The Evangelist Mark reports the following words of Jesus, which are inserted within the debate at that time regarding what is pure and impure: “There is nothing outside a man which by going into him can defile him; but the things which come out of a man are what defile him … What comes out of a man is what defiles a man. For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts” (Mk 7, 14-15, 20-21). Beyond the immediate question concerning food, we can detect in the reaction of the Pharisees a permanent temptation within man: to situate the origin of evil in an exterior cause. Many modern ideologies deep down have this presupposition: since injustice comes “from outside,” in order for justice to reign, it is sufficient to remove the exterior causes that prevent it being achieved. This way of thinking – Jesus warns – is ingenuous and shortsighted. Injustice, the fruit of evil, does not have exclusively external roots; its origin lies in the human heart, where the seeds are found of a mysterious cooperation with evil. With bitterness the Psalmist recognises this: “Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me” (Ps 51,7). Indeed, man is weakened by an intense influence, which wounds his capacity to enter into communion with the other. By nature, he is open to sharing freely, but he finds in his being a strange force of gravity that makes him turn in and affirm himself above and against others: this is egoism, the result of original sin. Adam and Eve, seduced by Satan’s lie, snatching the mysterious fruit against the divine command, replaced the logic of trusting in Love with that of suspicion and competition; the logic of receiving and trustfully expecting from the Other with anxiously seizing and doing on one’s own (cf. Gn 3, 1-6), experiencing, as a consequence, a sense of disquiet and uncertainty. How can man free himself from this selfish influence and open himself to love?

[Pope Benedict, Message for Lent 2010]

Old Testament Tradition and the New Meaning of Purity

1. An indispensable complement to the words pronounced by Christ in the Sermon on the Mount on which we have centred the cycle of our present reflections must be the analysis of purity. When Christ, in explaining the proper meaning of the commandment "Thou shalt not commit adultery", made reference to the inner man, he specified at the same time the fundamental dimension of purity, with which the mutual relations between man and woman in and out of marriage are to be marked. The words: 'But I say to you, whoever looks at a woman to lust after her has already committed adultery with her in his heart' (Mt 5:27-28) express what is contrary to purity. At the same time, these words demand the purity that in the Sermon on the Mount is included in the statement of the beatitudes: "Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God" (Mt 5:8). In this way Christ addresses an appeal to the human heart: he invites it, not accuses it, as we have already made clear above.

2. Christ sees in the heart, in man's innermost being, the source of purity - but also of moral impurity - in the fundamental and most generic meaning of the word. This is confirmed, for example, by his reply to the Pharisees, scandalised by the fact that his disciples "transgress the tradition of the ancients, for they do not wash their hands when they take food" (Mt 15:2). Jesus then said to those present: "Not what goes into the mouth makes a man unclean, but what comes out of the mouth makes a man unclean" (Mt 15:11). To his disciples, however, answering Peter's question, he explained these words thus: "...what comes out of the mouth comes from the heart. This makes a man unclean. For from the heart come evil intentions, murders, adulteries, prostitutions, thefts, false witness, blasphemies. These are the things that make a man unclean, but eating without washing one's hands does not make a man unclean" (cf. Mt 15:18-20; cf. Mk 7:20-23).

When we say "purity", "pure", in the first meaning of these terms, we indicate that which contrasts with uncleanness. 'Soiling' means 'make unclean', 'pollute'. This refers to the different spheres of the physical world. We speak, for example, of a 'dirty street', a 'dirty room', we also speak of 'polluted air'. Likewise, man can also be 'unclean' when his body is not clean. To remove the filthiness of the body, it must be washed. In the Old Testament tradition, great importance was attached to ritual ablutions, e.g. washing one's hands before eating, which is mentioned in the quoted text. Numerous and detailed prescriptions concerned the ablutions of the body in relation to sexual impurity, understood in an exclusively physiological sense, which we mentioned earlier (cf. Lev 15 ). According to the state of medical science at the time, the various ablutions could correspond to hygienic prescriptions. Insofar as they were imposed in the name of God and contained in the Sacred Books of the Old Covenant legislation, the observance of them acquired, indirectly, a religious significance; they were ritual ablutions and, in the life of the man of the Old Covenant, they served ritual "purity".

3. In relation to the aforementioned legal-religious tradition of the Old Covenant, an erroneous way of understanding moral purity(1) was formed. It was often understood in an exclusively outward and 'material' manner. In any case, there was an explicit tendency towards such an interpretation. Christ radically opposes it: nothing makes man unclean "from the outside", no "material" filthiness makes man impure in a moral, that is to say, inner sense. No ablution, not even ritual, is suitable in itself to produce moral purity. This has its exclusive source within man: it comes from the heart. It is probable that the respective Old Testament prescriptions (those, for example, found in Leviticus) (Lev 15:16-24; 18:1ff; 12:1-5) served not only for hygienic purposes, but also to attribute a certain dimension of interiority to what is corporeal and sexual in the human person. In any case, Christ was very careful not to link purity in the moral (ethical) sense with physiology and related organic processes. In the light of the words of Matthew 15:18-20, quoted above, none of the aspects of sexual "uncleanness", in the strictly somatic, biophysiological sense, enters per se into the definition of purity or impurity in the moral (ethical) sense.

4. The above statement ( Mt 15:18-20 ) is especially important for semantic reasons. In speaking of purity in the moral sense, i.e. the virtue of purity, we make use of an analogy, according to which moral evil is compared precisely to uncleanness. Certainly, this analogy has been part of the sphere of ethical concepts since the earliest times. Christ takes it up and confirms it in its full extent: 'What comes out of the mouth comes from the heart. This makes a man unclean'. Here Christ speaks of every moral evil, every sin, i.e. transgressions of the various commandments, and enumerates "evil intentions, murders, adulteries, prostitutions, thefts, false witness, blasphemies", without limiting himself to a specific kind of sin. It follows that the concept of 'purity' and 'impurity' in the moral sense is first and foremost a general concept, not a specific one: hence every moral good is a manifestation of purity, and every moral evil is a manifestation of impurity. The statement in Matthew 15:18-20 does not restrict purity to a single area of morality, i.e. to that connected with the commandment 'Thou shalt not commit adultery' and 'Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife', i.e. to that which concerns the mutual relations between man and woman, linked to the body and its concupiscence. Similarly, we can also understand the beatitude of the Sermon on the Mount, addressed to men who are 'pure in heart', both in a generic and more specific sense. Only the eventual contexts will allow us to delimit and specify this meaning.

