Where and which Messiah? In the dilemma, the solution

(Lk 9:18-22)

People of God are no longer in the closed of a womb that protects and guarantees the believer, and sometimes we feel incapable of fielding the Risen One in our limits.

Indeed, the dream of a person who solves problems from the outside (like a shortcut) is still ingrained.

Chimaera fuelled by the bewilderment and anguish we feel in the face of a world marked by contradictions - today even by the bitter consequences of the global crisis.

The wish of a Messiah is kept alive by our trembling... in the waiting for intervention of Someone able to be [instead] inside ourselves and things.

That’s why God turns not to a brave captain, not to a powerful ruler, not to a hero, but to those who offer love. And each of us could be, though our works seem sloppy in themselves, or far inferior to desires.

But Christ himself pours into them.

He is the humble Son, yet he doesn’t play in defense: authentic Liberator.

Divine Glory has an unexpected figure. The Eternal is not a controller, nor a promoter of models that defend order, or [old or fashionable] beliefs, nor fine manners.

The secluded place (v.18) is paraphrases of our risk of misunderstanding.

Even at that time everyone was waiting for the coming of the Anointed of the Lord, but each sect or school of thought in its own way.

Some awaited a sovereign, others a priest, or warrior commander; a judge, a prophet...

All "masters", clinging to some social privilege. No servant, intimate to ourselves: full understanding escaped.

Jesus explicitly imposes messianic silence (v.21) because he doesn’t follow expectations, hopes, intentions by the norm - all external.

In fact, he replaces the perspective of «”the” Messiah» ["that" awaited Messiah] with «the Son of Man» (vv.20-22): the true and full development of divine Plan for humanity.

«"The" Christ» according to the common mentality was a predictable figure, hard, too normal, fixed over time - who had no respect for personal processes - and overflowing with claims.

«Son of Man» is a Person without exaggeration: more intimate, true and profound; without too much method, nor typologies. Person who for this reason does not cease to grow.

In Lk all the important events of the story of Jesus are inserted in a moment of prayer.

It was not easy even for Him to be in tune with the idea that divine Glory could manifest itself in a totally unfavorable situation - only here and there pulsating of light.

And what do you say (cf. v.20)? To the great riddle, only God-man Crucified [the Different, and without reputation] is Judgment, and the Answer that frees from insecurity.

With our inner Friend who embraces, nourishes us and acts like a magnet, we will give everything to the Present - the better part. Closeness of Infinity and our eternal side.

[Friday 25th wk. in O.T.  September 26, 2025]

Lk 9:18-22 (18-25)

Judging question. In the dilemma, the solution

(Lk 9:18-22)

The people of God no longer find themselves in the enclosure of a womb that protects and guarantees the believer, and sometimes we feel as if we are incapable of bringing the Risen One into our limitation.

Indeed, the dream of a person who solves problems from outside (as a shortcut) is still rooted.

Chimera fuelled by the bewilderment and anguish we feel in the face of a world marked by contradictions - today even by the bitter consequences of the global crisis.

The wish for a Messiah is kept alive by our trepidation... waiting for the intervention of Someone capable of standing (instead) within ourselves and things.

We look for the One who can give life a shot in the arm, changing it immediately and radically. Only then can we give it substance - not from the outside.

We continue to wait for a Saviour even today, even though the conventionalist environment only offers less and less meaningful choices [even useless carousels] while impatience provokes resignation or insulting fanaticism.

That is why God turns not to a valiant captain, not to a powerful ruler, not to a hero, but to one who offers love. And each one of us could be one, although our works seem sloppy in themselves, or far inferior to our desires.

But it is Christ himself who pours himself into them.

He is the resigned Son, and yet He does not play defence: He is the authentic Deliverer.

Divine glory has an unexpected figure. The Eternal One is not a controller, nor a promoter of models defending order, or convictions [whether ancient or fashionable], nor fine manners.

The secluded place (v.18) is a paraphrase of our risk of equivocation.

At that time, too, all awaited the coming of the Lord's Anointed, but each sect or school of thought in its own way.

Some awaited a ruler, others a priest, or warrior commander; a judge, a vate....

All 'masters', grasping at some social privilege. No servant, intimate to ourselves: full understanding eluded us.

None had understood the Father's plan.

Not even the kings or prophets had understood it.

Each had set their own dreams of fame against God's plan. At best, they had justified intentions of purification, but also of the rectification of ancient practices; as well as greatness. For some, summary, provisional, unpleasantly exhibitionist.

From the Most High they only wanted a little help to reach their goals, not the Dream of God.

In this way Jesus explicitly imposes the messianic silence (v.21) precisely because it does not match (really nothing to match) the expectations, the hopes, the goals, the intentions in the norm - all external.

Indeed, it replaces the perspective of ""the" Messiah" ["that" expected Messiah] with "the Son of Man" (vv.20-22): the true and full development of the divine plan on humanity.

""The" Christ" according to common mentality was a predictable, harsh, too normal figure, fixed in time - who had no respect for personal processes - and overflowing with claims.

"The Son of Man" is Person without exaggeration: more intimate, true and profound; without too much method or typology. Person who for this reason does not cease to grow.

In Lk all the important events of Jesus' life are set in a moment of prayer.

It was not easy even for Him to be in tune with the idea that divine glory could be manifested in a totally unfavourable situation - only here and there pulsating light.

Well, the response to our shaky experience, so that it can leap from the ashes, is linked not to being recognised and liked by all, but to states of persecution, or disturbance and discomfort.

In fact, the soul speaks with wisdom: thus, it binds growth to a different mindset - not induced by others or conventional ways of being in the world.

They impose caesuras of purpose - if all formal, tame, socially condescending: real ruptures with goals that do not respect vocational instincts. Where we are ourselves, in the Calling by Name and in character.

For the Master and Lord, the only opportune mortifications concern painful cuts and separations from the conformism of roles: detachments that make us free and ready in the current moment.

