If then I have done any wrong and committed anything worthy of death, I do not deprecate dying; but if there is nothing of those things of which they accuse me, no man can give me up to them. I appeal to Caesar.
Paul has been held at Caesarea for two years, and the charges against him are still unproven. Now the new governor, Festus, offers him a trial in Jerusalem — and Paul's reply ends with four words that decided the rest of his life.
Festus's question sounded like a courtesy. It was not, and Paul knew what waited on the road to Jerusalem.
As soon as Festus arrived in the province, he went to Jerusalem. There the leading Jews seized the chance to demand Paul's return. They said they wanted him tried again before the Jewish council, but their real purpose was to kill him on the way... Festus saw clearly that Paul's real offence had to do with the religious opinions of the Jews, and that he had broken no law. Yet he wanted to win favour with the Jews, so he asks Paul whether he would go to Jerusalem for trial there. This was little better than a proposal to sacrifice him to Jewish hatred.
The first half of the verse gives away everything a guilty man would hide. Paul does not plead for his life. He stands on Roman law, and the law was on his side.
It is clear that all the righteousness of the case lay with Paul. He therefore makes use of his title as a Roman citizen against those who would have broken Roman law. He pushed for no change of law, he sought nothing for himself, he employed no lawyer. The law had already ruled, and he pleaded it before a man whose office was to administer it.
The word "appeal" means something different today than it did in a Roman province. Paul was not contesting a verdict — there was no verdict.
When Paul appealed to Caesar, it was not an appeal against a judgement already given, which is what an appeal means today. Paul knew the murderous hatred of the Jews and the corruption of the governors. So he chose Caesar's court to judge his case, which, as a Roman, he had the right to do.
That right came with conditions, and Paul's case met them.
He had to go to Rome as a prisoner. This happened through his appeal to Caesar — an appeal by no means always granted, since it was clearly open to abuse. An obvious case of guilt got no appeal. Nor did a case too trivial for the emperor to hear. Paul's innocence was beyond question, though Jewish ill-will had made the case very serious. He appealed when he saw the governor playing with justice to please the Jews.
Commentators differ here. Some read the appeal as the one move that cost Paul his freedom.
To human eyes it was perhaps his only way out. But the Holy Spirit is careful to tell us that he might have gone free if he had not appealed to Caesar.
Others answer that Paul himself taught that rulers are God's servants. Using them cannot be wrong in principle.
If an appeal to Caesar were wrong in itself for a Christian, then making it could never be right, in any circumstances, for anyone... But Paul elsewhere fully accepts the ruling authorities as those appointed by God to be God's servants for the good of people. There seems to be no real difficulty in his using them for that. If we do not know his motive, in the case of one such as he was, it is simple justice to credit him with the highest.
Whatever the motive, the outcome matched a promise Paul had already been given.
In this sudden change on the part of Festus we may see the hand of God. On the night after the uproar in the council, the Lord had appeared to Paul. He told him that he must bear witness to Him in Rome, and now He controls circumstances to bring this about... Paul's appeal settled everything. Having appealed to Caesar, to Rome he must go. This is the third time we find Paul taking his stand on his Roman citizenship. Here most clearly it was made to serve and work out the purpose of his Lord.
- Trap. Festus offered Jerusalem to buy Jewish goodwill at Paul's expense. Paul refused the place, not the trial.
- Innocence. Paul offers his life if he is guilty. The offer is safe, because the governor himself knows there is no crime.
- Right. The appeal was not a protest against a verdict. It was a citizen's choice of court, open to him because his innocence was clear.
- Question. Commentators differ. One reading says the appeal cost Paul his freedom. Another credits him with the highest motive in using rulers God appointed.
- Purpose. Either way, the word could not be taken back. It carried Paul to Rome, the city where the Lord had already told him he would testify.
Then Festus, having conferred with the council, answered, Thou hast appealed to Caesar. To Caesar shalt thou go.
Paul has refused a second trial in Jerusalem and has asked the emperor to hear his case, and Festus gives the one answer Roman law allowed. That short reply ends the trial at Caesarea and opens the road to Rome, and it raises two questions: was the appeal Paul's wisest step, and whose purpose did it serve?
Once Paul spoke the words, the governor had no room left to move. His reply is not a decision but an admission. It sends Paul to the highest court in the empire.
So far the difficulty was over. The governor was bound by the appeal… The king, or emperor, was to hear the case, just as the lower judges did. And this was not by flattering the princes of this world or seeking access to them, but as holy sufferers with Christ and for His name (Matthew 10:18).
Paul asked for no special treatment. He held the court to the law it already had on its books.
All the righteousness of the case lay with Paul. He therefore makes use of his standing as a Roman citizen against those who would have broken Roman law. He pushed for no change in the law, he sought nothing for himself, he employed no lawyer. The law had already ruled, and he pleaded it before a man whose office was to administer it.
The governor had offered a trial in Jerusalem to win goodwill from Paul's accusers. What he set in motion was something else entirely.
In this sudden change on the part of Festus we may see the hand of God. During the night after the uproar in the council, the Lord had appeared to Paul. He told him that he must bear witness to Him in Rome, and now He controls circumstances to bring this about… Paul knew that the proposed move was the first step toward handing him over to his enemies. Yet Festus knew very well that he had done no wrong.
Nobody in the room was aiming at that outcome. Yet it came about anyway:
This was the fulfilment of God's purpose, that Paul, brought to Rome by His providence, should bear witness there before the Emperor himself. This was not the thought of Festus, nor of the Jews… But the will of God is accomplished without the will of men.
Commentators differ on whether Paul was right to appeal. One points to what the Holy Spirit tells us about it:
To human eyes it was perhaps his only resource in the circumstances. But the Holy Spirit is careful to tell us that he might have gone free if he had not appealed to Caesar.
Others hold back from calling it a fault. One writer weighs the evidence and then refuses to judge Paul:
Festus and Agrippa both declare a short time later that the appeal was the only thing keeping Paul from going free. This might be seen as merely the excuse of a man who did not want the responsibility of freeing him — except that it is Agrippa who says it… How can we decide that it was lack of faith or lack of wisdom? He surely surpassed any of us in both. He stood in those circumstances as we do not, and he knew far more fully everything that was at stake.
The same writer answers the question of principle directly: Paul "fully accepts the 'powers that be' as those appointed of God to be the ministers of God for good to men, and there seems no real difficulty in his using them for that." Another simply reads it as guidance: "Festus was divinely guided in it all… This settled his journey to Rome."
Paul had long wanted to see Rome. The way he finally got there was not the way he had pictured.
It was Paul's purpose to visit Rome after going to Jerusalem (Acts 19:21), and God gave effect to it, for it was God's purpose (Acts 23:11). But how different was the way under His hand from the apostle's expectation! He must go to Rome a prisoner. This came to him through his appeal to Caesar — an appeal by no means always granted, since it was clearly open to abuse. Obvious guilt meant refusal; so did a case too trivial for the emperor to hear. Paul's innocence was beyond question, while Jewish ill will had made the case a most serious one. He appealed when he saw the governor playing with justice to please the Jews.
- Pressure. Festus offered a trial in Jerusalem to please Paul's accusers. He knew the prisoner had done no wrong.
- Plea. Paul claimed no privilege and hired no advocate; he held the governor to a law already on the books.
- Verdict. The appeal bound the judge. Once Paul spoke the word, Rome was certain.
- Purpose. What no one in that court intended, God had already announced: Paul must bear witness at Rome.
- Path. Commentators differ over whether the appeal cost Paul his freedom. All agree it carried him where God had promised — as a prisoner.