5. The broader and more general meaning of purity is also present in the letters of St Paul, in which we shall gradually identify the contexts that explicitly restrict the meaning of purity to the "somatic" and "sexual" sphere, i.e. to that meaning that we can grasp from the words pronounced by Christ in the Sermon on the Mount on concupiscence, which is already expressed in "looking at the woman", and is equated with "adultery committed in the heart" (cf. Mt 5:27-28 ).

St Paul is not the author of the words on triple concupiscence. They are, as we know, found in the first letter of John. It can, however, be said that analogous to what for John ( 1 Jn 2:16-17 ) is the opposition within man between God and the world (between what comes "from the Father" and what comes "from the world") - an opposition that arises in the heart and penetrates into the actions of man as "concupiscence of the eyes, concupiscence of the flesh and pride of life" - St Paul notes another contradiction in the Christian: the opposition and at the same time the tension between the "flesh" and the "Spirit" (written with a capital letter, i.e. the Holy Spirit): "I say to you therefore, walk according to the Spirit, and you will not be led to satisfy the desires of the flesh; for the flesh has desires contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit has desires contrary to the flesh; these things are opposed to each other, so that you do not do what you would" ( Gal 5:16-17 ). It follows that life 'according to the flesh' is in opposition to life 'according to the Spirit'. "For those who live according to the flesh, think about the things of the flesh; but those who live according to the Spirit, about the things of the Spirit" ( Rom 8:5 ).

In the following analyses we will try to show that purity - the purity of heart, of which Christ spoke in the Sermon on the Mount - is properly realised in life "according to the Spirit".

[Pope John Paul II, General Audience 10 December 1980]

The Gospel for today’s liturgy shows a few scribes and Pharisees amazed by Jesus’ attitude. They are scandalized because his disciples pick up food without first performing the traditional ritual ablutions. They think among themselves: “This way of doing things is contrary to the religious practice” (cf. Mk 7:2-5).

We too could ask ourselves: why do Jesus and his disciples disregard these traditions? After all, they are not bad things, but good ritual habits, simple cleansing before eating.  Why is Jesus  not concerned with this? Because for him it is important to bring faith back to its centre. We see it repeatedly in the Gospel: this bringing faith back to the centre. And to avoid a risk, which applies to those scribes as well as to us: to observe outward formalities, putting the heart and  faith in the background. Many times we too “put makeup” on our soul. Outward formality and not the heart of faith: this is a risk. It is the risk of a religiosity of appearances : looking good on the outside, while neglecting to purify the heart. There is always the temptation to “deal with God” with some outward devotion, but Jesus does not settle for this worship. Jesus does not want outward appearances, he wants a faith that touches the heart.

 In fact, immediately afterwards, he calls the people back to speak a great truth: “there is nothing outside  a man which by going into him can defile him; but the things which come out of a man are what defile him” (v. 15). Rather, it is “from within, out of the heart” (v. 21) that evil things are born. These words are revolutionary, because in the mindset of the time, it was thought that certain foods or external contacts would make one impure. Jesus reverses the perspective: it is not what comes from the outside that is harmful, but rather, what is born from within.

Dear brothers and sisters, this also pertains to us. We often think that evil comes mainly from the outside: from other people’s conduct, from those who think badly of us, from society. How often we blame others, society, the world, for everything that happens to us! It is always the fault of “others”: it is the fault of people, of those who govern, of misfortune, and so on. It seems that problems always come from the outside. And we spend time assigning blame; but spending time blaming others is wasting time. We become angry, bitter and keep God away from our heart. Like those people in the Gospel, who complain, who are scandalized, who cause controversy and do not welcome Jesus. One cannot be truly religious while complaining: complaining poisons, it leads you to anger, to resentment and to sadness, that of the heart, which closes the door to God.

Let us ask the Lord today to free us from blaming others — like children: “No, it wasn’t me! It’s the other one, the other one…”. Let us ask in prayer for the grace not to waste time polluting the world with complaints, because this is not Christian. Jesus instead invites us to look at life and the world starting from our heart. If we look inside ourselves, we will find almost all that we despise outside. And if, with sincerity,  we will ask God to purify our heart, then indeed we will be starting to make the world cleaner. Because there is an infallible way to defeat evil: by starting to conquer it within yourself. The first Fathers of the Church, the monks, when they were asked: “What is the path of holiness, how should I begin”? The first step, they used to say, was to blame oneself: blame yourself. Blaming ourselves. How many of us, during the day, in a moment of  the day or a moment in the week, are able to blame ourselves within? “Yes, this one did this to me, the other one … that one, a  barbarity…”. But me? Do I do the same thing, or do I do it this way.... It is wisdom: learning to blame yourself. Try to do it, it will do you good. It does me good, when I manage to do so, but it is good for us, it is good for everyone.

May the Virgin Mary, who changed history through the purity of her heart, help us to purify our own, by overcoming first and foremost the vice of blaming others and complaining about everything.

[Pope Francis, Angelus 29 August 2021]

God bless us and may the Virgin protect us. On this Sunday, 2 February 2025, we celebrate the Presentation of the Lord in the Temple of Jerusalem

*First Reading From the book of the prophet Malachi (3,1-4) 

We are in the presence of a mysterious prophetic fragment seen by many as a testimony of universalism, freedom and hope. However, it is not easy to understand how to accept this text. Why does the prophet Malachi insist so much on the Temple, on the Levites (or priests), on offerings and on everything related to worship? To understand this insistence, the historical context must be taken into account. Malachi writes around 450 BC, at a time when there was no longer a king in Israel descended from David, the country was under Persian rule, and the Jewish people were ruled by priests. This is why the author insists on God's covenant with the priests who were God's representatives to his people. Malachi recalls the privileged bond between God and the descendants of Levi, but witnesses a degeneration in the conduct of this priestly caste and it was therefore very important to recall the ideal and responsibility of the priesthood. The covenant with the priests was at the service of God's covenant with his people, and it is precisely this covenant that is spoken of here: 'Immediately shall the Lord whom you seek enter into his temple; and the angel of the covenant whom you long for, behold, he is coming'. Malachi addresses all those who wait, who desire, who seek, and announces to them that they have not waited, sought, desired in vain, and their desire, their expectation will be fulfilled. And this will soon come to pass.