They usher in an unpredictable and fruitful Vison, opposite to the conformistically dreamt of recovery. However archaic (even if à la page), because it would lose the activating nature proper to the development of life.

Problems are often like concrete figures, and contacts, that force us to other solutions, preventing us from re-entering the world of the habitual past or of even fashionable patterns - those that do not realise our innermost goals.

In short: it is not possible to 'believe' without speaking out in person, now.

And what do you say (cf. v.20)? To the great enigma, only God-man crucified [the different, and without reputation] is Judgement, and answer that frees from insecurities.

With our inner Friend who embraces, nourishes us and acts as a magnet, we give everything to the Present - best side - nearness of Infinity and our eternal side.

Reputation: crossroads of the Truth of Faith

(Lk 9:22-25)

Yesterday we pointed out how the worm of vanity in the pursuit of others' esteem drives one to hypocrisy and ostentation.

Today too, the Word - a solemn and pressing call to a decisive choice - invites to totality; to live Lent with uprightness, not exhibiting too much external ceremony.

We ask ourselves: What makes one intimate with the Father? Carrying the Cross (in the sense of being a devoted and obedient son)? Is it necessary to renounce living, accepting the various evils?

No, communion with God follows from a freely made commitment. That scaffold is not a requirement of the Father who would like to be at least compensated by someone.

And no fatalism: it is not a matter of enduring life's inevitable setbacks. It is not this that unites, it is not coping that binds the people of God who recognise themselves in the Crucified One.

There are not many paths to choose from, but only two: victory and revenge, or perception and gift - every moment is decision time. Models are no longer needed.

Man's authenticity is not his greatness, but fidelity in love that realises - and can place us on paths of persecution and mockery, instead of accommodating or blatant results (on the safe and immediate).

True humanity no longer needs to ascend to transcend the limits of matter (dualist mysticism).

Nor do we need to identify ourselves - almost sacramentally - with the forces of deep but depersonalising cosmic processes (mystery religions).

We are not called to perfect ourselves through the observance of a law or traditions down to the minutiae (Phariseeism).

Nor is our vocation to escape religiously from the abyss of the world's misery, in the hope of an approaching goal to solve everything (apocalypticism).

The Lord's Anointed was awaited as sovereign, priest, thaumaturge, warrior, judge, prophet... Jesus ascending Calvary is quite another paradigm: a different way of being and an entirely different Way.

To the title of Messiah, Luke prefers that of "Son of Man" (v.22): an expression with which the Master actually designated himself.

The Son of Man - the true and full development of the divine plan on humanity - is not hindered by the habitués of the sacred precincts.

In the Gospels, the growth and humanisation of the people is not thwarted by sinners, but by those who would have the ministry of making the Face of God known to all.

Therefore, the character of the apostle is not identified with celebrities and social figures, but with the life of Jesus of Nazareth - the public rebel against official authorities, and condemned.

Here, pushing down, we meet God.

That of the cross was in fact the torture imposed on marginalised criminals. In this lies the 'denial of self' (v.23), which unfortunately in the history of spirituality has suffered bad interpretations.

The believer is not recognised by heroic and magnificent deeds, or asceticism; nor by excellence and visibility of office, charisma and credit, weight and prestige - but by social choice, which brings discredit to one's reputation.

The missionary is not singled out because of extraordinary qualities, but because of smallness.

He who only appreciates great things - even astounding and blatant from a 'spiritual' point of view - loves strength and does not build the new kingdom.

A comparison of the parallel texts in the Greek language (e.g.) of Mk 8:34; Mt 10:38; Lk 9:23 and 14:27 (Jn 12:26) gives insight into the meaning of "taking up" or "lifting up the cross" for a disciple who relives Christ and expands Him in human history.

God does not give any cross, nor are children called to "bear" (or even "offer") it! The Cross is to be actively taken up, for the friend of Jesus stakes his honour on it.

The eminent and crystal-clear source of intimate life enables one to achieve total self-giving even in terms of public consideration.

After the court sentence, the condemned man had to carry the horizontal arm of the gallows on his shoulders.

It was the most harrowing moment, because it was one of utmost loneliness and perceived failure.

The wretched and already shamed man proceeded to the place of execution passing between two wings of the crowd who, out of religious duty, mocked and battered the wretch (deemed cursed by God).

Jesus does not propose the Cross in the corny sense of a necessary endurance of life's inevitable contrarieties, which then through asceticism chisels out souls more capable of being resilient.... (today we say: resilient).Compared to the usual tirades on healthy discipline - exterior and interior - the same for everyone (and useful only to keep the situation good, of privilege) Lk is on the contrary suggesting a much more radical behaviour.

The Lord proposes an asceticism totally different from that of the religions - even inverted.

The believer renounces reputation. This is the essential, diriment cue of the character of the Faith.

He who is tied to his good reputation, to the roles, to the character (to be played), to the task, to the level he has acquired, will never resemble the Lord - and neither will he who does not dilute the tribal dimension of the 'family' interest.

From the earliest times, the proclamation of the authentic Messiah created divisions: the sword of his Person separated each person's affair from the world of values of the clan to which he belonged or from the idea of respectability, even national respectability.

Today, the same thing happens where someone proclaims the Gospel as it is, and attempts to renew the jammed mechanisms of the habitual, outdated and faux-blue-blooded institution on the ground. Carrying the cross of consequent mockery.

A clean break and cut with the criteria of greatness and success, for the new unity: the unity that is the crossroads of Truth without duplicity. Try it to believe.

It sounds like a meaningless dream, but this is what unites the Church to its Lord: a crucifying path, where one gains what one loses - first and foremost in consideration.

To internalise and live the message:

What changes do you feel as your Calling? Does reputation and opinion in the community favour or block you? For what reason? Is your 'family' closed in on itself or does it facilitate the opening of horizons?

