Sunday, October 16, 2011


They sent their disciples to Him, along with the Herodians, saying, “Teacher, we know that You are sincere, and teach the way of God in accordance with truth, and show deference to no one; for You do not regard people with partiality. Tell us, then, what You think. Is it lawful to pay taxes to the emperor, or not?” (Matthew 22.16-17)


Although I’m fairly sure the rule no longer applies, it’s often said three topics are taboo in polite American conversation: sex, politics, and religion. Lord knows, we should be eager and at ease to discuss all three, as they inform much of what contributes to our national distress. Meanwhile, Parisian friends confess they’re often perplexed and always amused to see how eagerly and easily we’re scandalized by subjects we should have put to rest long ago. “Here, sex and politics are the first things we talk about,” they say. (As devoutly secular people, the French seldom mention religion, which isn’t to say it’s off-limits.) It took several years, but Walt and I slowly discovered Parisians have a few taboos too, the greatest being money. What one earns or owns simply isn’t discussed. The reason may not be what you suspect. They don’t think money is too personal to talk about. It’s too impersonal. Financial worth has no bearing on friendship.

Sunday’s Gospel (Matthew 22.15-22) brings to mind American and French conversational taboos, with three of the four shaken together into a nasty cocktail contrived to do Jesus in. Only sex gets left out, and had the devious mixologists who serve up the noxious frappé—the Pharisees—found a way, they’d probably have tossed it in. They do a swell job as it is, distilling a vindictive brew of politics, religion, and money into a trick question they hope will knock Jesus senseless. Their audacity to confront Him with these topics has nothing to do with taboos, though. All three subjects are widely discussed and, in fact, routinely figure into Jesus’s sermons, parables, and conversation. The lethal scheme laced into the Pharisees’ cocktail is what makes it offensive.

This Is It

All along, the Pharisees and other sects have tried to stump Jesus with cleverly devised brainteasers. But such tests are customary in rabbinical circles, with Jesus’s adversaries employing them to refute one another as well. This one is different, because it seeks to destroy, not merely discredit, Jesus. The whole thing reeks of conspiracy; every detail is calculated to belittle Him and erase all doubts about the Pharisees’ endgame. The leaders who poison their proposition don’t even show Jesus proper respect to present it personally. They ship it via their followers, backed by a cadre of Herodians. Their sole agenda is protecting the dynasty of paranoid puppet-king, Herod the Great, whose son (and Israel’s current ruler), Herod Antipas, beheaded John the Baptist.

While the overtly displayed hostility escapes no one, least of all Jesus, the question poses the gravest insult to His intelligence. It masks politically volatile ingredients with sweet talk and tangy religiosity, as if Jesus is too thick to detect what’s really going on. Not only is He savvy to the set-up. He’s played a major role building up to this showdown. Since His triumphant arrival in Jerusalem for Passover, He’s done nothing but humiliate His detractors with lacerating criticism and stupefying challenges. The air hangs thick with “give it your best shot.” Once Jesus gets a whiff of the Pharisees’ concoction, noting they’ve arranged for plenty of loyal onlookers to testify against Him when He chokes, He knows this is it. As the Herodians lean in to catch every word, the underlings spill the question. No doubt all involved naïvely expect it to go exactly like they rehearsed: flattery first, then the fall. “Teacher, we know that You are sincere, and teach the way of God in accordance with truth, and show deference to no one; for You do not regard people with partiality. Tell us, then, what You think. Is it lawful to pay taxes to the emperor, or not?” (Matthew 22.16-17)

Everything they say about Jesus is true, of course. But coming from their mouths, it’s a lie that exposes the deceit swimming beneath the question’s surface. If He approves paying tribute to Caesar, He’ll be vilified as a traitor to His people; they’ll run Him out of town and that will be that. The alternative is worse. Suppose Jesus takes the popular religious stance, insisting Jewish Law forbids idolatry—which imperial taxation basically amounts to, since the Romans worship Caesar as a god. The Herodians will pounce on that, declaring Him an insurgent. The king will see He’s delivered into Roman hands by sundown; by sun-up, the Baptist’s fate will look like a cakewalk compared to what He’ll face. To His inquisitors’ amazement, Jesus refuses to swallow one drop of their venomous swill. First, He calls them on their treachery. “Why are you putting Me to the test, you hypocrites?” He replies. (v18) Then He asks for a coin. “Whose head is this, and whose title?” He demands. (v20) They answer, “The emperor’s,” to which Jesus says, “Give therefore to the emperor the things that are the emperor’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” (v21) Foiled once again, they walk away.


The incident speaks volumes to our duty to honor obligations as believers and citizens. And it’s often cited as clear-cut doctrine supporting separation of church and state. Most of all, it depicts the deviance people knowingly resort to when their beliefs are threatened. As long as the Pharisees call the shots, provoking Jesus is no big deal. It’s another story when He turns the tables with challenges they can’t answer. Then they put their heads together to mix up their mash of tasty controversies and make a point of lengths they’ll take to regain control. They have no business teaming up with Herodians. Pharisees are all about God’s Law. Herodians are all about placating Roman power. It makes no sense.

