Give to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and to God the things that are God’s. 
It is said that King Louis 14th of France never wore gloves when he was out riding; and so, one very very frosty winter’s morning two peasants saw him riding by and one of them said to the other, “My goodness, his hands must be very very cold”, and the other said “Not at all, his hands are always warm.”  “How come?”  “Because he always has his hands in our pockets.” (Laughter)
         
Now this gospel could be read as justifying the government having its hands in our pockets.  But this gospel is not about paying taxes to the government and so I want to really reassure Joe, the plumber.  (Laughter)  It’s not about paying taxes to a government; it’s about paying homage to God.  And the Jews who heard these words from Jesus would have immediately grasped that because their whole tradition, their whole religious background taught them that everything, everything in this world, every human endeavor even those that might be judged to belong to Caesar, everything really belongs to God.  In other words there is really no division between sacred and secular; and certainly Jesus would not have preached such a division because he was a Jew.  He was steeped in his own religious teaching and his own religious background; and so he would have accepted that simply everything, every human activity must be subject to God, and in some way reflect God, and in some way give glory and honor to God.  And so what was a Jewish belief this gospel has made a Christian belief. 
         
Now to say that there is really no distinction between what may be called “secular” and “sacred” would seem to contradict the First Amendment to the Constitution here in the United States.  Well, let it be said first of all that wherever the Church has been too closely entwined with the state it has been disastrous for the Church.  The Church is best served when it is free to govern itself without interference from the state.  The First Amendment was written to protect churches and religions from interference from the state.  You remember the words, “Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion nor prohibit the free exercise thereof.”  Congress is not to establish any one particular church or religion.  You see, that was the case in all of Europe at the time.  There were established churches, especially under the Monarchies, and since the thirteen colonies had been part of the British crown there was an established church here in the United States, or in the thirteen colonies let me say.  And so Congress was saying there should be no established church, that no church should be favored over another one.  And you know, in some countries there are still established churches.  In England, for example, the Church of England is the established church with a monarch at its head and the Prime Minister has the final say in the appointment of Bishops.
         
When John Carroll was suggested as the first Catholic Bishop in the United States, Rome, as was its custom in Europe, wrote to the government saying, you know, would he be an acceptable person to be appointed as Bishop.  Thomas Jefferson, who was Secretary of State at the time, replied “The United States has no interest in this matter.”  By the way, Bishop John Carroll was a cousin of Charles Carroll of Carlton who was a signatory, the only Catholic signatory on the Declaration of Independence.  Now, the First Amendment does not, does not claim that religion has nothing to say to the state.  It does not say that religion cannot critique public policy.  Many people believe that the Church has no right to comment on what may be regarded as a political matter.  Well, I believe that religious leaders have not only the right, but indeed a solemn duty to examine all human matters in the light of their religious faith.  Because all human endeavors without exception have a moral component and it is precisely this moral component that Church leaders are called upon to critique in the light of their faith. What people may say comes under politics is no exception.  Our Pope, our Bishops have a solemn duty to guide us Catholics in public matters such as abortion, capitol punishment, war, health service for the poor, justice for workers, etc. because all of these have a moral component.  And just because Congress, or the Supreme Court, or the President, just because they say something is lawful does not necessarily make it moral.  We need guidance in such matters.  Now some of you may be more expert in economics, or labor relations, or law, or medicine, more expert than the Pope or the Bishops put together, but I for one know that I am not more expert in moral theology.  Now having said all that it must be said that ultimately, ultimately we have to make a personal decision according to our own conscience and that was the teaching of our present Pope when he was simply Father Ratzsiger, an expert theologian at the Vatican Council.  He made it very clear that personal individual conscience must always rule – always.  We are bound to follow our own personal individual conscience.  However, it must be a well informed conscience and surely, the teaching of our Church should be part, a big part, of that formation process.  Into God the things that are God’s.  How are we to judge that we are really doing that?  How are we to judge if we are truly honoring God in all that we do?  Well, I believe that one of the very good criterions would be the words of Jesus himself in Matthew: 25, “Whatever you do for the least of my brothers and sisters you do for me.”  In short, are our actions and the actions of the government that we sanction are they conducive to the well being of people here in our own country, especially the most vulnerable – the poor, the sick, the elderly, children?  Are our actions and the actions of the government that we sanction are they conducive to true peace in our world and to relieving poverty and misery wherever it may exist?  These are questions that we’ve to ask ourselves.  These are the criteria we have to put before us when we ask, “Am I really doing all I can to further the honor and the glory of God to give to God the things that are God’s.  And so when we look at that, we look at those criteria, then strangely enough perhaps this might actually involve giving to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s.  In other words, paying our fair share of taxes.  Horror of horrors, paying taxes might actually be a Christian thing to do!  Amen.

rjs