"And immediately he will come", the Hebrew word pit'ôm indicates both swiftness and nearness, and is as strong as the expression that follows: "here he comes". The two synonymous expressions 'immediately he will enter' and 'here he comes' frame (include) the announcement of the Lord's coming. "Immediately shall he enter into his temple, the Lord whom you seek; and the angel of the covenant whom you long for, behold, he is coming". The angel of the covenant comes to re-establish the covenant: first of all with the sons of Levi, but above all, through them, with the whole people, and we understand that this angel of the covenant is God himself. In the Bible, in order not to name God directly out of respect, the expression 'the Angel of God' is often used. It is therefore about the very coming of God. In his small book of just four pages in our Bible, Malachi speaks several times of the day of his coming; he calls it the 'day of the Lord' and each time this day appears both desirable and disquieting. For example, in the verse that immediately follows the text of today's liturgy, God says: "I will come to you for judgment" (v. 5), that is, I will deliver you from evil. This is desirable for the righteous but fearsome for those who live in evil and work evil. God's intervention is a discernment that must take place within us on the day of judgement and a messenger must precede the coming of the Lord who will call all people to conversion. As Malachi writes: "I will send my messenger to prepare the way before me. Later, Jesus will quote precisely this prophecy referring to John the Baptist. Asking the people who they had gone to see, he will say that John the Baptist is "more than a prophet. He is he of whom it is written: Behold, I send my messenger before you; he shall prepare your way before you" (Mt 11:7-10 and Lk 7:27).  With these words, Jesus identified himself as the Angel of the covenant coming to his temple and we will understand this better by delving into St Luke's Gospel today, feast of the Presentation of the Lord 

*Responsorial Psalm 23/24 (7, 8, 9, 10)

"Lift up, O ye gates, your foreheads, lift up ancient thresholds, and let the King of glory come in". This expression is solemn and somewhat surprising since it is difficult to imagine that the gates would rise. We are in a poetic context and the hyperbole serves to express the majesty of this King of glory who solemnly enters the Temple of Jerusalem. The expression 'king of glory' refers to God himself, the Lord of the universe. Our thoughts go back to the great feast of the Dedication of the first Temple, performed by King Solomon around 950 BC. In our imagination we see again the huge procession, the steps packed with worshippers... As we read in Psalm 67/68: "Your procession appears, God, the procession of my God, of my king, in the sanctuary. Singers precede, zither-players follow, along with maidens playing tambourines" (Ps 67:25-26). The Dedication of the first Temple by Solomon is described in the first book of Kings. On that occasion Solomon gathered the elders of Israel, the heads of the tribes, and the princes of the families of the children of Israel in Jerusalem, to bring up the Ark of the Lord from the city of David, that is, from Zion in the month of Etanim, the seventh month, during the Feast of Tabernacles. When all the elders of Israel had arrived, the priests brought up the Ark, the tent of meeting, and all the sacred objects that were in the tent, and so many small and large cattle were sacrificed that they could not be counted nor enumerated. The priests placed the Ark of the Covenant of the Lord in its place, in the inner chamber of the House, the Holy of Holies, under the wings of the cherubim. The cherubim, in the Bible, do not resemble the little angels of our imagination, but are winged animals with human faces, more like large Egyptian sphinxes. In Mesopotamia, they were the guardians of temples. In the Temple of Jerusalem, above the Ark of the Covenant stood two gilded wooden statues depicting these beings. Their outstretched wings above the Ark symbolised the throne of God. In this context, we can imagine the crowd and a choir singing: 'Lift up, O gates, your foreheads, lift up ancient thresholds, and let the king of glory enter'. And another choir replies: 'Who is this king of glory? The Lord strong and valiant, the Lord valiant in battle'. Behind the terms recalling war, which may surprise us today, we must read the memory of all the battles Israel needed to win a living space. Ever since the giving of the Law on Sinai, the Ark accompanied the people of Israel in every battle, a sign of God's presence in the midst of his people. The most common assumption is that this psalm is very old, since all trace of the Ark has been lost since the Babylonian exile. No biblical text clearly mentions it either during or after the exile, but it is known that it ended up as part of the booty taken away by Nebuchadnezzar during the taking of Jerusalem. Was it later hidden by Jeremiah on Mount Nebo, as some relate? No one knows. Yet this psalm was sung regularly in the ceremonies of the Temple of Jerusalem even long after the Babylonian exile, at a time when there was no longer any procession around the Ark. This is precisely why it acquired greater importance: having definitively lost the Ark of the Covenant, the tangible sign of God's presence, the psalm represented all that remained of the past splendour. It taught the people the necessary detachment: God's presence is not bound to an object, however loaded with memory. Moreover, with the passing of the centuries, this psalm took on a new meaning: "Let the King of glory come in" became the cry of impatience for the coming of the Messiah. Come at last the eternal King who will reign over renewed humanity at the end of time! He will indeed be the "Lord valiant in battle" the one who finally vanquishes Evil and the powers of death; he will indeed be the Lord, God of the universe and all mankind will share in his victory. This was the expectation of Israel, which grew from century to century.  It is not surprising, then, that the Christian liturgy sings Psalm 23/24 on the day it celebrates the Presentation of the Child Jesus in the Temple of Jerusalem: a way of affirming that this child is the King of glory, that is, God himself.

* Second Reading From the letter to the Hebrews ( 2:14-18)

 The theme of Christ's mediation is fundamental in the Letter to the Hebrews. It is undoubtedly useful to remember that it was written in a context of not a few controversies, and it is precisely from this letter that we can intuit the kind of objections that the first Christians of Jewish origin had to face. They were constantly being told: Your Jesus is not the Messiah; we need a priest, and he is not. It was therefore crucial for a first-century Christian to know that Christ is indeed a priest, the institution of the priesthood being central in the Old Testament, as we also noted in the first reading from the book of Malachi, which is the last of the Old Testament. Now, such an important institution in the history of the Jewish people and for its survival, could not be ignored in the New Testament. Jesus, however, according to Jewish law, was not a priest and could not aspire to be one, much less consider himself a high priest. He was descended from David, thus from the tribe of Judah and not at all from the tribe of Levi, and the author of the Epistle knows this and states it clearly (cf. Heb 7:14).  The Letter to the Hebrews answers: Jesus is not a high priest descended from Aaron, but he is in the likeness of Melchizedek.  This character mentioned in Genesis chapter 14 lived long before Moses and Aaron and is related to Abraham. Yet he is called "priest of the Most High God" (cf. Gen 14:18-20). So Jesus is indeed high priest, in his own way, in continuity with the Old Testament. This is precisely the purpose of the Letter to the Hebrews: to show us how Jesus realises the institution of the priesthood and to realise in biblical language does not mean to reproduce the Old Testament model, but to bring it to its full perfection. So let us see the three aspects of the ancient priesthood and what its essential elements were: The priest was a mediator, a member of the people who was allowed to commune with God's holiness and, in return, passed on God's gifts and blessings to the people. In today's passage, it is emphasised that Jesus is indeed a member of the people: 'Since the sons have flesh and blood in common, Christ in the same way became a partaker of them... therefore he had to make himself in all things like the brethren...' (Heb 2:14-17). To be "like" means to share the same weaknesses: temptations, trials, suffering and death. Jesus shared our poor human condition and in order to bring God closer to man, he made himself one of us, thus cancelling the distance between God and man. Moreover, the priest had to be allowed to communicate with the holiness of God who is the Holy One, that is, the totally Other (Kadosh, El Elyon, HaKadosh HaMufla), as the Bible often reminds us. To get closer to the Holy God, priests underwent rites of separation: ritual bathing, anointing, dressing and sacrifice. Even the sacred places where the priests officiated were separated from the common living spaces of the people. With Jesus, all this is turned upside down: he never separated himself from the life of his people, rather he mingled with the little ones, the marginalised, the unclean. And yet, says the Letter to the Hebrews, we have certain proof that Jesus is the Righteous One par excellence, the Son of God, the Holy One: his resurrection by defeating death has re-established the Covenant with God, which was the very goal of the priests. We are now free, and the greatest enemy of freedom is fear. But, thanks to Jesus, we no longer have anything to fear because we know God's love. The one who made us doubt this love was Satan, but through death, Jesus reduced him to powerlessness (cf. 2:14-15). Jesus' suffering shows how far God's love for us goes. Finally a question: Why does this Letter speak of the "children of Abraham" and not the "children of Adam"? It states in fact. "He cares not for the angels, but for the seed of Abraham". The answer is because Abraham, in biblical meditation, represents faith, understood as trust, and we are left with the freedom not to be children of Abraham, that is, believers. It is up to us to decide whether or not to enter into God's plan.

