Cw – Paul’s Appeal to Caesar 25: 1-12

Paul’s Appeal to Caesar
25: 1-12

59 AD

Paul’s appeal to Cesar DIG: Seeing that two years has passed since the trial in chapter 24, what does the request here show about the strength of the Jewish leaders’ opposition to Paul? How might the contrast between Paul now and in 9:1-2 account in part for their animosity? How is Paul being used as a pawn by these Roman officials in 25:9 and 24:27? How might this account for his decision to appeal to Caesar?

REFLECT: What do you do when you feel that no matter what you say, you will not really be heard by another person? What was one circumstance that threatened to ambush you in your spiritual life? How did you deal with it? If someone wanted to prove you are a believer, what evidence from this past week could they use?

After Felix was removed by Emperor Nero (to see link click Cv – Paul’s Defense before Governor Felix), he was replaced by Porcius Festus, a better man than his predecessor, who took up his duties with the intention of doing what was right. However, he soon discovered that Jewish politics was not easy to handle, especially the two-year old case of the apostle Paul, a prisoner with no official charges against him. Paul was a Jew whose countrymen wanted to kill him, and he was a Roman whose government didn’t know what to do with him.

What a dilemma! If Festus released Paul, the Jews would cause trouble, and that was something the new governor dared not risk. However, if he held Paul prisoner, Festus would have to explain why a Roman citizen was being held without definite official charges. The new governor knew that it was smart for him to act quickly and take advantage of the fact the he was a newcomer on the scene. To delay would only make the problem worse, and it was bad enough already.⁵⁷⁵

The visit of Festus to Jerusalem: Knowing how important it was for him to get along with the Jewish leaders, Festus lost no time in visiting the Holy City and paying his respects, and the leaders lost no time in bringing up Paul’s case. It was not likely that the new governor knew anything about the original plot or even suspected that the Jewish leaders were out for blood. Three days after Festus arrived in the province of Judea, he went up to Jerusalem from Caesarea. While Caesarea was the capital of Judea for the Romans, Jerusalem was the capital for the Jews. So Festus quickly traveled to Jerusalem to begin his new relationship with them (25:1). Festus surely knew of the volatile situation in the Land he was about to rule, and this made the securing of these social networks of support and power all the more crucial. What he could not have known is that this elite did not speak for a very large segment of the Jewish society, as it did not have their trust, nor could he have known the extent of the corruption among the elite and the lengths they would go to stay in power and rid themselves of troublemakers.⁵⁷⁶

There, the ruling kohanim (the twenty-four priests who were Sadducees) and the leading Judeans (or the Pharisees of the Sanhedrin) brought charges against Paul again after two years. They couldn’t get their way with Felix, so now they were hoping to get their way with Festus. They were continually urging him, asking a favor – to have Paul sent from Caesarea to Jerusalem, planning an ambush to kill him on the road (25:2-3). “Kill Paul!” had been the cry of the unbelieving Jews ever since Paul had returned to Jerusalem (21:27-32, 22:22, 23:10-15); however, Festus knew nothing of this. The situation was growing more serious by the minute, for now it was the Great Sanhedrin (see the commentary on The Life of Christ Lg – The Great Sanhedrin), and not a common mob, that was plotting Paul’s death. You would think that their anger would have subsided after two years, but it had not. The Adversary, a murderer from the beginning, was hard at work (John 8:44).

Although Festus was a more conciliatory character than Felix, yet on his first visit to Jerusalem, he stood firm. Then he answered that Paul was being guarded at Caesarea so there was no need to bring him to Jerusalem, and that he himself was about to go there shortly. “So then,” he said, “let the prominent men among you go down [to Caesarea] with me; and if there is any wrong in the man, let them accuse him” (25:4-5). But his first response in Jerusalem was the response of a political novice (as far as the Jews were concerned), and not yet aware of who held the power and what their interests were.

Paul’s appeal to Caesar: Festus was efficient. After spending not more than eight to ten days with them, Festus went down to Caesarea. The next day, he sat on the raised judgment (bema) seat, giving him legal authority, and ordered Paul to be brought in. Paul’s accusers assumed a threatening posture, surrounding him both physically and with their accusations. When he arrived, the Judeans who had come down from Jerusalem stood around him, bringing against him many serious charges that they could not prove (25:6-7). Luke probably wasn’t present, but shorthand was used as early as 50 AD, and copies were available to the defendant.⁵⁷⁷ This time the Jews had no lawyer like Tertullus (24:1a), so they made their case in numbers and generalities. They made the same claims as Tertullus, and then added more for good measure. But they still couldn’t prove anything. They used constant repetition instead of evidence.

Paul summarized his defense, saying: I have committed no offense against the Torah of the Jewish people, or against the Temple, or against Caesar. This mention of Caesar prepares us for Paul’s appeal. But Festus, seeing that there was nothing in Roman law that he could be charged with, and wanting to do the Jewish leaders a favor, said to Paul, “Are you willing to go up to Jerusalem to be tried before me” (25:8-9)? Tactfully, he assured Paul that he would not hand him over to Jewish jurisdiction. It would be a Roman trial “before me,” as he put it. It was not at all clear what Festus was proposing. Was he proposing a mere change of venue with a Roman trail in Jerusalem? Or was he suggesting a change of jurisdiction? It may have been something like the hearing before the Sanhedrin arranged by Lysias (23:1-10). Perhaps the governor envisioned a formal trial with some of the Jewish leaders on his advisory council. In any event, it was a dangerous proposal from Paul’s point of view, and Festus’ motives were not innocent. Luke hinted at this by noting that he wanted to grant the Jews “a favor” of transporting Paul to Jerusalem (25:3). It must have seemed to Paul like his resolve was melting away. Paul remembered the plot to kill him on the road to Caesarea (see Cs – The Conspiracy to Kill Paul). He wondered if Festus might go down that same road and ultimately hand him over to the Jews. Paul’s overall strategy was clearly to remain under Roman jurisdiction, even if he had to go over Festus’ head.