On this Sunday when the Gospel asks us about the true identity of Jesus, we find ourselves transported with the disciples to the road leading to the villages around Caesarea Philippi. Jesus asks them: “Who do you say that I am?” (Mk 8:29). The moment he chose to ask this question is not insignificant. Jesus was facing a decisive turning-point in his life. He was going up to Jerusalem, to the place where the central events of our salvation would take place: his crucifixion and resurrection. In Jerusalem too, following these events, the Church would be born. And at this decisive moment, Jesus first asks his disciples: “Who do men say that I am?” (Mk 8:27). They give very different answers: John the Baptist, Elijah, one of the prophets! Today, as down the centuries, those who encounter Jesus along their own way give their own answers. These are approaches which can be helpful in finding the way to truth. But while not necessarily false, they remain insufficient, for they do not go to the heart of who Jesus is. Only those willing to follow him on his path, to live in fellowship with him in the community of his disciples, can truly know who he is. Finally, Peter, who had dwelt with Jesus for some time, gives his answer: “You are the Christ” (Mk 8:29). It is the right answer, of course, but it is still not enough, since Jesus feels the need to clarify it. He realizes that people could use this answer to advance agendas which are not his, to raise false temporal hopes in his regard. He does not let himself be confined to the attributes of the human saviour which many were expecting.

By telling his disciples that he must suffer and be put to death, and then rise again, Jesus wants to make them understand his true identity. He is a Messiah who suffers, a Messiah who serves, and not some triumphant political saviour. He is the Servant who obeys his Father’s will, even to giving up his life. This had already been foretold by the prophet Isaiah in today’s first reading. Jesus thus contradicts the expectations of many. What he says is shocking and disturbing. We can understand the reaction of Peter who rebukes him, refusing to accept that his Master should suffer and die! Jesus is stern with Peter; he makes him realize that anyone who would be his disciple must become a servant, just as he became Servant.

Following Jesus means taking up one’s cross and walking in his footsteps, along a difficult path which leads not to earthly power or glory but, if necessary, to self-abandonment, to losing one’s life for Christ and the Gospel in order to save it. We are assured that this is the way to the resurrection, to true and definitive life with God. Choosing to walk in the footsteps of Jesus Christ, who made himself the Servant of all, requires drawing ever closer to him, attentively listening to his word and drawing from it the inspiration for all that we do.

[Pope Benedict, homily in Beirut, 16 September 2012]

"And who do you say that I am?" (Mt 16:15).

1. As we begin the cycle of catechesis on Jesus Christ, of fundamental importance for Christian faith and life, we feel challenged by the same question that almost two thousand years ago the Master asked Peter and the disciples who were with him. At that decisive moment of his life, as Matthew, who witnessed it, recounts in his Gospel, "When Jesus had come to the region of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, 'People, who do they say that the Son of Man is?' They answered, 'Some say John the Baptist, others Elijah, others Jeremiah or any of the prophets.' He said to them, 'Who do you say that I am?'" (Mt 16:13-15).

We know Peter's blunt and impetuous reply: "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God" (Mt 16:16). In order for us too to formulate it, not so much in abstract terms, but as an expression of a vital experience, the fruit of the Father's gift (cf. Mt 16:17), each of us must allow ourselves to be personally touched by the question: "And you, who say, who am I? You who hear of me, answer: what am I really to you?". For Peter, divine illumination and the answer of faith came after a long period of being close to Jesus, listening to his word and observing his life and ministry (cf. Mt 16:21-24).

In order to come to a more conscious confession of Jesus Christ, we too must walk, like Peter, a path of attentive, caring listening. We must put ourselves in the school of the first disciples, who became his witnesses and our teachers, and at the same time absorb the experience and testimony of twenty centuries of history marked by the Master's question and enriched by the immense chorus of responses from the faithful of all times and places. Today, as the "Lord and Life-giving" Spirit pushes us towards the threshold of the third Christian millennium, we are called to give with renewed joy the response that God inspires and expects from us, almost as if for a new birth of Jesus Christ in our history.

2. Jesus' question about his identity shows the pedagogical subtlety of one who does not trust in hasty answers, but wants an answer matured through a time, sometimes a long time, of reflection and prayer, in attentive and intense listening to the truth of the Christian faith professed and preached by the Church.

Indeed, we recognise that in the face of Jesus we cannot be content with a merely human sympathy, however legitimate and precious, nor is it sufficient to consider him merely as a character worthy of historical, theological, spiritual or social interest, or as a source of artistic inspiration. Around Christ we often see hovering, even among Christians, the shadows of ignorance, or the even more distressing ones of misunderstanding or even infidelity. There is always the risk of appealing to the 'Gospel of Jesus', without really knowing its greatness and radicality, and without living out what is claimed in words. How many are those who reduce the Gospel to their own measure and make themselves a more comfortable Jesus, denying his transcendent divinity, or nullifying his real, historical humanity, or manipulating the integrity of his message, in particular by not taking into account the sacrifice of the cross that dominates his life and doctrine, nor the Church that he instituted as his 'sacrament' in history.

Even these shadows stimulate us to search for the full truth about Jesus, taking advantage of the many lights that, as once with Peter, the Father has lit up over the centuries around Jesus in the hearts of so many men with the power of the Holy Spirit: the lights of faithful witnesses even to martyrdom; the lights of so many passionate scholars, committed to fathoming the mystery of Jesus with the instrument of intelligence sustained by faith; the lights that above all the Magisterium of the Church, guided by the charisma of the Holy Spirit, has lit up in the dogmatic definitions of Jesus Christ.

We recognise that a stimulus to discover who Jesus really is is present in the uncertain and anxious search of many of our contemporaries so similar to Nicodemus who went "by night to find Jesus" (Jn 3:2) or Zacchaeus who climbed a tree to "see Jesus" (Lk 19:4). The desire to help every man to discover Jesus, who came as a doctor for the sick and as a saviour for sinners (cf. Mk 2:17), urges me to perform the demanding and exciting task of presenting the figure of Jesus to the children of the Church and to every man of good will.