*From the Gospel according to Luke (2:22 - 40)

In the account of the evangelist Luke a double insistence emerges: first on the Law, then on the Spirit. In the first verses (vv. 22-24), he mentions the Law three times to emphasise that the child's life begins under the sign of the Law. It should be made clear, however, that Luke mentions the Law of Israel not as a series of written commandments and indeed one could replace the word 'Law' with 'Faith of Israel'. The life of the Family of Nazareth is all imbued with faith, and when they come to the Temple in Jerusalem to fulfil the Jewish customs, they do so with an attitude of fervour. Luke's first message is this: the salvation of all mankind took shape within the framework of the Law of Israel, of the faith of Israel: in a word, the Word of God became incarnate in this context and thus God's merciful plan for mankind was fulfilled. Then Simeon enters the scene, prompted by the Spirit, also mentioned three times. It is therefore the Spirit who inspires Simeon with the words that reveal the mystery of this child: 'My eyes have seen your salvation'. It is good to take up these words of Simeon one by one: 'My eyes have seen your salvation, prepared by you before all peoples'. The Old Testament is the story of this long and patient preparation by God for the salvation of mankind. And it is precisely the salvation of mankind, not just the people of Israel. This is exactly what Simeon points out: 'Light to reveal you to the Gentiles and glory to your people Israel'. Israel's glory, in fact, lies in having been chosen not for itself, but for all mankind. As history progressed, throughout the events of the Old Testament, God's chosen people discovered more and more clearly that God's plan of salvation concerns the whole of humanity. furthermore, all this takes place in the Temple.  For Luke, the message is fundamental and he communicates it to us: we already witness the glorious entry of Jesus, Lord and Saviour, into the temple of Jerusalem, as the prophet Malachi had announced. This is precisely the opening of the first reading: 'Thus says the Lord God: Behold, I will send my messenger to prepare the way before me, and straightway the Lord whom you seek shall enter into his temple; and the angel of the covenant, whom you long for, behold, he is coming, says the Lord of hosts'.

Luke recognises in Jesus the Angel of the Covenant who enters his temple. Simeon's words about glory and light fit perfectly in this line: 'My eyes have seen your salvation, prepared by you before all peoples: light to reveal you to the Gentiles and glory to your people Israel'. Another echo of today's gospel in the Old Testament is found in the Psalm: "Who is this king of glory? Lift up, O gates, your foreheads". The psalm awaited a Messiah-king descendant of David; we know that the king of glory is this child. Luke describes a majestic scene of glory: the whole long wait of Israel is represented by two characters, Simeon and Anna. "Simeon, a righteous and godly man waited for the consolation of Israel". As for Anna, it can be assumed that if she spoke of the child to those who were waiting for the liberation of Jerusalem, it was because she too was eagerly awaiting the Messiah. When Simeon proclaims: 'Now you may let your servant go in peace, O Lord, according to your word, for my eyes have seen your salvation, prepared by you before all peoples: a light to reveal you to the nations and the glory of your people Israel', he clearly states that this child is the Messiah, the reflection of God's glory. With Jesus, it is the Glory of God that enters the Sanctuary; which is tantamount to saying that Jesus is the Glory, that he is God himself. From this moment, the time of the Law is fulfilled. The Angel of the Covenant has entered his temple to spread the Spirit over all mankind of every race and culture. 

P.S. For further study, since we also find this Gospel page on the feast of the Holy Family of Nazareth, I will add a few additional notes.

The expectation of the Messiah was alive in the Jewish people at the time of Jesus' birth, but not everyone spoke of it in the same way, even though the impatience was shared by all. Some spoke of the 'consolation of Israel', like Simeon, others of the 'deliverance of Jerusalem', like the prophetess Anna. Some were waiting for a king, a descendant of David, who would drive out the occupiers, representatives of the Roman power. Others awaited a completely different Messiah: Isaiah had described him at length and called him 'the Servant of God'.

To those who waited for a king, the narratives of the Annunciation and the Nativity showed that Jesus was precisely the one they were waiting for. For example, the angel at the Annunciation had told Mary: 'The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David; he will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and his kingdom will have no end'. Certainly the young girl from Nazareth was surprised, yet the message was clear.  Yet in the account of Jesus' presentation in the Temple, there is no mention of this aspect of the newborn child's personality. And besides, the child who enters the Temple in the arms of his parents was not born in a royal palace, but in a modest family in precarious conditions. Rather, it seems that St Luke invites us to recognise in the child presented in the Temple, the servant announced by Isaiah in chapters 42, 49, 50 and 52-53: 'This is my servant whom I uphold, my chosen one whom I rejoice in (42:1)...The Lord has called me from my mother's womb, from my mother's womb he has spoken my name (I49:1)...Every morning he listens to me, so that I may hear like the disciples; the Lord God has opened my ear' (50:4-5).  Such an expression declares that this servant was very docile to the word of God; and he had received the mission to bring salvation to the whole world. Isaiah said: "I have set you as a covenant for the peoples, as the light of the nations" (42:6)... "I will make you the light of the nations, that you may bring my salvation to the ends of the earth" (49:6). Which shows that already at the time of Isaiah it was understood that God's plan of love and salvation concerns all mankind and not only the people of Israel. Finally, Isaiah did not conceal the terrible fate that awaited this saviour: he would fulfil his mission of salvation for all, but his word, deemed too inconvenient, would arouse persecution and contempt. Let us recall this passage: 'I presented my back to the scourgers, my cheeks to those who plucked their beards' (50:6). Probably under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and thanks to his knowledge of Isaiah's prophecies, Simeon immediately understood that the child was the Servant announced by the prophet. He guessed the painful fate of Jesus, whose inspired word would be rejected by the majority of his contemporaries. He said to Mary: "Behold, he is here for the fall and resurrection of many in Israel and as a sign of contradiction - and to you also a sword will pierce your soul - so that the thoughts of many hearts may be revealed". Simeon understood that the hour of salvation for all mankind had come: "Now you may let your servant go in peace, O Lord, according to your word, for my eyes have seen your salvation, prepared before all peoples: light to reveal you to the nations and glory to your people Israel". Yes, Jesus is the Servant Messiah, described in Isaiah's "Songs of the Servant of the Lord" (42,49,50,52-53) the one who brings salvation: "Through him shall the will of the Lord be done" (53:10).

