1] The Jews collected this from everyone, and the half-shekel was paid as redemption for two souls according to the law. The rich man was not demanded more, nor the poor man less. The half-shekel is sacred, intimating nothing else than the true divine-human Mediator, since everything foreshadowed this. The true redemption was the Lord who had the Father in himself, since his nature is divine. [2] The giving of the half-shekel is a symbol of his self-giving, and the shekel is for the redeemed soul. No one is allowed to pay more than the half, not even if he is rich. Thus it is said, “For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell,” [3] that is, all the fullness of divinity, which is offered in his mediatorial work on the cross, abides in his dual nature as God-man. The richness of his divinity and the poverty of his humanity are fully integrated in one person. The half-shekel is interpreted here as his divinity, under question by the tax collectors. FRAGMENT 87. [4]

[1] Ex 30:13.

[2] Roman coins normally carried an image (charactēr) of the emperor stamped on their obverse alongside titles ascribing divine status to the Roman emperor. The Jewish half-shekel (the coin used to pay the temple tax) bore no human image or text inscription, yet it was considered by its use as holy. Apollinaris is contrasting the conventions to comment on Christ’s dual nature. To make the point more obvious, he refers to Jesus’ character, or nature (charactēr), as divine (theikos).

[3] Col 1:19.

[4] MKGK 27.

A SYMBOL FORESHADOWING OUR REDEMPTION

HILARY OF POITIERS: The Lord is asked to pay a half-shekel. For this was the amount that the law had established for those serving in the temple for the redemption of soul and body. But the law, as we know, is the foreshadowing of the future (for it was not the value of the coin that God desired so that with such a small expense redemption of soul and body might be granted for sins). Therefore the offering of this half-shekel was established [1] so that we might offer ourselves certified and professed and enrolled in the name of Christ, in Christ who is the true temple of God, and it was established as testimony of the Son of God. ON MATTHEW 17.10. [2]

[1] Ex 30:13.

[2] SC 258:70.

NOT PAYING THE TAX?

JEROME: After Caesar Augustus, Judea was made a tributary state and all the people were registered in the census. So Joseph and his kinswoman Mary had set off for Bethlehem. Once again, since Jesus had been brought up in Nazareth, which is a town of Galilee lying close to Capernaum, he is asked to pay taxes. Because of the magnitude of the miracles he had done, those who demanded this tax do not dare to ask him. Instead, they meet a disciple and maliciously ask whether he should pay taxes or defy Caesar’s will. COMMENTARY ON MATTHEW 3.17.24. [1]

[1] CCL 77:154.

17:25-26 | From Whom Do Earthly Kings Take Tribute?

THE SONS ARE FREE

CHRYSOSTOM: So that Peter should not think that he said it after hearing it from others, he forestalls him by showing this very thing and giving Peter, a man who up to now shrank from speaking about these things, freedom to speak about it. What he says is something like this: “I am free from paying tribute. For if the kings of the earth do not take it from their sons but from their subjects, much more ought I to be free of this demand, being the Son not of an earthly king but of the king of heaven and myself a king as well.” Do you see how he has distinguished the sons from them that are not sons? And if he were not a son, he brought in the example of the kings without purpose. Someone may say, “Yes, he is a son but not trueborn.” Then he is not a son, and if he is not a son or trueborn he does not belong to God but to someone else. But if he belongs to someone else, then the comparison does not have its proper strength. For he is speaking not of sons generally but of truly begotten sons, their very own sons, of sons who share the kingdom with their parents. And so by way of contrast he mentioned “the sons of others,” calling those that are born of themselves “their own” and those not born of themselves “of others.” THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW, HOMILY 58.2. [1]

[1] PG 58:567; NPNF 1 10:358-59.

IMMUNITY FROM TAXES

JEROME: Our Lord was the son of a king both according to the flesh and according to the spirit, begotten either from the stock of David or from the Word of the almighty Father. Therefore as the son of a king he did not owe tax, but as one who had assumed the humility of the flesh he has to fulfill all justice. We unfortunates, who are enrolled under Christ’s name and do nothing worthy of such great majesty, for us he both underwent the cross and paid our tax. But we do not pay him tribute in return for his honor and like the sons of a king we are immune from taxes. COMMENTARY ON MATTHEW 3.17.26. [1]

[1] CCL 77:155.

DO KINGS TAKE TRIBUTE FROM THEIR SONS?

