254 - What Is Left For Caesar?

What Is Left For Caesar?
A Look at Mark 12:13-17 and Romans 13:1-7
By Arthur Bud Ogle

"If Christ was not establishing a legitimate domain for the state to operate outside of God's realm, and if Paul is teaching the body of Christ how it can learn to love even enemies, what then is left for Caesar? . . Insofar as our answer is biblical, it can be suggested that the New Testament's clearest portrayal of the state is as crucifier. . The fact that Jesus and Paul do not address the state does not mean that they ignore it. Rather, they replace it and all other principalities and powers with participation in the new creation."

CAREFUL re-reading of the tribute passage and Paul's injunction in Romans 13 suggests a new perspective on the question posed by this essay. Sensitive Christians perplexed by the power of the state always come up against these two bulwarks affirming a separate order or authority for the state.

Jesus and Paul confront people with, and introduce them to, a totally new understanding of authority, one in which subjection to God and one another replaces all other powers as the source of life and its value and meaning. No government, state, or nation, or any other person or institution legitimately has coercive authority. In fact, coercive authority is a conflict in terms. The only sources of authority for people of God are God's presence in prayer, service, and community; God's gift of justification; the freedom to love beyond any worldly restraints or expectations; and the envisioning and embodying of a reconciled world where God and people are partners in creation.

This message permeates the New Testament. Christ's response to the question of tribute to Caesar and Paul's understanding of "authority" in Romans 13 both show that the Body of Christ and the new

Arthur Bud Ogle, a graduate of Yale and the University of Virginia where he received his doctorate, is currently co-director of the University Christian Ministry at Northwestern University and a member of the Covenant Community. The latter is a body of disciples seeking to incorporate the radical simplicity of the gospel in every di mension of life. Several members of the community participated in Bible studies and worked on projects from which germinated the ideas and spirit of this essay. The community seeks to be living testimony of "how people change." Being grasped by the overwhelming magnitude of God's grace and seeking to support and stretch one another in shared response to that Good News, the community's self-understanding is to be an organ of God's transformation of the world.

255 - What Is Left For Caesar?

creation are not merely proleptic glimpses of God's eschatological power but the very agency in and by which God reveals genuine authority. Mystery and politics are conflated. Jesus and Paul did not found a new religion. They both lived and died as Jews. But they confront their followers with a new reality. Service and submission, not status or strength, determines "leadership."

Jesus and Paul's confrontation with Caesar and the Roman Empire parallels our own time. Although the United States is vastly different from the Roman Empire, both nations depend(ed) on tradition, privilege, and power to maintain allegiance. The cross and empty grave bear full witness to the impotence of such privilege and power. God is all powerful and authoritative insofar as people accept and live in that grace. God does not have a separate realm but transforms all realms of the here and now for the one who is able to hear and see and believe.

I

One-dimensional reading of the New Testament drama often misses those essential kernels of revolutionary insight which confront the reader with the presence of the Realm of God. The Gospels and Epistles are designed to evoke wonder, appreciation of and participation in God's new order. In this regard, Christ's confrontation with the authorities in Mark11 and 12 (paralleled in Matthew 21-23 and Luke 19-21) is truly spectacular. His radically new order is set in sharp and clear outlines against the prevailing powers. Nothing, not temple custom, or Caesar, or hopes for a future Kingdom of David, or manipulation of the law, is allowed to distract from the holiness and authority of God. The triumphal entry resounds with the declaration that David's kingdom will finally be God's. The city does not "know … the things that make for peace" (Luke 19:39, 42). True authority does not come from careful preservation of past or position. Nor does it come from the public adulation of the crowd. It arises out of submission to God.

Jesus does not suggest that we learn authority from Caesar, or that we replace Caesar with God to rule over us in the same way Caesar did. In the most profound sense of the English word, "authority" refers to the author of power, of relationships, of creation. Caesar, government, and the state do not create or author things or people. Rather, they manipulate, arrange, and redistribute others' power and relationships. The biblical word for "authority" is "exousia" which means "of or from being," that which really is. For Plato it was the ideal. For politicians it was Caesar and Rome. For Jesus it is an understanding that God is transforming the world, re-authoring it so that humility, service, and love best express our living in God's authority. Jesus applies that understanding immediately upon his arrival in Jerusalem. He systematically addresses the questions of authority in every realm. In chapters 11and 12 of Mark, Christ addresses questions of power and its abuse in everything from nationalistic exclusiveness (11: 17) to the resurrection of the dead (12:25). The majestic sweep of Christ's au-

256 - What Is Left For Caesar?

thority cleanses the temple (11: 15) and clarifies the law as true worship (12:33).