We observe similarly mismatched mixologists in our time. It astounds us when vehemently professing Christians join ranks with political groups that directly oppose the Gospel of compassion and peace. We can’t imagine what causes them to think we’ll swallow their toxic cocktail. We’ll never figure out why they don’t realize we smell and taste the venom in their love-the-sinner-hate-the-sin sweet talk and boldly bigoted religiosity. Not that it matters, since we’re not Who’ll ultimately demand an explanation for their treachery. What we’re asked to take from this story is a keener grasp of severe panic set off by any threat to their beliefs. We hear it in cries to “take back” America and “return to God.” We see it in resorting to sin as the only means to defeat sin. We sense it in desperate alliances forged with extremists. It’s a sad, sad sight to behold.

It only takes a penny to turn down their yeasty cocktail. What’s God’s is God’s, what’s Caesar’s is Caesar’s. But there’s a far more troubling question we have to answer. Can we follow Jesus all the way to the cross, look into the faces of those who desire our destruction, and pray, “Forgive them. They know not what they do”? That calls for selfless sacrifice at a price we must be willing to pay.

Most holy and righteous God, we’re forever grateful for spiritual discernment to detect poison laced in devious challenges to our faith. Now grant us the discipline to repay evil with good, malice with mercy, and intolerance with grace. Amen.

Like the Pharisees, many who perceive threats to their beliefs will concoct ridiculously obvious and contradictory arguments to eliminate their challengers. Dismissing their ploys is easy. Forgiving them isn’t.


Sherry Peyton said...

Once again, you say it so well that I am left in amazement. What a gorgeous reflection Tim. Thank you so much.

May I tell you about this website I found. It is and it follows the "common lectionary." I'm not sure who is behind it, but it provides the most extensive research tool I've seen in a long time. Just tons of articles and sermons and commentary all linked to whatever passage you are interested in. Just thought you might want to take a look. That being said, they ought to be adding your reflections as links to their readers!

Blessings, Sherry

Tim said...

Oh, Sherry, what a gift you've given me today! Thank you so much for the link. I already see me losing hours roaming its pages. (I promise not to hold you remotely responsible when I lose track of time , etc. )

Because this one of those stories with a famous--and overused, I think--punch line, when I opened today's readings, my first thought was to let it go and look into one of the other texts. But then I got one of those (not at all unusual) yanks on the collar that said, "Hey. There's a lot more happening here than you may think." So I read it again and it felt like I was reading an Op-Ed piece--or perhaps a manual--on religious controversy.

And in a rather peculiar sense, it was comforting to realize many of the same tactics that play out with the Pharisees are still in use, because it attests the faith debate is still alive and kicking. Now that may not be so reassuring for those who adopt the Pharisees' methods. (They can't be happy about how they feel, nor what their fears compel them to do.) For those who just trying to walk in Christ's footsteps and the do the hard work of building God's kingdom, however, it's good to know facing cleverly constructed opposition is par for the course.

Nothing new under the sun, Proverbs says...

Thank you for such gracious comments and the marvelous link. I trust you'll see its impact in future reflections!

Blessings, kind friend,

PS: Last evening I caught the first installment of a PBS series, "Catholicism." It started with a rousing essay that scooted around the Holy Land to answer the question, "Who was Jesus?" Fr. Robert Barron is the host and I very much like his take: "Either Jesus is Who He said He was, or a very dangerous man." I believe this is a rerun and probably isn't big news to you. But if you've not caught it, I bet you'll enjoy it immensely--and argue with it from time to time, too!

Missy Francis said...

Thank you for a great reflection, Tim. I knew I would like what you had to say on this.
At Mass yesterday I couldn't help but feel a bit of ire listening to the Gospel and thinking about how folks use this passage to justify not helping others; "that's the job of churches and charity, not government."
And yet, the same people who say this will say they are trying to bring God's kingdom about here. It makes no sense. I wonder if anyone ever really reads what comes after those oft repeated words, "the kingdom of heaven is like..."
As if faith that brings people to submission is okay, but faith that brings people to action is not.
(I have not seen that PBS series; I'll have to check it out.) God bless you, my friend.

Tim said...

Thanks, Missy. Yesterday, our pastor definitely solved this dilemma about the Caesar/God dichotomy when it comes to our obligations to act. "What belongs to Caesar also belongs to God," she reminded us. What we give to Caesar should be viewed in alignment with God's kingdom as well. Particularly in "enlightened" democratic societies where we have a voice in how our taxes are spent, those of us who profession to be kingdom-builders should insist that the powers that be not neglect the least among us. And I think even those who don't believe expect that of us who do, which is why they're the first to point out when professing Christians jump ship and side with wealthy politicians and special interests while people starve, live in tents and motels, and die because of inadequate healthcare.

You're right. Preserving a dynasty of robber barons at the expense of widows, orphans, and strangers makes no sense--and our outrage that a core of Christians anchors this heresy is fully justified.

Peace and joy always,