You may remember that, at the beginning of my pontificate, I addressed an invitation to the people of today to "open wide the doors to Christ" (Insegnamenti di Giovanni Paolo II, I [1978] 38). Later, in the exhortation Catechesi Tradendae (Ioannis Pauli PP. II, Catechesi Tradendae, 5), dedicated to catechesis, making myself the spokesman for the thinking of the bishops gathered in the Fourth Synod, I affirmed that "the essential and primordial object of catechesis is . . the 'mystery of Christ'. To catechise is in a certain way to lead one to scrutinise this mystery in all its dimensions . . .; to unveil in the person of Christ the whole eternal plan of God, which is fulfilled in him . . . He alone can lead us to the love of the Father in the Holy Spirit and can make us participate in the life of the Holy Trinity' (Eiusdem, Catechesi Tradendae, 5).

We will follow this catechetical itinerary together, ordering our considerations around four focal points: 1) Jesus in his historical reality and in his transcendent messianic quality, son of Abraham, son of man and son of God; 2) Jesus in his identity as true God and true man, in profound communion with the Father and animated by the power of the Holy Spirit, as presented to us in the Gospel; 3) Jesus in the eyes of the Church, which with the assistance of the Holy Spirit has clarified and deepened the revealed data giving us, especially with the Ecumenical Councils, precise formulations of the Christological faith; 4) finally, Jesus in his life and works, Jesus in his redemptive passion and glorification, Jesus among us and in us, in history and in his Church until the end of the world (cf. Mt 28, 20).

3. It is true that in the Church there are many ways of catechising God's people about Jesus. Each one, however, to be authentic must draw its content from the perennial source of holy Tradition and sacred Scripture, interpreted in the light of the teachings of the Fathers and Doctors of the Church, the liturgy, popular faith and piety, in a word of the Tradition living and working in the Church under the action of the Holy Spirit, who - according to the Master's promise - "will lead you into all truth, for he will not speak of himself, but will say all that he has heard and will proclaim to you the things to come" (Jn 16:13). This Tradition we recognise expressed and synthesised particularly in the doctrine of the sacrosanct Councils, gathered in the symbols of faith and deepened by theological reflection faithful to Revelation and the Magisterium of the Church.

What would a catechesis on Jesus be worth if it did not have the genuineness and completeness of the gaze with which the Church contemplates, prays and proclaims his mystery? On the other hand, a pedagogical wisdom is required that, in addressing the recipients of catechesis, knows how to take into account their conditions and needs. As I wrote in the exhortation now cited, Catechesi Tradendae: 'The constant concern of every catechist - whatever the level of his or her responsibilities in the Church - must be to pass on the doctrine and life of Jesus through his or her teaching and behaviour' (John Paul II, Catechesi Tradendae, 6).

4. Let us conclude this introductory catechesis by recalling that Jesus, at a particularly difficult moment in the life of the first disciples, when the cross loomed close and many were abandoning him, addressed to those who had remained with him another of those questions of his that were so strong, so penetrating and inescapable: "Do you perhaps also wish to leave?" It was Peter again who, as the interpreter of his brothers, answered: "Lord, to whom shall we go? You alone have words of eternal life. We have believed and known that you are the Holy One of God" (Jn 6:66-69). May these catechetical appointments of ours make us ever more willing to allow ourselves to be questioned by Jesus, able to have the right answer to his questions, ready to share his life to the full.

[Pope John Paul II, General Audience 7 January 1987]

The Gospel passage this Sunday (Lk 9:18-24) calls us to once again confront Jesus “face to face”, so to speak. In one of the rare quiet moments when he is alone with his disciples, he asks them: “Who do the people say that I am?” (v. 18). They responded to him, saying: “John the Baptist; others say Elijah; others say one of the ancient prophets who has risen” (v. 19). Therefore, people esteemed Jesus and considered him to be a great prophet, but they were not yet aware of his true identity, that is, that He was the Messiah, the Son of God sent by the Father for the salvation of everyone.

Then Jesus directly addresses the Apostles — because this is what most interests him — asking: “But who do you say that I am?”. Immediately, on behalf of everyone, Peter responds, “The Christ of God” (v. 20), that is to say: You are the Messiah, the Anointed of God, sent by Him to save his people according to the Covenant and the promise. Therefore Jesus realizes that the Twelve, and Peter in particular, have received the gift of faith from the Father; and for this reason he begins to speak with them openly — this is how the Gospel puts it: “openly” — of what awaits him in Jerusalem. “The Son of Man must suffer many things”, he says, “and be rejected by the elders, the chief priests and the scribes, and be killed, and rise on the third day” (cf. v. 22).

These same questions are proposed to each of us today: “Who is Jesus for the people of our time?”, and more importantly: “Who is Jesus for each of us?”, for me, for you, for you, for you, and for you ...? Who is Jesus for each one of us? We are called to make Peter’s answer our own response, joyfully professing that Jesus is the Son of God, the Eternal Word of the Father, who became man to redeem mankind, pouring out the abundance of divine mercy upon it. The world needs Christ more than ever: his salvation, his merciful love. Many people feel an empty void around and within themselves — perhaps, at certain times, we do too —; others live in restlessness and insecurity due to uncertainty and conflict. We all need adequate answers to our questions, to our concrete questions. Only in Him, in Christ, is it possible to find true peace and the fulfillment of every human aspiration. Jesus knows the human heart better than anyone. This is why he can heal, giving life and consolation.

After concluding the dialogue with the Apostles, Jesus addressed everyone, saying: “If anyone wants to come after me, let him deny himself, take up his cross daily and follow me” (v. 23). This is not an ornamental cross or an ideological cross, but it is the cross of life, the cross of one’s duty, the cross of making sacrifices for others with love — for parents, for children, for the family, for friends, and even for enemies — the cross of being ready to be in solidarity with the poor, to strive for justice and peace. In assuming this attitude, these crosses, we always lose something. We must never forget that “whoever loses his life [for Christ] will save it” (v. 24). It is losing in order to win. Let us remember all of our brothers and sisters who still put these words of Jesus into practice today, offering their time, their work, their efforts and even their lives so as to never deny their faith in Christ. Jesus, through His Holy Spirit, gives us the strength to move forward along the path of faith and of witness: doing exactly what we believe; not saying one thing and doing another. On this path Our Lady is always near to us: let us allow her to hold our hand when we are going through the darkest and most difficult moments.