Christ does not answer the same questions the people ask. Rather than explain or justify his actions or teachings, Jesus is always pointing to the new sense of relationship, truth, and power available in God's realm. The disciples ask about fig trees (Mark 11:21), and Jesus teaches about faith and prayer and the need for peace. Disciples cannot experience the faith of moving mountains or God's grace apart from their own reconciliation, being at one with one another.

The first question of the chief priests and scribes and elders concerns Jesus' authority to re-form the practices of the temple (Mark 11:28), but Jesus teaches about hearing God's Word. At this point Matthew's interpretation of the parables of the two children, the wedding banquet and the disobedient tenants (Mathew 21:28-44) focuses the issue even more clearly. Authority does not come via nationality or the temple or special therein, but in obedience. Concerned about their "legitimate authority," the authorities ask, "What about Caesar?"

Surely, they scheme, when Jesus refuses to support the Roman government's authority to demand tribute, we can teach him a thing or two about power by bringing it down on him. (Luke 20:20 is most explicit here.) How well we know, they continue shaking their heads, that you have no respect for people's positions of power or status (Mark 12:14f.), but does your way of truth allow us to register for or pay tribute to Caesar? The stage is set.

Jesus once again seizes the opportunity to teach people about God's realm. He turns the focus from his view of authority to an experience of the genuine authority of Israel's traditions against icons in the temple and fake claims of divinity. He asked for a denarius. To those of us unfamiliar with Rome's system of coinage that may seem insignificant. But it was a very deliberate gesture. The denarius was a Roman coin minted only in distant Gaul and used to pay the much-hated Roman legions.¹ It was used by the Romans and the wealthy who collaborated with them. The denarius was a rare coin for the common people. They were, however, familiar with its symbolism as the coin of those who cooperated with Rome. It was a coin used by the high priests who were the ruling nobility in occupied Israel, by the Herodians, and by other members of the tax-exempt upper classes.

Jesus, probably holding the coin so those crowding around could see, asks whose image (the Greek word is icon) and inscription is thereon. Again our unfamiliarity flattens the dynamic tension all the people must have felt. The icon on the coin was Caesar. Jewish law forbade the presence of any icon in the temple-especially Caesar's. Public opinion ran so strongly against the use of icons that just a few years earlier, in 26 A.D., when Pontius Pilate posted some Roman icons

¹ Special debt is owed to J. Spencer Kennard's very helpful Render to God: A Study of the Tribute Passage, N.Y., Oxford, 1950. Special thanks also to all those who helped clarify the ideas herein: Joe, Donna, George, Bob, Don, Mike, Margie, Betsy, Bob, Pat, Clark, Bruce, and Dave.

257 - What Is Left For Caesar?

around Jerusalem, the city came to a standstill. In an incredible display of massive civil disobedience, literally thousands of Israelites indicated their willingness to die rather than have foreign icons pollute their Holy City. Pilate, stunned by the depth and strength of the people's convictions, removed the icons. How much worse to carry an icon into the temple itself. Jesus thus places the Pharisees and Herodians in the position of supporting icons.

But Christ does not stop there. He wanted to read the epigraph (inscription) on the coin. Typically it would have read, with reference to Caesar, "Son of God, Father of Country," or "Tiberius Caesar, Son of the Deified Augustus, Himself Holy." Jesus read the inscription. No more had to be said.

That which is Caesar's-this Roman coin with his icon and blasphemy-should go to Caesar. And that which is God's should go to God. The people who carry the icons and slogans of Caesar into the temple should pay Caesar what he claims is his due. The tax-exempt elite render to Caesar. But the faithful Jew, refusing to adulterate the temple with icons of people who claim to be gods, should render all of life to God. Of course, the Messiah could not advocate paying tribute to another sovereign. Neither, however, did Jesus encourage expectations of the long-awaited messianic confrontation of force against Rome's force. Rather, Jesus penetrated to the heart of the issue by showing that the question of authority answers itself. Caesar has the authority that Caesar's followers give him, and God possesses the authority that is acknowledged in faith. The source and summary of authority lies in those who have it, who render or give it as a sacred trust. Biblically it takes the form of covenant between God and people. It is at once a unilateral gift of, by, and from God and the dialogue of faithful people with one another and their sovereign.