+Giovanni D'Ercole

I also offer at someone's request a short summary that can be circulated among the faithful. Next Sunday, 2 February 2025, we celebrate the Presentation of the Lord and

let us prepare ourselves by taking a quick look at the word of God that we will hear in Holy Mass

*First Reading From the book of the prophet Malachi (3,1-4) 

We are in the presence of a mysterious prophetic fragment seen by many as a testimony of universalism, freedom and hope. However, it is not easy to understand how to accept this text. The prophet Malachi insists so much on the Temple, the Levites (or priests), the offerings, and everything related to worship because Israel was under Persian rule and the Jewish people were ruled by the priests who were God's representatives to his people. The covenant with the priests was at the service of God's covenant with his people and it is this covenant that is at issue here. Malachi addresses all those who wait, desire, seek and announces to them that they have not waited, sought, desired in vain and their desire, their expectation will be fulfilled because soon the Angel of the Covenant will come, that is, God himself. As Malachi writes: "I will send my messenger to prepare the way before me. Later, Jesus will quote precisely this prophecy referring to John the Baptist. Asking the people who they had gone to see, he will say that John the Baptist is "more than a prophet. He is he of whom it is written: Behold, I send my messenger before you; he shall prepare your way before you" (Mt 11:7-10 and Lk 7:27).  With these words, Jesus identified himself as the Angel of the covenant coming to his temple and we will understand this better by delving into St Luke's Gospel today, feast of the Presentation of the Lord 

*Responsorial Psalm 23/24 (7, 8, 9, 10)

"Lift up, O ye gates, your foreheads, lift up ancient thresholds, and let the King of glory come in". This expression is solemn and somewhat surprising since it is difficult to imagine that the gates would rise. We are in a poetic context and the hyperbole serves to express the majesty of this King of glory who solemnly enters the Temple of Jerusalem. The expression 'king of glory' refers to God himself, the Lord of the universe. We can imagine the crowd and a choir singing: 'Lift up, O gates, your foreheads, lift up ancient thresholds, and let the King of glory enter'. And another choir responds: 'Who is this king of glory? The Lord strong and valiant, the Lord valiant in battle'. This psalm was sung in the ceremonies of the Temple of Jerusalem even long after the Babylonian exile, at a time when there was no longer any procession around the Ark. This is precisely why it acquired greater importance: having definitively lost the Ark of the Covenant, the tangible sign of God's presence, the psalm represented all that remained of the past splendour. It taught the people the necessary detachment: God's presence is not bound to an object, however loaded with memory. Moreover, with the passing of the centuries, this psalm took on a new meaning: "Let the King of glory come in" became the cry of impatience for the coming of the Messiah. Come at last the eternal King who will reign over renewed humanity at the end of time! This was the expectation of Israel, growing from century to century.  No wonder, then, that the Christian liturgy sings Psalm 23/24 on the day it celebrates the Presentation of the Infant Jesus in the Temple of Jerusalem: a way of affirming that this child is the King of glory, that is, God himself.

* Second Reading From the letter to the Hebrews ( 2:14-18)

 The theme of Christ's mediation is fundamental in the Letter to the Hebrews. It is undoubtedly useful to remember that it was written in a context of not a few controversies, and it is precisely from this letter that we can intuit the kind of objections that the first Christians of Jewish origin had to face. They were constantly being told: Your Jesus is not the Messiah; we need a priest, and he is not. It was therefore crucial for a first-century Christian to know that Christ is indeed a priest. Jesus, however, according to Jewish law, was not a priest and could not aspire to be one, much less consider himself a high priest. The Letter to the Hebrews answers: Jesus is not a high priest descended from Aaron, but he is in the likeness of Melchizedek, a character who appears in Genesis chapter 14 and lived long before Moses and Aaron and is related to Abraham. Yet he is called "priest of the Most High God" (cf. Gen 14:18-20). So Jesus is indeed high priest, in his own way, in continuity with the Old Testament. This is precisely the purpose of the Letter to the Hebrews: to show us how Jesus realises the institution of the priesthood, and to realise in biblical language does not mean to reproduce the Old Testament model, but to bring it to its full perfection. Finally a question: Why does this Letter speak of the "sons of Abraham" and not the "sons of Adam"? Indeed, it says. "He cares not for the angels, but for the seed of Abraham". The answer is because Abraham, in biblical meditation, represents faith, understood as trust, and we are left with the freedom not to be children of Abraham, that is, believers. It is up to us to decide whether or not to enter into God's plan.

*From the Gospel according to Luke (2:22 - 40)

In the account of the evangelist Luke a double insistence emerges: first on the Law, then on the Spirit. In the first verses (vv. 22-24), he mentions the Law three times to emphasise that the child's life begins under the sign of the Law. It should be made clear, however, that Luke mentions the Law of Israel not as a series of written commandments and indeed one could replace the word "Law" with "Faith of Israel" and the life of the Family of Nazareth is all imbued with this faith. Luke's first message is this: the salvation of all humanity took shape within the framework of the Law of Israel, of the faith of Israel: in a word, the Word of God became incarnate in this context and thus God's merciful plan for humanity was fulfilled. Then Simeon enters the scene, prompted by the Spirit, also mentioned three times. It is therefore the Spirit who inspires Simeon with the words that reveal the mystery of this child: "My eyes have seen your salvation, prepared by you before all peoples". The Old Testament is the story of this long and patient preparation by God for the salvation of mankind. And it is precisely the salvation of mankind, not just the people of Israel. This is exactly what Simeon points out: 'Light to reveal you to the Gentiles and glory to your people Israel'. The glory of Israel, in fact, lies in having been chosen not for itself, but for all mankind. For Luke, the message is fundamental and he communicates it to us: we already witness the glorious entry of Jesus, Lord and Saviour, into the temple of Jerusalem, as the prophet Malachi had announced. Luke recognises in Jesus the Angel of the Covenant entering his temple. The psalm awaited a Messiah-king descendant of David; we know that the king of glory is this child. Luke describes a majestic scene of glory: the whole long wait of Israel is represented by two characters, Simeon and Anna. "Simeon, a righteous and godly man waited for the consolation of Israel". As for Anna, it can be assumed that if she spoke of the child to those who were waiting for the liberation of Jerusalem, it was because she too was eagerly awaiting the Messiah. When Simeon proclaims: 'Now you may let your servant go in peace, O Lord, according to your word, for my eyes have seen your salvation', he clearly states that this child is the Messiah. With Jesus, the Glory of God enters the Sanctuary; which is equivalent to saying that Jesus is the Glory, God himself entered his temple to spread the Spirit over all mankind.