[Pope Francis, Angelus 19 June 2016]

In the riddle, the solution

(Lk 9:7-9)

Jesus, who is he? You can’t give an answer except in the light of his story and his condemnation: nothing to do with one of the spiritualists or miracle-makers who arouses curiosity, as Herod expected.

The contrast between the extraordinary figure expected and the obtuseness of (elusive) judgment ends up leaving things as they are. Worse: it encloses the Mystery and loses its "where" today.

One does not understand the Person of Christ starting from the things we know.

He intends to wipe out all attractive but false idols; however, he doesn’t like the axe of the Baptizer, nor the violent zeal of Elijah.

The new Rabbi wants to value the intuition of consciences, rather than the duties or the desire to analyze behaviors. This is the incredible.

Jesus is not some sort of ‘ghost’ that emerges from the past.

He turns history to completion according to innate and spontaneous impulses, which will let emerge the simple personal and the obvious unheard of.

Each religious group closed the Messiah in its interpretative model, consonant with an environment veined with ancient hopes: defense of goods and customs, "cultural" identity, well-being at the expense of others, expansion, wonders.

The sons’ revolution poses a theme that seeks the authentic Way, near and Elsewhere. The humanity of God.

In short, questioning the Person of Jesus already means beginning to overcome conformist codes and small habitual interpretations; to embrace the irruption of the Eternal.

It’s the very question about the Person dimension that invites us to broaden the horizon and begin an Exodus. It will guide to authentic understanding, and measure; to the reason why we are in the world.

Christ reverses the destiny of the man’s kingdom, and his claims.

Any external combination with even eminent figures of the gallery of the greats of history remains static, partial, too predictable.

Not infrequently deviant, due to the inevitable brain limitations it provides, caging the soul [and immobilizing life].

On the Way, the growth of knowledge of his story, adherence to his depth, and Action of the Spirit, will not allow to persist in fixed thoughts, attachments, commonplaces.

Interpretations, preconceptions or showcases that then permeate all of life and dampen it, depriving it of intoxication.

Completely personal Presence, new Sense, innate Wisdom of ‘nature’; not a specific particularism that does not offer regenerated life - that winks only at itself.

Jesus: he is the Engine, the Way and the Reason for the Journey in the Spirit that is leading us.

His Person in us finds in us a “point” within from which he pours forth the courage to be ourselves, and to no longer seek external approval.

This frees the soul from common or prodigious expectations; from the regrets of conformity. To make us advance from primordial states and beliefs to new Dreams of the being that corresponds and tinkles, that emerges and wants to express itself - humanizing.

To internalize and live the message:

When did you realize that in the enigma about the Person of Christ there is already a cut with the obvious expectation, and a cue - the energy of the solution?

[Thursday 25th wk. in O.T.  September 25, 2025]

Who is Jesus: a question that judges

(Lk 9:7-9)

Jesus, who is he? No answer can be given except in the light of his story and his condemnation: nothing to do with one of the spirits or miracle-makers who arouses curiosity, as Herod expected.

The contrast between the extraordinary figure expected and misunderstood, and the obtuseness of the elusive judgement ends up leaving things as they are. Worse: it encloses the Mystery - the most normal one in the world, but one that remains forever [God's humanity] - and loses its 'whereabouts' today.

One does not understand the Person of Christ from the things we know or try to frame him in the customary criteria of the First Testament; with the common feeling, with the magical models of the time...

He is not one of the ancient prophets, come back to purify the filthiness of the opportunist strings of the Temple, and to mend the practices of ancient religion. He comes to supplant them.

By political exigencies, Herod Antipas is forced to be constantly on the alert for the security of his small kingdom [Galilee and Perea] so the success of the Baptist frightens him.

As Josephus Flavius reports, the king preferred to do away with him for fear of a popular uprising, for which he would have to account to Rome.

But - it is the stupidity of power - once a prophet is beheaded, someone more incisive takes his place.

While the blood of the Baptist was still fresh, news came of a young Rabbi who shocked the minds of the subjects of those lands.

The subversive nightmare returns, more subtle than before: the Son of God does not merely call for an improvement of the situation; he wants to replace it.

He proclaims the Truth of the Father and of authentic man, proposing a germ of an alternative world to the ruthless, pyramidal society of the time.

He intends to sweep away the attractive but false idols; however, he does not like the axe of the Baptizer, nor the violent zeal of Elijah - who had sent down a portentous and unstoppable fire from heaven on his enemies.

Jesus wants to value the intuition of consciences, rather than duties or the eagerness to analyse behaviour. This is the incredible.

The Lord is not some kind of 'ghost' who emerges from the past to make the 'ultimate', in an atmosphere [also of group] that oppresses and expects enhanced or even outsized results.

He turns history to fulfilment according to innate and spontaneous impulses, which will allow the simply personal and the blatantly unprecedented to emerge.

Each religious group enclosed the Messiah in its own interpretative model, consonant with an environment tinged with ancient hopes: defence of goods and customs, 'cultural' identity, well-being at the expense of others, expansion, prodigies.

The revolution of the sons poses a theme that seeks the authentic, proximate Way and Elsewhere - precisely, the humanity of God. In the background, around the corner, but not relegated inside a corner.

In short, to question the Person of Jesus is already to begin to move beyond conformist codes and petty habitual interpretations... to embrace the irruption of the Eternal.

It is the very question about the prominence of Person that invites us not to look at a single banal solution [that of everyone or of some lover of paroxysm].

Rather, to broaden the horizon and begin an Exodus, which will lead us to the authentic understanding and measure; to the reason why we are in the world.

