for June 2
Tuesday of the Ninth Week of Ordinary Time

It’s one of the most famous punchlines in all of the bible: “Render to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s.” Invoking the name Caesar immediately conjures up for us the world of politics. So we can’t help applying this short aphorism to our present day debates about the separation of church and state, or keeping secular concerns from encroaching on our spiritual lives. But in fact the notion of separating church and state is pretty much a modern concept, so Jesus was hardly taking a public stance on an issue that our founding fathers grappled with seventeen hundred years later as a new idea.

The scriptural commentaries are in the habit of grouping biblical stories in various categories, one of which is called controversy stories. The present reading is a classic controversy story. Jesus’ opponents ask a hostile question in an attempt to “ensnare him,” as Mark tells us. To understand the trap being set, we need to recall the rather complicated historical context.

Jewish religion traditionally abhorred any depiction of a living figure because of the widespread practice of idolatry—turning an image into an object of worship. This Jewish aversion was especially appropriate towards images of the Roman emperor. Emperors were increasingly inclined to assume divine pretensions as a way of asserting their political dominance. Roman currency, bearing the image of the emperor, therefore, was the last thing a faithful Jew wished to traffic in.

The problem most sharply arose with regard to the payment of taxes, which the Roman occupying authorities naturally wanted to receive in their own currency and on their own terms. So, the controversy is not so much a modern political one about an overly intrusive government or the perennial problem of an excessive tax burden. Rather, Jesus is confronted by a deeper and more ancient problem: how does one deal with the unavoidable compromises that must be made when dealing with the secular world?

An interesting question, indeed. One that was raised, as here, in the ancient world, and still plagues us today.  t’s hard to live as a purist in today’s world and still function as a full participating member of society: Is it right to pay taxes to the despised Caesar, when one has no other choice?

Just by coincidence, this gospel passage is presented on election day here in Pennsylvania. So let us consider, for example, choosing to vote for a particular candidate. If you are truly sensitive to Catholic moral principles and social teaching, you may judge that no candidate perfectly meets all the criteria. So is it better not to vote at all? 

To escape the dilemma and avoid the taint of compromise, some people select one issue as their exclusive concern. They falsely claim that they are thereby untarnished by any morally repugnant compromise. “One issue voters” tend to be moral absolutists. In fact, however, this tactic itself represents an extreme compromise. To make one issue the only determinative issue is to ignore everything else—which is a huge compromise.

Jesus cleverly escapes the effort to entrap him by skillfully crafting his words to describe the unavoidable compromise in symbolic terms: Sometimes you have to touch Caesar’s coin, bearing his image, even though it will soil your hands. We certainly don’t think of Jesus as a moral compromiser. Yet when we try to twist him into a moral absolutist, perhaps we are in danger of losing the true genius of his moral teaching.
—Walter F. Modrys SJ

Today’s readings can be found on the US Conference of Catholic Bishops website.