Like Felix, Festus found himself unable to rise above the pressure exerted by the Jewish power structure and ultimately compromised his sense of justice with respect to Paul. In this regard Festus behaved much like Pontus Pilate in the trial of Yeshua when he washed his hands of the matter, saying: I am innocent of this man’s blood. It is your responsibility (Matthew 27:24)! In fact, many striking similarities occur between Paul’s experience in Acts 25-26 and the trial of Messiah in Luke 23:1-25.⁵⁷⁸

However, Festus could not force Paul to change the venue of the trial because he was a Roman citizen. Paul said: I am standing before Caesar’s judgment seat, a Roman citizen standing before a Roman tribunal, where I ought to be tried. Festus was Caesar’s representative and he should have been the one to judge. There was no basis for turning him over to the Jews to be tried in Jerusalem. He detected the governor’s motive and threw it right back in his face: I have done no wrong to the Judeans, as you very well know. If then, for the sake of argument, I am in the wrong and have committed anything worthy of death, I do not seek to escape death. But if there is nothing to their charges, no one can turn me over to the Sanhedrin. Paul knew that he wouldn’t have a chance if that happened. Now that Festus appeared to be on the verge of handing him over to the Jews, Paul made a legal maneuver around both the governor and the Great Sanhedrin with his declaration: I appeal to Caesar (25:10-11)!⁵⁷⁹

Similar to the earlier two instances in which Paul claimed his rights of citizenship, Luke once again depicts Paul asserting his rights to appeal before a small, predominantly Roman group and only as a last resort, only when he could no longer tolerate a course of action being proposed by a Roman official. In other words, Paul exercised his right of appeal only under extreme pressure.⁵⁸⁰

Initially, I’m sure Festus was relieved. The pressure was off of him to make a decision. He could rightly tell the infuriated Jewish leadership that the decision was out of his hands. Paul had chosen to go to Rome. But after the relief subsided, Festus realized that he had another problem on his hands, that of the report he had to send to Caesar.

A governor usually had an advisory council that consisted of the higher officials in his administration. Although ultimate decisions were solely in his hands, he could turn to this group for consultation on difficult matters of law. Paul’s appeal was certainly no everyday occurrence, and Fetus turned to his council before giving formal acknowledgement. Then when Festus had consulted with his council, he responded, “You have appealed to Caesar – to Caesar you shall go” (25:12)! In this particular case, the Caesar in question was Nero (54-68 AD). Anyone familiar with Nero’s later persecution of the Christians in Rome might assume that this didn’t bode well for Paul. This was in the earlier years of Nero’s reign, however, years marked by a general stability. His “dark side” had not surfaced. Perhaps more significant than Paul going to Caesar, was Paul going to Rome to bear his ultimate witness (19:21 and 23:11).⁵⁸¹

A closer look at justice, citizenship and appeals in the provinces: No doubt it galled the members of the Sanhedrin that Caesarea was the provincial seat of power and they had to go there to try to obtain justice. For them, the temptation was great to take matters (or even stones) into their own hands. Notice, for example, that during the period of time between the departure of Felix and the coming of the Sanhedrin to Caesarea to see Festus, recognizing a power vacuum and thus a window of opportunity, took matters into their own hands and murdered Jacob (James), the half-brother of Yeshua and the leader of the Messianic community in Jerusalem (see Bs – The Council at Jerusalem).  The dizzying vantage point from the southeast corner of the Royal Stoa was said by Josephus to drop some 450 feet to the Kidron Valley below. And according to early tradition, Jacob was martyred by being thrown from there because he would not renounce his faith (Antiquities 20.200).

Roman citizens were few-and-far-between in Judea during the mid-to-late 50s, and Jewish ones even more rare. Therefore, there were probably few precedents in dealing with a case like Paul’s, a person caught between Jewish and Roman law. The question of jurisdiction must have been very puzzling for Festus in view of the fact that the Jewish accusers stressed political charges but really wanted to judge Paul themselves; while Paul stressed theological matters but insisted on Roman justice.

From an early date Roman citizens had possessed the right of appeal against an official’s conduct of their case to the people. When the Roman state became an empire, the right of appeal transferred to the emperor. This right was given to Roman citizens beginning in 509 BC and was one of the most cherished rights of a Roman citizen. It guaranteed further investigation. The one making the appeal would be transferred to Rome and the emperor himself would make the final decision. There might be little or no need for such an appeal if one was faced with a good governor, but Festus was new, and his judgments an unknown quantity. Clearly, Paul did not trust him; indeed, he accused the governor of bias. Furthermore, precisely because Festus couldn’t determine what the crime or issue really was between Paul and his accusers, Paul had to assume the worst. But more than anything else, Paul knew that Yeshua had commanded: Don’t worry! For just as you have testified about Me in Jerusalem, so you must also testify in Rome (23:11)!⁵⁸²