Christ reverses the fate and destiny of the kingdom of man.

Any outward juxtaposition to even eminent figures in the gallery of history's greats remains static, partial, too predictable.

Not infrequently deviant, because of the inevitable cerebral limitations it causes, caging the soul [and immobilising life].

By Way, the growth of knowledge of its story, the adherence to its depth, the Action of the Spirit, will not allow fixed thoughts, attachments, commonplaces to persist in our minds.

Interpretations, preconceptions or window dressing that then impregnate the whole of life and dull it, depriving it of intoxication.

Entirely personal presence, new insight, innate Wisdom of 'nature'; not a specific particularism that does not offer regenerated life - that only winks at itself.

Jesus: he is the Engine, the Way and the Motive of the Way in the Spirit that is leading us.

His Person in us finds a "point" within from which He pours forth the courage to be ourselves, and to no longer seek external approval.

This frees the soul from common, or prodigious expectations; from the regrets of conformity. To advance from primordial states and beliefs to new Dreams of being that corresponds and tinkles, that emerges and wants to express itself - humanising.

To internalise and live the message:

In your opinion, what interpretations and preconceptions dampen the exercise of personal intuition in one's growth, and Evangelisation?When did you realise that in the enigma about the Person of Christ there is already a cut with the obvious of expectations, and a cue - the energy of the solution, even for revival from the global emergency?

As we follow him

To truly know Jesus we must talk to him, dialogue with him as we follow him on his path. Pope Francis focused his homily at the mass celebrated on 26 September 2013 in the chapel of Santa Marta precisely on getting to know Jesus.

The Pontiff took as his starting point the passage from Luke's Gospel (9:7-9) in which Herod wonders who the Jesus he hears so much about is. The person of Jesus, the Pontiff recalled, often provoked questions such as: "Who is this? Where does he come from? Let us think, for example, in the synagogue in Nazareth, when he left for the first time: but where did he learn these things? We know him well: he is the carpenter's son. We think of Peter and the apostles after that storm, that wind that Jesus silenced. But who is he to whom heaven and earth, the wind, the rain, the storm obey? But who is he?"

Questions, the Pope explained, that one can ask out of curiosity or to be sure of how to behave before him. The fact remains, however, that anyone who knows Jesus asks these questions. Indeed, "some", continued the Pope, returning to the Gospel episode, "begin to feel afraid of this man, because he can lead them into a political conflict with the Romans"; and so they think they do not take into greater consideration "this man who creates so many problems".

And why, the Pontiff asked, does Jesus create problems? "One cannot know Jesus," was his answer, "without having problems". Paradoxically, he added, 'if you want to have a problem, go down the road that leads you to know Jesus' and then many problems will arise. In any case, Jesus cannot be known 'in first class' or 'in tranquillity', let alone 'in the library'. Jesus can only be known in the daily journey of life.

And one can get to know him, said the Holy Father, "even in the catechism. It is true! The catechism,' he specified, 'teaches us many things about Jesus and we must study him, we must learn him. In this way we learn that the Son of God came to save us and we understand from the beauty of salvation history the love of the Father'. The fact remains, however, that even knowledge of Jesus through the catechism "is not enough": knowing him with the mind is already a step forward, but "Jesus must be known in dialogue with him. Speaking with him, in prayer, on your knees. If you do not pray, if you do not speak with Jesus,' he said, 'you do not know him'.

Finally, there is a third way to know Jesus: "It is following him, going with him, walking with him, walking his ways. And as you walk with him, you know "Jesus with the language of action. If you know Jesus with these three languages: of the mind, of the heart, of action, then you can say that you know Jesus". Making this kind of knowledge involves personal involvement. "One cannot know Jesus," the Pontiff reiterated, "without involving oneself with him, without staking one's life for him. Therefore, to really know him it is necessary to read "what the Church tells you about him, to speak with him in prayer and to walk the road with him". This is the way and "each one - he concluded - must make his own choice".

[Pope Francis, St. Martha, in L'Osservatore Romano 27/09/2013]

My dear Professor Odifreddi, (...) I would like to thank you for having tried in great detail to engage with my book and thus with my faith; this is largely what I had intended in my speech to the Roman Curia at Christmas 2009. I must also thank you for the fair manner in which you treated my text, sincerely trying to do it justice.

My judgement of your book as a whole is, however, rather mixed in itself. I read some parts of it with enjoyment and profit. In other parts, however, I marvelled at a certain aggressiveness and recklessness of the argumentation. (...)

Several times, she points out to me that theology would be science fiction. In this regard, I am amazed that you nevertheless consider my book worthy of such detailed discussion. Allow me to propose four points on this matter:

1. Is it correct to say that 'science' in the strictest sense of the word is only mathematics, whereas I learnt from you that here too a distinction should be made between arithmetic and geometry. In all specific subjects, scientificity has its own form each time, depending on the particularity of its object. The essential thing is that it applies a verifiable method, excludes arbitrariness and guarantees rationality in the respective modes.

2. At the very least, it should recognise that, in the historical sphere and in that of philosophical thought, theology has produced lasting results.

3. An important function of theology is to keep religion bound to reason and reason to religion. Both functions are of essential importance to humanity. In my dialogue with Habermas, I showed that there are pathologies of religion and - no less dangerous - pathologies of reason. Both need each other, and keeping them continuously connected is an important task of theology.

4. Science fiction exists, on the other hand, within many sciences. What you expound on the theories about the beginning and end of the world in Heisenberg, Schrödinger, etc., I would designate as science fiction in the good sense: they are visions and anticipations, in order to arrive at true knowledge, but they are, in fact, only imaginations with which we try to approach reality. There is, after all, science fiction in a big way even within the theory of evolution. Richard Dawkins' The Selfish Gene is a classic example of science fiction. The great Jacques Monod wrote some sentences that he himself will surely have included in his work only as science fiction. I quote: 'The appearance of tetrapod vertebrates ... originates precisely from the fact that a primitive fish 'chose' to go and explore the earth, on which it was, however, unable to move except by jumping awkwardly and thus creating, as a consequence of a change in behaviour, the selective pressure thanks to which the robust limbs of the tetrapods would develop. Among the descendants of this daring explorer, this Magellan of evolution, some can run at speeds in excess of 70 kilometres per hour..." (quoted in the Italian edition Il caso e la necessità, Milan 2001, p. 117 ff.). 

