Tuesday of Week 9 of Ordinary Time – Gospel
Commentary on Mark 12:13-17
Possibly in response to the parable of the wicked tenants which we read yesterday, a delegation comes to confront Jesus. Their composition is rather unusual, but proves the ancient saying that “the enemy of my enemy is my friend”. It would be hard to find two groups more ideologically opposed than the Pharisees and the Herodians. The Pharisees set the highest standards in their observance of the Law. They were highly patriotic and strongly anti-Roman. The Herodians, on the other hand, were seen as rather lax and not particularly devout. And they had the reputation of being a little too cosy with the Roman colonial powers. In normal circumstances, these two groups would never be seen in each other’s company. But now they had a common opponent in Jesus. For Jesus was seen, depending on how he was interpreted, as challenging the Law on the one hand and as a potential rallying point for anti-Roman sentiment on the other.
The confrontation is carried out with a good deal of subtlety. It begins with shameless flattery:
Teacher, we know that you are sincere and show deference to no one, for you do not regard people with partiality but teach the way of God in accordance with truth.
In fact, every word of this is absolutely true and would that it could be said of every one of us! In their book, however, it means that Jesus is a very dangerous person and, indeed, people like Jesus have run into trouble all through history, not least in our own days.
Having, as they imagined, totally disarmed Jesus by their positive approach, they smoothly slip in the knife. One can almost hear the blandness and feigned innocence with which they ask their question:
Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar or not?
It sounds to us a very straightforward question, but it was, in fact, one of the most politically sensitive issues of the day. And of course, it was a trick question.
If Jesus said it was permissible, then he incurred the wrath of every Jewish patriot, most of all the powerful Pharisees, who deeply resented the presence of the Roman power on their land. If he said it was not permissible, then he could immediately be denounced by people like the Herodians to the Roman authorities for subversion. In either case, he would lose.
Jesus, of course, immediately sees through their deceit. He asks to be shown a denarius, a coin roughly equal to a day’s wage. It was a Roman coin and it carried the head of the emperor, Caesar Augustus. Pointing to the image, Jesus asks whose head it is and he is told it is that of the emperor. Jesus said,
Give to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and to God the things that are God’s.
His enemies “were utterly amazed at him” and reduced to speechlessness with no comeback. It was an answer that said everything and said nothing. It said everything because no one could quarrel with it; it said nothing because it did not decide in any way what belonged to God and what to the emperor.
The whole scene, of course, reflects a serious problem besetting the early Church. How much allegiance did they owe, as Christians, to the temporal power, especially one where the emperor was seen as having divine prerogatives or was openly persecuting Christians? There were clearly limits to the allegiance they could give. This resulted in waves of persecutions and large numbers of martyrs dying rather than compromising their faith.
The problem of how much allegiance Christians owe to temporal powers is still a live issue for us today. It concerns the question of separation of Church and state and how that is to be interpreted. It concerns the way we—both electors and elected—vote when sensitive moral issues are at stake.
In one sense, God has a total claim on our allegiance. There is nothing which does not belong to him. Nevertheless, society, through its legitimate authorities, also has a claim on our allegiance. It can make demands on us in asking us to contribute, e.g. through taxation, to promoting the overall well-being of our whole community, especially of those who are in need.
As Christians, we cannot simply isolate ourselves from the political arena, that is, the area in which the interests of the citizenry are discussed and managed. The political arena is inseparable from issues of truth and justice, and there is no way that Christians, who are committed to building the Kingdom, cannot be concerned about the welfare of their fellow citizens. “The Church should not dabble in politics,” say some. No, it should not dabble; it should be deeply involved in every important moral and social issue.
Nevertheless, the words of Jesus remain our guiding principle: we give to God what belongs to him and we give to society what it has a right to ask of us—our cooperation in making it a place guided by the principles and values of the Kingdom. To do anything less is to fail to give everything to God.
Read more
Monday of Week 9 of Ordinary Time – Gospel
Commentary on Mark 12:1-12
This will be our last week of readings from Mark’s Gospel. We are now in chapter 12 and fast approaching the climax of Jesus’ life and mission. This chapter is marked by a growing conflict between Jesus and the religious and political leaders of his own people. The chapter begins today with a parable (or, more accurately, allegory) directed towards that leadership. Its meaning was very clear to those who heard it.
It tells the story of a man who planted a vineyard, fitted it out with all that was necessary and then let it out to tenants to cultivate. It is clear that the owner is God, the vineyard is Israel and the tenants the people of Israel. The words of Jesus echo very closely a similar image in a poem by the prophet Isaiah:
I will sing for my beloved In Isaiah’s image the vines only produce sour grapes. In Jesus’ story there are evidently good harvests. The problem arises when the owner sends his servants to collect what belongs to him of the harvests. One after the other, the servants are driven away, beaten up or even killed. It is a clear reference to the way that God’s people treated the many prophets which God had sent to them. In exasperation, the owner decides to send his only son, expecting that they will at least respect him. But no, the tenants argue that by killing the only heir, the vineyard will inevitably become their property. When the son (Jesus) arrives, they seize him, kill him and throw him out of the vineyard (a reference to Jesus being crucified outside the walls of Jerusalem). Jesus then says: What then will the owner of the vineyard do? He will come and destroy the tenants and give the vineyard to others. Have you not read this scripture: ‘The stone that the builders rejected Jesus is rejected by the leaders and by many (but not all) of his own people. The Gentiles will be invited to take their place and will be more than happy to fill it. The words Jesus quoted from Psalm 118 can apply either to himself or the Gentiles. Jesus, the rejected and crucified one, becomes the cornerstone. Or, the despised Gentiles become the recipients of God’s love and grace and the cornerstone of the new Christian communities. Clearly, this story did nothing to endear Jesus to the leaders. They would have (as foretold by the story they had just heard) seized him, but they were afraid of the crowd (also Jews) who stood in awe of Jesus, his words and works. This is one of those stories where we can be tempted to sit in judgement on those who rejected Jesus. But we are not reading it today for that purpose. Rather we are being asked whether we are listening to the word of God as it comes to us in the various people that God sends into our lives. How much better are we than the scribes and Pharisees? How often do we rationalise ourselves out of doing what God clearly wants us to do? What welcome do we give to God’s messengers? Do we even recognise them when they come? Maybe today—right now—would be a good time to listen more carefully than we normally do.
my love song concerning his vineyard:
My beloved had a vineyard
on a very fertile hill.
has become the cornerstone;
this was the Lord’s doing,
and it is amazing in our eyes’?