HILARY OF POITIERS: Is it not clear that the sons of kings are not subject to tax and those who are the heirs of a kingdom are free from service? But his words have inner meaning. A drachma was demanded of the people. Now the law moves toward that faith which was to be revealed through Christ. Therefore by the custom of the law this same drachma was demanded from Christ as though from an ordinary citizen. But to show that he was not subject to the law and to demonstrate the glory of his Father’s dignity in himself, he offered as an example of earthly privilege the fact that kings’ sons are not subject to census and tax. He is the Redeemer of our soul and body. Nothing should be demanded of him for his redemption, because it was necessary that a king’s son be distinguished from the common lot. Therefore the king’s son offers a stumbling block to the tax law in order to do away with it, he being free from the duty of the law. ON MATTHEW 17.11. [1]

[1] SC 258:70-72.

17:27 | Fishing for a Shekel

THE FISH A FIGURE FOR THE CHURCH

APOLLINARIS: He establishes himself as lord and master of the sea, of the things in it and of all the elements, as the true Son of God the Father. For this fish provides a type of the church: once [it was] held by the brine of faithlessness and superstition, submerged in the depths of the sea and swamped by the storms and distress of worldly pleasures. But now [it is] raised up by the apostles’ hook of teaching and the fishing nets of the Word to the knowledge of God, of him “who calls us from darkness to his amazing light.” [1] FRAGMENT 88. [2]

[1] 1 Pet 2:9.

[2] MKGK 28.

FIND A SHEKEL IN THE FISH’S MOUTH AND GIVE IT

CHRYSOSTOM: Elsewhere, however, he despises the offense, [1] when he was talking about foods, [2] teaching us to know the times when we must take account of those being offended and when to disregard them. And in the manner of giving or paying the tax, he discloses himself again. Why does he not tell Peter to give of what they have laid up? So that, as I said, in this too he might show that he is God of all and that he rules even the sea. He had already demonstrated this when he rebuked it and by his commanding Peter to walk on the waves. [3] Now again he signifies the same thing, though in another way, yet so as to cause great amazement. For it was not a small thing to predict that the fish carrying the tribute would be the first one caught in those depths or that the net thrown into the deep would obey his command and would bring in the fish carrying the coin. Thus it is an act of divine and unutterable power. THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW, HOMILY 58.2. [4]

[1] Scandalon, stumbling block.

[2] Mt 15:11-20.

[3] Mt 14:29.

[4] PG 58:567; NPNF 1 10:359.

GIVE IT TO THEM FOR ME AND FOR YOURSELF

ORIGEN: This coin was not in Jesus’ house but happened to be in the mouth of a fish in the sea. This too, I think, was a result of God’s kindness. It was caught and came up on the hook belonging to Peter, who was the fisher of men. That which is figuratively called a fish was caught in order that the coin with the image of Caesar might be taken from it, that it might take its place among those which were caught by them who have learned to become fishers of men. Let him, then, who has the things of Caesar render them to Caesar, [1] that afterwards he may be able to render to God the things of God. But since Jesus is the image of God the unseen and did not have the image of Caesar (for there was nothing in him that had anything to do with the prince of this world), [2] he therefore took the image of Caesar from a suitable place in the sea, so as to pay it to the kings of the earth as the contribution of himself and his disciple. Jesus did this so that those taking the half-shekel might not suppose Jesus to be in debt either to them or to the kings of the earth. For he paid the debt, one he had never taken on or possessed or used to buy anything or made his personal possession, to prevent the image of Caesar ever being alongside the image of the invisible God. COMMENTARY ON MATTHEW 13.10. [3]

[1] Mt 22:21.

[2] In sharp contrast to Apollinaris (cf. p. 64. n. 2), Origen interprets the Roman emperor as a symbol of the devil, the prince of this world. Christ is the fish, and the coin found in its mouth signifies the ransom that he has paid the devil to free humankind, which through sin had become the devil’s slave. The fact that the coin was found in the sea (symbolic of the world) indicates that Christ did not take it from his dominion but from that of the devil, to show that he was not the devil’s slave as was his disciple Peter, who here symbolizes humanity set free by Christ.

[3] GCS 40:207-8; ANF 9:481.

GO TO THE SEA

CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA: He was also able to take the coin out of the earth, but he did not do so. [Instead he] made the miracle out of the sea, so that he might teach us the mystery rich in contemplation. For we are the fish snatched from the bitter disturbances of life. It is just as if we have been caught out of the sea on the apostles’ hooks. In their mouths the fish have Christ the royal coin, which was rendered in payment of debt for two things, for our soul and for our body. Also for two peoples, the Jews and the Gentiles. Also in the same way for the poor and the wealthy, since the old law clearly demanded the payment of the half-shekel from both rich and poor alike. FRAGMENT 212. [1]

[1] MKGK 222-23.