+Giovanni D'Ercole

3rd Sunday in Ordinary Time (year C) [26 January 2025]

God bless us and may the Virgin protect us! This Sunday, 26 January 2025, marks the 6th Sunday of the Word of God. In St. Peter's Basilica, Pope Francis will preside over it in the context of the Jubilee Year. The chosen motto is taken from the Book of Psalms: "I hope in your Word" (Ps 119:74).

III Sunday in Ordinary Time (year C)

*First Reading from the Book of Nehemiah (8: 2-4a. 5-6. 8-10)

For those of us who begin to complain when liturgies last longer than an hour, we would surely be well served by all standing together from dawn until noon, as one man: men, women and children. And during such a long time to listen to readings in Hebrew, a language that was no longer understood, although the scribe, the reader, would interrupt from time to time to make way for the translator, who would translate the text into Aramaic, a language commonly used in Jerusalem. Those taking part did not seem tired, nor did they find the time too long: on the contrary, they all wept with emotion, sang and continually cheered together with their hands raised: Amen! Ezra, the priest, and Nehemiah, the governor, can be satisfied because they have succeeded in restoring confidence to the people who, after the Babylonian exile, continue to go through a complicated and difficult period. 

We have here a beautiful testimony of the reconstruction of Israel's 'national home' after the Babylonian deportation.  We are in Jerusalem around 450 B.C.: the exile in Babylon was over and after much controversy, the Temple in Jerusalem was finally rebuilt, even if it was not quite like Solomon's, and community life was also resumed. We could say that everything was going well, but it was not, and morale was low because the people seemed to have lost hope, which they had always retained even in the most painful parts of their existence. The truth is that the scars of the previous century's dramas remained because it was not easy to resume life after the invasion and looting of the city. Indeed, the scars remained for generations: scars of the exile itself, but also those of the return to the homeland since everything had been lost with the deportation to Babylon. The long-awaited return was not a triumph, but an occasion for confrontation between those who had remained in Jerusalem and by now had begun a life of their own, even introducing pagan rites, and the 'community of the return' who, after more than fifty years, thought they would find what their ancestors had left behind, something that was impossible and created serious clashes between them.  The miracle is that that period, although terrible, was very fruitful because the faith of Israel survived the test. Not only did this people keep their faith intact during the exile, amidst all the dangers of idolatry, but they remained united and even grew in fervour. This was all thanks to the priests and prophets, who did tireless pastoral work. It was, for example, a period of intense re-reading and meditation of the Scriptures, since one of the main purposes during the fifty years of exile was to direct all hopes towards the return to the promised land. However, the much hoped-for return turned out to be a cold shower because, as experience teaches us, there is almost always a gulf between dream and reality. On closer inspection, the great problem of the return, as we have seen in Isaiah's texts for the Epiphany and the second Sunday of Ordinary Time (last Sunday), was the difficulty of living together between those who had returned from Babylon full of ideals and plans, the so-called "community of return", and those who had meanwhile settled in Jerusalem. Between them there was not a ditch, but a real chasm: some were pagans who had occupied the land and brought idol worship with them, and their concerns were light years removed from the manifold demands of Jewish law. Their priorities were incompatible with the demands of the Torah. The rebuilding of the Temple met with their hostility, and the less fervent members of the Jewish community were often tempted by the prevailing laxity. The authorities were particularly concerned about this religious laxity, which continued to worsen due to the numerous marriages between Jews and pagans, and it became virtually impossible to preserve the purity and demands of the faith under such conditions. It was at this point that Ezra, the priest, and Nehemiah, the secular governor, joined forces and succeeded in obtaining together from the king of Persia, Artaxerxes, a mission to rebuild the city walls and full powers to reorganise these people. It must be remembered that they were still under Persian rule. Ezra and Nehemiah did their utmost to raise the situation and to restore strength and awaken the morale of the people. The Jewish community was all the more in need of cohesion as it was now living in daily contact with paganism and religious indifference. In the history of Israel, the unity of the people has always been built in the name of the Covenant with God, and the pillars of the Covenant remain the same: they are the Land, the Holy City, the Temple and the Word of God. Since they had returned home, the Land was there; Nehemiah, the governor devoted himself to reorganising the Holy City, Jerusalem, and the Temple was rebuilt. That left the Word, which was proclaimed during a gigantic open-air celebration.

It was important to take care of every detail for the staging of the celebration mentioned here: even the date was carefully chosen and an ancient tradition was revived, a great feast on what was then the date of the New Year: 'the first day of the seventh month'. For the occasion, a wooden platform was built overlooking the people and from that high platform the priest and translators proclaimed the Word. The homily then was an invitation to feast: eat, drink, for it is a day of joy, a day of your gathering around the Word of God. It is no longer a time for tears, nor for sadness and emotion. There is a lesson here that may be useful: to strengthen the community, Ezra and Nehemiah do not lecture the people, but propose a feast around the Word of God. To revive the sense of family, there is no better way than to organise and share moments of joyful celebration on a regular basis.