Twice more, the Gospels tell us, they tried to trap Jesus. The resurrection, later utilized by Paul to divide the Pharisees and Sadducees, troubles the Sadducees because of the potential future legal complications. Jesus laments their inability to understand "the power of God" (Mark 12:24), which focuses not on the past or the future but the living present. But there's still the law. "What is the first command of all?" (Mark 12:28) asks the scribe in a final attempt to trip up Jesus. Jesus unhesitatingly recites the Pharisees' favorite prayer, "Hear O Israel,and Leviticus illustrates what it means for God to be the Lord. If God rules, God's life-style is the only realistic life-style there is. It then be-between God and Caesar, who call for such basically different lifestyles. Jesus quickly disabuses his listeners of any possible confusion. The scribe's recognition that "there is no other besides God" (Mark 12:52), no Caesar, no death, draws Christ's assurance: "You are not far from the Realm of God" (Mark 12:34). It is not bound by time; it exists both before and after David. It is marked by recognizing God's full authority over all, not merely some, of life. As the widow and her

258 - What Is Left For Caesar?

mite so eloquently testify, Jesus turns back to the temple whose cleansing originated the long interchange on how God's authority works.

II

It is in that same temple that Paul is later arrested-arrested for following "the way," for suggesting Gentiles too were under God's authority, for stirring up a riot. Jesus forewarned the disciples that they would suffer arrest and persecution-for doing good (Romans 8:36 is a direct contradiction of Romans 13:3f. if the latter supposedly refers to the state and military authorities who are killing the Christians as sheep for the slaughter). He especially blessed those who would be persecuted and imprisoned-those supposedly in prison for something other than petty theft. And Paul was such a one. It is one of the ironies of the Christian tradition that Paul-beaten, stoned, and imprisoned, probably more than any other Christian, for refusing to be intimidated or controlled by worldly authorities-this Paul becomes the patron saint of those advocating subordination to authorities, hierarchy, and orders. Persecuted for his faith even more than he had previously persecuted others for theirs, Paul knew what authority was and what it can do. One kind of authority could imprison and kill. Another could liberate and overcome death. Paul's Epistle to the Romans is a hymn to, of, and for God. It is his most thorough-going attempt to confront readers and listeners with the experience of God as sovereign in life.

In many respects the second half of Romans is a commentary on the nature of God's rule: "In everything God works together with those who love God to obtain what is good" (Romans 8:28). In chapters 9-1 1, Paul shares his impossible dream of reconciling all the nations, all the powers and principalities of the earth, especially nations, which demand loyalty. In chapters 12-15:13 Paul asks for the perfect sacrifice, to be totally transformed by restoration of unity with God. Agreeing with the scribe who affirmed Jesus' answer about the great commandment, the life of love, as "more than all the burnt offerings and sacrifices" (Mark 12:33), Paul sees obedience as sacrifice of self in the remaking of self (Romans 12:2). God does not want dead sacrifices but living ones, not a willingness to die but an openness to live beyond all the possibilities.

Paul does not ask the Christians in Rome to find the will of God, or to accept the will of God, or to believe in the will of God, but to prove the will of God (Romans 12:2). He does not suggest that Jesus has already proved it for us. No, he insists God is proving it via our life in Christ. To accomplish that, God requires our total loyalty. Loyalty is not to be a utopian vision. Human sinfulness is central to Paul's understanding of the principalities and powers in our time. On the other hand, loyalty cannot be paid to those same principalities and powers. In Romans 13, Paul admonishes us to be subject to the higher authorities. However, those authorities are not the state, nation, empire, and military. To understand the first seven verses of chapter 13, it is essential to absorb them in their context.

259 - What Is Left For Caesar?