In all the issues discussed so far this is a serious dialogue, for which I - as I have already said repeatedly - am grateful. Things are different in the chapter on the priest and Catholic morality, and still differently in the chapters on Jesus. As for what you say about the moral abuse of minors by priests, I can - as you know - only take note of this with deep consternation. I have never tried to disguise these things. That the power of evil should penetrate to such an extent into the inner world of faith is for us a suffering that, on the one hand, we must endure, while, on the other hand, we must at the same time do everything possible to ensure that such cases do not happen again. Nor is it any comfort to know that, according to research by sociologists, the percentage of priests guilty of these crimes is no higher than in other comparable professional categories. In any case, one should not ostentatiously present this deviation as if it were a filth specific to Catholicism.

If it is not permissible to remain silent about evil in the Church, one must not, however, remain silent either about the great luminous wake of goodness and purity that the Christian faith has traced down the centuries. We must remember the great and pure figures that the faith has produced - from Benedict of Norcia and his sister Scholastica, to Francis and Clare of Assisi, to Teresa of Avila and John of the Cross, to the great Saints of charity such as Vincent de Paul and Camillus de Lellis, to Mother Teresa of Calcutta and the great and noble figures of 19th century Turin. It is also true today that faith drives many people to selfless love, service for others, sincerity and justice. (...)

What you say about the figure of Jesus is not worthy of your scientific rank. If you pose the question as if nothing is known about Jesus and nothing can be ascertained about him as a historical figure, then I can only strongly urge you to become a little more historically competent. I recommend to you for this especially the four volumes that Martin Hengel (an exegete from the Protestant Theological Faculty in Tübingen) has published together with Maria Schwemer: it is an excellent example of historical accuracy and extensive historical information. In the face of this, what you say about Jesus is rash talk that you should not repeat. That much has also been written in exegesis that is not very serious is, unfortunately, an indisputable fact. The American seminar on Jesus that you cite on pages 105 ff. only confirms once again what Albert Schweitzer had noted about Leben-Jesu-Forschung (Research on the Life of Jesus), namely that the so-called 'historical Jesus' is mostly a mirror of the ideas of the authors. Such unsuccessful forms of historical work, however, in no way undermine the importance of serious historical research, which has brought us true and reliable knowledge about the proclamation and the figure of Jesus. 

(...) Furthermore, I must emphatically reject your claim (p. 126) that I have presented historical-critical exegesis as a tool of the antichrist. In dealing with the account of Jesus' temptations, I have only taken up Soloviev's thesis that historical-critical exegesis can also be used by the antichrist - which is an indisputable fact. At the same time, however, I have always - and in particular in the preface to the first volume of my book on Jesus of Nazareth - made it abundantly clear that historical-critical exegesis is necessary for a faith that does not propose myths with historical images, but claims true historicity and must therefore also present the historical reality of its claims in a scientific manner. That is why it is not even correct for you to say that I would only be interested in meta-history: on the contrary, all my efforts are aimed at showing that the Jesus described in the Gospels is also the real historical Jesus; that it is history that really happened. (...)

With the 19th chapter of your book we return to the positive aspects of your dialogue with my thinking. (...) Although your interpretation of John 1: 1 is far removed from what the evangelist intended, there is nevertheless a convergence that is important. If you, however, want to replace God with 'Nature', the question remains, who or what this nature is. Nowhere do you define it and it therefore appears as an irrational deity that explains nothing. Above all, however, I would still like to point out that in your religion of mathematics three fundamental themes of human existence remain unconsidered: freedom, love and evil. I am astonished that you with a single mention dismiss freedom, which has been and is the core value of the modern age. Love does not appear in your book and there is no information about evil either. Whatever neurobiology may or may not say about freedom, in the real drama of our history it is present as a determining reality and must be taken into account. But your mathematical religion knows no information about evil. A religion that leaves out these fundamental questions remains empty.

My dear Professor, my criticism of your book is harsh in parts. But frankness is part of dialogue; only in this way can knowledge grow. You have been very frank and so you will accept that I am too. In any case, however, I very much welcome the fact that you, through your confrontation with my Introduction to Christianity, have sought such an open dialogue with the faith of the Catholic Church and that, despite all the contrasts, there is no lack of convergence in the core area.

With cordial greetings and all good wishes for your work.

[Pope Benedict, article in La Repubblica 24/09/2013]

1. With last week's catechesis, following the oldest symbols of the Christian faith, we began a new cycle of reflections on Jesus Christ. The Apostolic Symbol proclaims: "I believe . . . in Jesus Christ, his only Son (of God)". The Niceno-Constantinopolitan Symbol, after defining with even greater precision the divine origin of Jesus Christ as the Son of God, goes on to declare that this Son of God 'for us men and for our salvation descended from heaven and . . . became incarnate'. As can be seen, the core of the Christian faith consists of the twofold truth that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Son of man (the Christological truth), and is the realisation of man's salvation, which God the Father has accomplished in him, his Son and Saviour of the world (the soteriological truth).

2. If in the previous catecheses we dealt with evil, and sin in particular, we did so also to prepare the present cycle on Jesus Christ the Saviour. Salvation in fact means deliverance from evil, particularly sin. Revelation contained in sacred Scripture, beginning with the Proto-Gospel (Gen 3:15) opens us up to the truth that only God can free man from sin and all the evil present in human existence. God, while revealing himself as the Creator of the world and its providential Orderer, simultaneously reveals himself as Saviour: as the one who liberates from evil, particularly from sin caused by the creature's free will. This is the culmination of the creative project implemented by God's Providence, in which world (cosmology), man (anthropology) and God the Saviour (soteriology) are closely linked.