*Responsorial Psalm (18 (19), 8. 9. 10. 15)

We encounter this psalm several times, and we have therefore already had the opportunity to emphasise the importance for Israel of the Law, which is an extremely positive value, just as important is the fear of God, an attitude that is also profoundly positive and filial. There are several passages in the Old Testament in which the Law is presented as a path: if a son of Israel wants to be happy, he must be careful not to deviate either to the right or to the left. Today, to better understand this psalm, I propose to reread the book of Deuteronomy. The book of Deuteronomy is relatively late, written at a time when the southern kingdom of Judah was drifting dangerously away from the practice of the Law. This book therefore resounded as a cry of alarm: If you do not want the same catastrophe to happen to you that has befallen the northern kingdom, you would do well to change your ways. It is thus a reference to all the commandments of Moses and his warnings. Deuteronomy also contains a meditation on the role of the Law whose sole purpose is to educate the people and keep them on the right path. If God cares so much that his people remain on the right path, it is because this is the only way they can live happily and fulfil their calling to be a chosen people among the nations. The king of Jerusalem, Josiah, undertook a profound religious reform around 620 B.C., relying precisely on the book of Deuteronomy. While we would be inclined to see the law as a burden, it is clear in the Bible that it is an instrument of freedom. To help understand this, the image of the eagle teaching its young to fly is interesting in the biblical tradition. Ornithologists who have observed eagles in the Sinai desert tell us that when the young eagles soar, their parents stay nearby and glide above them, tracing wide circles; when the young are tired, they can at any time rest (in the double sense of catching their breath and resting on their parents' wings) and then soar once they have regained their strength. The ultimate goal, of course, is that the little ones soon become capable of fending for themselves. The biblical author took this image to explain that God gives his Law to men to teach them to fly with their own wings. There is no shadow of domination in this, far from it; by freeing his people from slavery in Egypt, the Lord has demonstrated once and for all that his only goal is to free his people. Here is what the book of Deuteronomy says: "The Lord found his people in a desert land, in a heath of lonely howls. He surrounded him, raised him up, guarded him as over the pupil of his eye. Like an eagle that watches over his brood, that flies above his born, he spread his wings" (Deut 32:9-11). A God who wants man to be free! This is the message that is faithfully transmitted from generation to generation: "Tomorrow, when your son asks you: why these prescriptions, these laws and customs that the Lord our God has commanded you?" then you will answer your son: "We were slaves of Pharaoh in Egypt, but with a mighty hand the Lord brought us out of Egypt... The Lord commanded us to practice all these laws and to fear the Lord our God, that we might always be happy and that he might keep us alive as we are today" (Deut 6:20-24). When King Josiah tried to get his people back on the right path, he realised how important it was for him to make known this book, which repeats this message in every way: the shortest way to be a free and happy people is to live according to the commands of the God of Israel. Understand, if your brothers in the north ended up so badly, it is because they forgot this elementary truth (always keep in mind the division between the southern kingdom, the kingdom of Judah, and the northern kingdom, the kingdom of Israel, and how the northern kingdom due to alliances with foreign peoples ended up being occupied and practically destroyed). And now, Josiah reminds us, it is not only the salvation of the southern kingdom that is at stake - which of course was his first concern - but the salvation of all mankind. And how will the chosen people be able to be witnesses of the liberating God before all nations if they do not themselves behave as a free people and instead fall into the constant temptations of humanity: idolatry, social injustice, power struggles?

Throughout history, the biblical authors have gradually become aware of this responsibility that God entrusted to his people by offering them his Covenant: "To the Lord our God belong the hidden things, while those things that are revealed are for us and for our children for ever, that all the words of this Law may be put into practice" (Deut 29:28). This inspires in Israel a great pride that never becomes presumption; if necessary, Deuteronomy calls the people back to humility: "If the Lord has taken a liking to you and chosen you, it is not because you are more numerous than all the other peoples, for you are the least of all" (Deut 7:7); and again: "Recognise that it is not because you are righteous that the Lord your God gives you possession of this good land, for you are a hard-necked people" (Deut 9:6).

Our psalm today takes up this lesson of humility: "The precepts of the Lord are upright, they make the heart rejoice; the commandment of the Lord is clear, it enlightens the eyes" (v.9). "The precepts of the Lord are upright": here is a nice way of saying that only God is wise. There is no need, then, to think oneself wise, but rather to let oneself be guided by him with simplicity. King Josiah would gladly have repeated this admonition to encourage his subjects: 'Yea, this commandment which I command thee today is not too hard for thee, nor beyond thy reach. It is not in heaven, for you to say: Who shall ascend for us into heaven to take it for us, that we may hear it and be able to put it into practice? Nor is it beyond the sea, for you to say: Who will cross the sea for us to take it, that he may make us hear it and we may put it into practice? Yes, the word is very near you: it is in your mouth and in your heart, that you may put it into practice'. The humble, daily practice of the Law can gradually transform an entire people; as the psalm goes on to say: "The command of the Lord is clear, it enlightens the eyes" Deut 30:11).

One last remark: The book of Deuteronomy, which we know today, is later than Josiah; however, the foundations were already well laid in a manuscript found by Josiah's workers during the restoration of the temple in Jerusalem (cf. Second Book of Kings 22:8-13 and Second Book of Chronicles 34:14-19). It is an interesting manuscript probably brought by refugees from the northern kingdom after the fall of Samaria in 721 and was a solid exhortation for true conversion and an invitation to return to the practice of the commandments. Scholars believe it to be part of chapters 12-26 of the book of Deuteronomy.

* Second Reading from the First Epistle of Saint Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians (12:12-30)

St Paul simply and directly states that everyone in the Christian and civil community has a task to perform and a place to occupy while being attentive to one another: we should not despise one another, and indeed we should remember that everyone needs everyone. Paul's lengthy reasoning is evidence of a concrete situation: the community in Corinth faced exactly the same problems as we do today.

To teach his believers a lesson, Paul resorts to a method that works better than any discourse: he gives them an example with a parable that he did not actually invent at all because he uses a fable that everyone knew and adapts it to his objective. This is an allegorical narrative better known as the apologue "the belly and the limbs" by Menenius Agrippa, a Roman consul and diplomat of the 5th century BC. In truth, this narration is already present in Aesop, a storyteller and fable teller of ancient Greece (6th century B.C.) as well as in Phaedrus (a contemporary of Jesus 20 B.C. - 50 A.D.) both of whom were well known at the time of St Paul. This parable is found in the Roman History of Titus Livius and Jean Fontaine (1621-1695) took it up and transformed it into verse in the 9th book of his fables. Like all fables, it begins with: Once upon a time there was a man like all the others... except that, in him, all the limbs talked and argued with each other, but not all of them showed a good character, apparently, probably because some had the impression that they were less considered or somewhat exploited. One day, during a discussion, his feet and hands rebelled against his stomach: why did his stomach, he, only eat and drink what the other limbs gave him and all the pleasure was for him?  It was certainly not the stomach that got tired working, tilling the vineyard, shopping, cutting meat, chewing, and so on. Then they decided all the limbs would simply go on strike and from that moment on, no one would move: the stomach would see what would happen to it. That way, if the stomach died, the satisfaction would belong to those who had stopped working. However, they had forgotten one very simple thing: if the stomach dies of hunger, it will not be the only one to suffer. That body, like all others, was one, and everyone needed everyone!