III

Paul's supposed teaching about the state comes right in the middle of an inspiring homily about the people of God. In the church, different people miraculously become one body, a plurality of souls actually constituting a singular body (Romans 6:12 and 8:23). The body begins with God's call to each believer to "your reasonable service, present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God. Do not be conformed to this realm but be transformed by the restoration of your mind so that you may prove God's good, pleasing and perfect will" (12:1 and 2). This is an order befitting Paul, but one that Paul fully expects to be consummated in God through the church in which "we are one body in Christ" (Romans 12:5). This section on the people, the body, of God (12-15:13) ties together God's hope and Paul's concern for nations (15:14-16). Both foci point to God's rule in the political as well as spiritual arenas. Paul concludes his appeal on behalf of the Jews by affirming, "Because all things are from God and through God and in God, to God be the glory in all realms" (I 1:36). He summarizes his responsibilities to the nations "so that the eternal command of God will be made known in all the nations' obedience of faith" (16:26).

A discursus advocating subordination to the state (allegedly Romans 13:1-7) would be dramatically out of context and Pauline character. Careful commentators have been vexed by the "insertion" of this section for centuries. Paul Minear's struggle is typical of these. He carefully analyzes the entire letter within the framework of the inter-church struggle at Rome. But when he gets to 13:1-7 he confesses in frustration, "I must admit that I am unable to find particular reasons in the Roman situation for Paul's inclusion of this teaching … concerning obedience to governing authorities " ² If, however, these "governing authorities"are the servant-leaders of the church and Paul's counsel is to be subject to them, the passage becomes a perfect confirmation of Minear's thesis. The "political thesis," suggested by Paul's use of some specific words often applied to the state, has been so commonly assumed that commentators usually fail to grasp some crucial linguistic keys of context and word usage. That failure has had widespread impact because other words usually referring to the church and to God's power are arbitrarily and inaccurately applied, this author contends, to governments.

Noting the confusion as to why "Paul brought up the Chrisitian political obligation" at this particular point in his letter, George W. Forell emphasizes that these words to the Romans "have largely determined the Christian attitude towards the state." ³ After all, public opinion runs, nothing could be clearer than The Living Bible's rendition of admonition: "Obey the government, for God is the one who has put it there. There is no government anywhere that God has not placed in

² Paul Minear, The Obedience of Faith: The Purposes of Paul in the Epistle to the Romans, London, SCM Press, 197 1, p. 88.
³ George W. Forell, The Christian Lifestyle: Reflections on Romans 12-15, Philadelphia, Fortress Press, 1975.

260 - What Is Left For Caesar?

power. So those who refuse to obey the laws of the land are refusing to obey God, and punishment will follow. For the policeman does not frighten people who are doing right . . ." (Romans 13:1-3). Tell that to Martin Luther King, Jr. or Alexander Solzhenitsyn or Dom Helder Camara or the Japanese-Americans stripped of their rights, loyalty, and dignity during World War II. Or share that with Christians imprisoned for their faith in Uganda and South Korea and the Philippines. And what about Paul himself, regularly beaten and jailed for insisting on proclaiming a new gospel of authority? And Jesus? And Stephen? And Peter? And the countless Christian martyrs of the first century? If Paul meant The Living Bible's sense of the passage, he certainly did not mean those governments of his own time which he so thoroughly denounced in I Corinthians 2. But Paul is typically interpreted as ordering unqualified submission to the government, and this leads J. C. O'Neill to write, "These seven (obviously non-Pauline) verses have caused more unhappiness and misery . . than any other seven verses in the New Testament by the license they have given to tyrants, and the support for tyrants the church has felt called on to offer …. "⁴

IV

The problem is discerning Paul's intended use of several key words. Paul never uses the words government, state, nation, empire, Caesar, or police in this passage. His references to authorities, tribute, and the sword, may clearly, and often do, refer to the state. But they are also all used with reference to God's word through the Holy Spirit among the people of God. Careful discernment of Paul's theological intent suggests that Paul would not counsel that there are many other "sovereigns" than Christ.

The passage becomes consistent with its context, however, if the "higher authorities" that Paul discusses are recognized as the servant-leadership of the church. Chapter twelve asks everybody to be a living sacrifice, a dynamic organ in the Body of Christ in order to enable each Christian to love even enemies (often the government). Chapter thirteen shows the way, and the Christian community's understanding of the Greek words is more faithfully rendered by translating the passage as follows: "Let every soul be subject to the higher authorities, for there is no genuine authority apart from God, and those continuing in God's ordination. So the ones resisting the authority have opposed God's directions, and, having opposed God's authority, will take judgment on themselves. For the church's servant-leaders are not a fear to the good work (e.g., feeding hungry enemies 12:21) but to the evil (e.g., executing your own style of justice in wrath [12:20] or lying to the Holy Spirit as Ananias and Sapphira did (Acts 5: 1 -11]). If you do not want to fear the authority, do good and you will be praised for it."