In fact, as the Second Vatican Council recalls, Christians believe that the world is "created and kept in existence by the love of the Creator, a world certainly placed under the bondage of sin, but liberated by Christ crucified and risen . . ." (Gaudium et Spes, 2).

3. The name 'Jesus', considered in its etymological meaning, means 'Yahweh frees', saves, helps. Before the enslavement in Babylon it was expressed in the form 'Jehosua': a theophoric name containing the root of the most holy name of Yahweh. After the Babylonian enslavement it took the abbreviated form 'Jeshua', which in the translation of the Septuagint was transcribed as 'Jesoûs' from which the Italian 'Jesus' is derived.

The name was quite common, both in the time of the old and the new covenant. It is in fact the name borne by Joshua, who after the death of Moses introduced the Israelites into the promised land: "He, according to the meaning of his name, was great for the salvation of God's elect . . . to give possession to Israel' (Sir 46: 1). Jesus, son of Sirach, was the compiler of the book of Sirach (Sir 50: 27). In the genealogy of the Saviour, recorded in the Gospel according to Luke, we find enumerated 'Er, son of Jesus' (Lk 3:28-29). Among St Paul's co-workers is also a certain Jesus, "called Righteous" (cf. Col 4:11).

4. The name Jesus, however, never had the fullness of meaning that it would take on in the case of Jesus of Nazareth and that would be revealed by the angel to Mary (cf. Lk 1:31ff.) and Joseph (cf. Mt 1:21). At the beginning of Jesus' public ministry, people understood his name in the common sense of the time.

"We have found him of whom Moses in the Law and the prophets wrote, Jesus, son of Joseph of Nazareth". So says one of the first disciples, Philip, to Nathanael who replies: "Can anything good ever come from Nazareth?" (Jn 1:45-46). This question indicates that Nazareth was not highly esteemed by the children of Israel. In spite of this, Jesus was called "Nazarene" (cf. Matthew 2: 23), or even "Jesus from Nazareth of Galilee" (Matthew 21: 11), an expression that Pilate himself used in the inscription he had placed on the cross: "Jesus the Nazarene, King of the Jews" (John 19: 19).

5. People called Jesus "the Nazarene" after the place where he resided with his family until he was thirty years old. We know, however, that Jesus' birthplace was not Nazareth but Bethlehem, a town in Judea, south of Jerusalem. This is attested by the evangelists Luke and Matthew. The former, in particular, points out that because of the census ordered by the Roman authorities, "Joseph went up from the town of Nazareth and Galilee to Judea to the city of David, called Bethlehem, to be registered with Mary his wife, who was with child. Now while they were in that place, the days of childbirth were fulfilled for her" (Lk 2:4-6).

As with other biblical places, Bethlehem also takes on a prophetic value. Referring to the prophet Micah, Matthew recalls that this town was designated as the place of the birth of the Messiah: "And you, Bethlehem, land of Judah, are not the smallest chief town of Judah: for out of you shall come forth a leader who shall shepherd my people Israel" (Mt 2:6). The prophet adds: ". . its origins are from antiquity, from the earliest days" (Mt 5:1).

This text was referred to by the priests and scribes whom Herod had consulted to answer the Magi who, having come from the East, asked where the birthplace of the Messiah was.

The text in Matthew's Gospel (Matthew 2: 1): "Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the time of King Herod", refers to the prophecy of Micah, to which the question in the Fourth Gospel also refers: "Does not the Scripture say that the Christ will come from the seed of David and from Bethlehem, the village of David?" (John 7: 42).

6. From these details we deduce that Jesus is the name of a historical person who lived in Palestine. If it is right to give historical credibility to figures like Moses and Joshua, all the more reason to accept the historical existence of Jesus. The Gospels do not tell us in detail about his life because they do not have a primarily historiographical purpose. However, it is precisely the Gospels that, read with critical honesty, lead to the conclusion that Jesus of Nazareth is a historical person who lived in a specific space and time. Even from a purely scientific point of view, it is not those who affirm, but those who deny the existence of Jesus, as the mythological theories of the past have done and as some scholars still do today, that must arouse wonder.

As for the precise date of Jesus' birth, expert opinions do not agree. It is commonly accepted that the monk Dionysius the Small, when in the year 533 he proposed to calculate the years not from the foundation of Rome, but from the birth of Jesus Christ, fell into error. Until recently, it was believed that this was a mistake of about four years, but the matter is far from settled.

7. In the tradition of the Israelitic people, the name 'Jesus' has retained its etymological value: 'God frees'. Traditionally, it was always the parents who imposed the name on their children. However, in the case of Jesus, son of Mary, the name was chosen and assigned from above already before his birth, according to the angel's indication to Mary in the annunciation (Lk 1:31) and to Joseph in a dream (Mt 1:21). "He was given the name Jesus" - underlines the evangelist Luke - because by this name "he had been called by the angel before he was conceived in his mother's womb" (Lk 2:21).

8. In the plan laid out by God's providence, Jesus of Nazareth bears a name that alludes to salvation: "God delivers", because he is in fact what the name indicates, namely the Saviour. This is testified by a number of phrases in the so-called Infancy Gospels, written by Luke (Lk 2:11): ". . there was born . . . a Saviour", and by Matthew (Mt 1:21): "for he will save his people from their sins". These are expressions that reflect the truth that is revealed and proclaimed throughout the New Testament. For example, the Apostle Paul writes in the Letter to the Philippians: "For this reason God has exalted him and given him the name which is above every other name; that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow . . . and every tongue proclaim that Jesus Christ is Lord (Kyrios, Adonai) to the glory of God the Father' (Phil 2:9-11).

The reason for the exaltation of Jesus we find in the testimony given to him by the apostles who boldly proclaimed: 'In no one else is there salvation; for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which it is established that we may be saved' (Acts 4:12).

[Pope John Paul II, General Audience 14 January 1987]