Bulletin column from October 18, 2020

Dear Friends at Saint Mary’s Immaculate Conception Parish and Saint Frances Cabrini Parish:

Praised be Jesus Christ! Only a couple of weeks from the election, we are offered this Sunday for our meditation the famous scene from Matthew’s Gospel wherein Jesus is asked the explosive question about taxes and politics.

In First Century Palestine, the question of how to deal with Roman occupation in Judea was constantly on the minds of those who lived there. For many of the average citizens, Rome’s presence in their territory was offensive and unwelcome, but it was also tolerated for reasons of practicality. Rome brought trade, Rome brought its own order, Rome allowed commerce and jobs. Rome allowed the Jerusalem temple, as a major house of worship, to operate largely without interference, but only as long as there was no social unrest among the Jews against the Emperor. The temple was not merely a prayer space for the pious residents of the Jewish territories. The temple was a major pilgrimage destination which brought in revenue, provided jobs, maintained a social fabric, and also maintained a historical tie to the Jewish past wherein they were once a proud and politically independent people. Those who ran the temple walked a fine line of appeasing both the Romans and the restless population in what was something of a powder keg of political and religious tensions. This meant that it was not possible for someone to be “neutral” on the question of Rome and of the Temple. Both were dominating presences in the daily lives of the people, in an era when there was no distinction between politics and religion. They were essentially both the same thing.

This explains in part why the Pharisees seek in today’s Gospel to make Jesus pick a side in the major argument of the day. By this point he, too, has become a high-profile public figure drawing crowds and interest, and thereby potentially causing unrest in the streets which could be very dangerous for the fragile arrangement with Rome. Whose side is he on? That’s what they wanted to know. Maybe it was jealousy on their part, but, if one places oneself in the context of that era, one can see how it would be very maddening for a person of such status to claim no position on a matter that everyone worried a great deal about.

So, today we hear them ask Jesus in a public debate in Jerusalem to state his opinion. Enough is enough. Will you pay the census tax to the Romans, or not? In other words, are you for us, or are you against us? Pro-Rome or anti-Rome? Whichever side he picks, they know Jesus is going to lose because each side is a potential party in a growing cultural war.

Jesus, who is God (read “religion” in the purest sense) does not pick a side in their political debate, simply telling his questioners to give to Caesar what is uniquely Caesar’s, and to God what is uniquely God’s. He chooses instead to maintain a position that advances essential ethical principles about the truth of God and man, life and death, while at the same time refusing to directly identify the Kingdom of God with any specific, earthly political agenda. Knowledge of the mysteries of the Kingdom of God will give rise to political positions, but it will always be broader and deeper than any one, earthly mode and method of governance. In this way, God allows religion its own proper sphere of influence in the political realm, while at the same time not making it identical with politics. The two must shape each other, but they must remain distinct.

The Church finds herself in the same position in today’s world and in this election. We are in the midst of a fierce culture war, and we find ourselves surrounded by a host of practical or pragmatic reasons to pick one side or the other. It is tempting to try and force the Church to align solely with one party platform or candidate against the other. There are some who do not believe the Church or religion should have any voice in our political conversation and they refuse to engage what we have to say. There are others who want to use the Church to advance their cause and win an argument. Which candidate will get the majority of the votes from the Catholics or the Christians in this election- that is the question. It is a little like the Pharisees wanting to know which side Jesus is on.

The teachings of Jesus and the Church do have, and must have, a prominent voice in our political debates and in processes. Religion and politics must mix as they always have because convictions give rise to political positions. A Catholic should never support a candidate or party that actively seeks to suppress religious expressions or teachings from being publicly proclaimed and shared.

At the same time, a Catholic should never feel fully at home in any earthly political category. In our fallen world, every earthly political solution to problems is going to come up short. The Church has no official political party because we are broader and deeper than mere politics. We are still obligated to vote because we must engage the world and let our convictions shape processes, but we do so knowing that any vote is going to be an imperfect one that balances a whole host of contradictions these days.

This is made even harder when Catholics seek political office as candidates. Merely because one calls oneself Catholic in our modern era, it does not guarantee that they truly advance the correct positions that must logically follow from being a believing, practicing Catholic. One’s political principles must not be in contradiction to the ethical teachings that originate in one’s religion, especially in the case of Catholics who have the benefit of an official body of defined Church teachings to guide them. Again, this makes it difficult for both Catholic candidates as well as Catholic voters to truly be at home in any one political platform and system, because the Kingdom of God is indeed broader and deeper than any earthly category.

Which means that with this election, we will again be living as Jesus did in the tension of what is unresolved, until he offers his life in response. We too must sacrifice and change if our politics and culture is ever going to change. If we want our politics to be authentically shaped in the true and best sense by our religion, then we have no choice but to be truly religious ourselves.