Leading into chapter thirteen, Paul has just requested the nearly im-

⁴ J. C. O'Neill, Paul's Letter to the Romans, Baltimore, Penguin, 1975, p. 209.

261 - What Is Left For Caesar?

possible. He has asked that the Christians bless those (including the Roman government) who are persecuting them (12:14); that, insofar as it is possible, the Christians seek peace with all people (12:18); that they not avenge themselves but give wrath a special place (12:19); that they even go so far as to minister to the needs of their enemies (12:20). Paul then suggests that all this can actually be accomplished if the people will submit to the church authorities, the servant-leaders whose very office and experience enable them to establish harmony, provide the "place" in which God's wrath is expressed, and set the example of returning good for evil. The model of "higher authorities" is exactly the opposite of that assumed by the principalities and powers. The church's leaders do not lord their power over others but sacrifice and serve; they do nothing except the very thing that is required to "love one another" (Romans 13:8). Although Paul does not specifically designate the authorities as "church" authorities any more than "state" authorities, the Greek suggests that to be the case.

In the absence of compelling contextual reasons to assume Paul is speaking of political authorities, the apostle's use of specific words reveals his intent. He begins by requesting every "soul" to be subject. After just redeeming the "bodies" (in 12:1) it is unlikely that Paul would suggest that "souls" be subject to the state. The only modifier Paul puts on "authorities" is "higher." The three other times Paul uses this relatively rare word are all in his Epistle to the Philippians. There the adjectives "higher," "excelling," "surpassing" refers to the peace of God, the knowledge of Christ, and the importance of imitating Christ's obedience of subordination and humility. "Authorities" itself, depending on its context, can refer to temporal evil authorities, synagogue leaders, angels, or people especially empowered by God. The word "submit" is used forty-one times in the New Testament. Nineteen times submission is utilized to mean obedience to God (e.g., Romans 8:7 and 10:3), nine times to members of one's family or household, and six times to the church and its leaders in Jesus' name (e.g., I Corinthians 16:16). Although there are four passages, including the two here in Romans 13, which may suggest submission to political powers, the dominant biblical usage is to reserve submission for God and God's people.

The early church had a crystal clear understanding of being subject-to God and God's church. As martyr after martyr was hauled off to death for refusing to submit to Caesar's demand that everyone say, "Caesar is Lord," the church exhorted its members to submit to the church authorities-servant-leaders in the roles of deacon, elder, and bishop. Thus the earliest extra-biblical writings we have, Clement of Alexandria, Clement of Rome, Ignatius, Polycarp, Barnabas, and Hermas, emphasize the subjection of each individual Christian to the whole body.

"The Martyrdom of Polycarp" is a classic of the genre. Polycarp's choice is simple and absolute. He can affirm that Jesus Christ is ruling in his life, is "King" or "Lord." Or this great bishop of the early church

262 - What Is Left For Caesar?

can deny Christ and say "Caesar is Lord." Refusing to recant his faith, Polycarp is entreated by the political authorities to repent (metanoia), call upon Caesar as Lord (kurios), and be saved (diasozesthai). He refuses, proclaiming, "I can not blaspheme my king who has saved me. "⁵ Polycarp saw the issue in the same terms as Paul and Jesus. Obedience to God and submission to one another in the church leave no room for obedience to some other "Lord."

The early church knew it could survive only if the members were one body, working together in mutual submission and love. Each Christian needed to regard one another as one (Romans 12:16), love one another (12:10 and 13:8), and lead one another (12:10). The ideal way to fulfill the law (13:8 and 10) and the will of God (12:2), the way for the church to be the Body of Christ (12:5 and 13:14), is to be subject to one another and to those people who do not just repeat the patterns of traditional religion and statecraft but who serve and lead with the authority of God. It involves allowing God to be the author of the new creation which God asks us to be. It means living with the "Sermon on the Mount" in such a way that it is not a solace to the afflicted in a world inevitably gone amuck, or an impossible ideal to be admired from afar, but a call to action, an example of what life authored by God (under God's authority) is like.

Jesus and Paul were unambiguous in what they were about. They were establishing an alternative understanding of authority. They were asking people to be open to God. Such understanding and openness did indeed lead to a new creation, a new believer, a new world, a new authority, and a resurrection from the dead-whether that be from the grave or from the realm of false authority which killed and persecuted to prove its power and thereby bear witness to its real impotence.

V

If Christ was not establishing a legitimate domain for the state to operate outside God's realm, and if Paul is teaching the body of Christ how it can learn to love even enemies, what then is left for Caesar?

That is a most serious question. Insofar as our answer is biblical, it can be suggested that the New Testament's clearest portrayal of the state is as crucifier. Pilate has the authority granted by God not to build highways so that the apostle can perambulate the empire, not to establish leper colonies, not to protect freedom of religion, but to fulfill Scripture: to kill the Messiah. The paradigm of the state is Pharaoh-the most visible antagonistic force against the people of God until they are in the wilderness and have to deal with themselves. The fact that Jesus and Paul do not address the state does not mean that they ignore it. Rather, they replace it and all other principalities and powers with participation in the new creation.

Jesus and Paul were not out simply to eliminate the state. They sought to live from true authority and to guide others to do the same.

⁵ "The Martyrdom of Polycarp," The Apostolic Fathers, Vol. 2, Loeb Classical Library, New York, G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1930, pp. 314-340.

263 - What Is Left For Caesar?

Uncompromisingly living in obedience to God led them to death at the bands of the state. The state recognized that when it was shorn of legitimate authority, it could not survive. But rather than pursue the demise of the state, Jesus and Paul sought to build up the Body of Christ. While ushering in the eschaton, while defeating all other principalities and powers, while each Christian grows into the fullness of time, a second possible role is "left" for the state. Christians dare not ignore the state. Its ethic and authority are dominant for most people. Likewise, Christians cannot sanctify something which derives the source of its authority from somewhere other than God. For those outside the church, the state is one of the advocates and embodiments of the "interim ethic." In that interim between Jesus and the time when every knee shall bow to God's true authority, the state will persist. It can play an important role for the people not in the body of Christ, for those just beginning to believe that God is actually expecting us to live in the new creation, and as a means of enabling specific ministries that require cooperation between the church and people not yet members.

VI

The implications of this "reading" of the Bible are staggering. Beyond conscription and death penalties and support of oppressive governments, how can one even justify patriotism (one of our contemporary forms of setting Jews and Gentiles over against each other)? How can one justify a double, triple, or quadruple tithe to support the state when the church's mission budget is embarrassingly less than one percent of its members' income? Focusing on biblical priority, how do we interpret the increasing expansion of the state's domain in almost every realm? What do our contemporary Caesars feel is not owed to them?

Jesus' eschatology simply asks that we be open to allow God to work in our lives and all things will be new. It is only as the new power of subjection to one another is realized that coercion of one another becomes impotent. Thus Paul learned that even he could not be the Body of Christ alone. The community of faith, higher authority, is essential in dealing with worldly authorities. Submission apart from God is oppression. In God it is the liberating and authenticating word of authority. It is true liberation from the demonic principalities and powers of this era.

We each will make compromises with state authorities where we must. But let it be done in the realization that it is compromise, not virtue. In re-living with Jesus and Paul those moments of confrontation with the state, let us be open to the encounter with an authority that transcends all, the God that can transform even our very calls upon Caesar.

Jesus and Paul make it as clear as they can. The government has no legitimate autonomous authority over our lives. It has authority only as an expression of our lives. As such an expression, it often directly conflicts with Christ's realm and places severe restrictions on Paul's

264 - What Is Left For Caesar?

exhortation to "seek peace with all people" (Romans 12:18). Every time we pay homage or tribute to the institutions of nationalism or the I.R.S., we profess their importance in our lives. Every time we call on Washington to solve a problem, we are "calling on Caesar." That is a dramatic commentary on the church. If, instead of Washington's distant power, we reached out to serve the hungry enemy in our midst, to heal the sick and alienated, to recognize God's authority of new creation, then the purifying coals of fire and the sword of the spirit (Romans 12:20 and 13:4) would manifest true authority. The principalities and powers claim any and all authority they can. The media bombards us with them. And two still persistent voices call forth a chorus. "Owe no one anything except love one another … let us put on the weapons of light" (Romans 13:8 and 12).