St Paul thus took from the cultural heritage of his time a parable that was very easy to understand. And, if anyone had not understood it, he took the trouble to explain the meaning of the parable of the body and members himself by illustrating its teaching. For Paul, the moral is clear: our differences are an asset, provided we use them as instruments for unity. One of the salient points of Paul's discourse is that, not for a moment, he speaks in terms of hierarchy or superiority: Jews or Gentiles, slaves or free men since all our human distinctions no longer count. Only one thing matters now: our baptism into the same Spirit, our participation in one body, the body of Christ.

God's perspectives are completely different as Jesus clearly taught his apostles: "Among you it will not be so" (Matthew 20: 25-28).  However, Paul knows that this way of seeing things, of no longer thinking in terms of superiority, hierarchy, advancement or honours, is very difficult and so he insists on the respect that must be given to all: simply because the highest dignity, the only one that counts, is to be all members of the one body of Christ.

Respect, in the etymological sense of the term, is a question of gaze: sometimes, people who seem or seem unimportant to us we do not even see, our gaze does not linger on them. It can happen to all of us to feel ignored in the eyes of someone: their gaze slides over us as if we did not exist. Is that not so? 

In short, Paul offers us a great lesson in respect: respect for diversity, on the one hand, and respect for the dignity of each person, whatever their function or social role. I know it is not easy, but it is necessary to have a less selfish outlook to discover what each of us can bring to the life of our families, our communities and society. There are those who have a thinking mind, those who are researchers, inventors, organisers... There are those who have flair, those who can be patient, those who are clairvoyant, those who have the gift of speech and those who are better at writing, and there are those who suffer from illness or are very poor materially and spiritually, but all can offer something to others. One could go on enumerating the many charisms to be discovered and enhanced: one only needs to direct one's gaze well. If last Sunday, the second Sunday of Ordinary Time, reading the beginning of chapter 12 of the first letter to the Corinthians, seemed to be a hymn to diversity, today's development is a call to unity through respect for differences.

*From the Gospel according to Luke (1:1-4;4:14-21)

In the Sundays of ordinary time of liturgical year C, the evangelist Luke accompanies us, and we have already been able to meditate on his account of the birth and childhood of Jesus at Christmas time. We know very little about how the gospels were written and, in particular, about their dates of composition. However, from today's gospels we can deduce a few things. There was certainly oral preaching before the gospels were put into writing, for Luke tells Theophilus that he wanted to allow him to verify 'the soundness of the teachings he had received'. Luke also acknowledges that he was not an eyewitness to the events; he could only inform himself through eyewitnesses, which implies that they were still alive when he wrote. We can therefore assume that preaching about Christ's resurrection began already from Pentecost and that Luke's gospel was written later, but before the death of the last eyewitnesses, thus setting a cut-off date around 80-90 AD.

What we read today is placed after the baptism of Jesus and the account of his temptations in the desert. Apparently, everything seemed to be going well for Jesus who began his mission publicly after the death of John the Baptist. The evangelist writes: "Jesus returned to Galilee with the power of the Spirit and his fame spread throughout the region. He taught in the synagogues of the Jews, and they gave him praise". That Saturday morning Jesus, as a good Jew returning from a journey, went to worship in the synagogue. It is not surprising that he was given a reading, since every believer had the right to read the Scriptures. The celebration in the synagogue proceeded normally, until Jesus read the text of the day, which was a famous passage from the prophet Isaiah. In the great silence that followed the reading, Jesus quietly affirmed something extraordinary: "Today this Scripture that you have heard has been fulfilled". A few minutes of awkward silence followed, the time needed to interpret the meaning of his words. Indeed, those present expected Jesus to make a comment, as was customary, but not one that would surprise everyone. It is difficult for us today to imagine the audacity of that calm statement by Jesus, but for his contemporaries, that venerable text from the prophet Isaiah referred to the Messiah. Only the Messiah-King, when he would come, could have afforded to affirm: "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me; therefore he has anointed me..." From the beginning of the monarchy, in fact, the rite of consecration of kings included an anointing with oil. This gesture was a sign that God himself was permanently inspiring the king to enable him to fulfil his mission of saving the people. It was then said that the king was 'mashiach', which in Hebrew simply means 'anointed' and which in Italian is translated as Messiah while in Greek as Christos and in Latin as Christus.

At the time of Jesus, there were no more kings on the throne of Jerusalem, but it was expected that God would finally send the ideal king, who would bring freedom, justice and peace to his people. In particular, in Roman-occupied Palestine, the one who would deliver the people from Roman occupation was awaited. Clearly, Jesus of Nazareth, the carpenter's son, could not claim to be that expected Messiah-King. How could they recognise the Messiah they were waiting for in Jesus the humble carpenter in the land of Galilee? Yet he was indeed the Messiah. It must be acknowledged that Jesus did not cease to surprise his contemporaries.  St Luke emphasises, introducing this passage, that Jesus was accompanied by the power of the Spirit, an essential characteristic of the Messiah. But this is Luke's affirmation, the Christian; the people of Nazareth, on the other hand, did not know that, really, the Spirit of the Lord rested on Jesus. There is also this observation about the Gospel passage we have just heard. Jesus quotes the prophet Isaiah and attributes the quotation to himself, he makes it his own as a true programmatic discourse: 'The Spirit of the Lord is upon me... He has sent me to bring glad tidings to the poor, to proclaim release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim a year of favour from the Lord. Of Isaiah's prophecy (61:1-2) he does not read and indeed skips the last part of verse 2 altogether, which says: "...and a day of vengeance for our God." This is a significant omission because he focuses on the proclamation of grace and deliverance, leaving aside the idea of vengeance, and his entire ministry is centred on mercy, salvation and God's love, rather than immediate judgement or punishment. This omission of Isaiah's last sentence and the application of the passage to himself upset his listeners for several reasons. First, the people of Nazareth expected a Messiah who would deliver Israel from its oppressors, especially the Romans, and bring justice and vengeance against the enemies of the Jewish people. The omission of the 'day of vengeance of our God' seemed to dismiss the idea of a political and executioner Messiah. By proclaiming a message of universal grace and salvation, Jesus was challenging their nationalistic expectations. Regarding his declaration that Isaiah's prophecy is fulfilled in him, many of those present considered it scandalous and presumptuous because they knew him as the "carpenter's son" (Luke 4:22) who lived among them, and could not reconcile his humble origin with the idea of an envoy of God. Moreover, Jesus, when later mentioning the episodes of Elijah and Elisha (Luke 4:25-27), went on to emphasise the fact that God often intervened for the good of pagans such as the widow of Sarepta in Sidon or Naaman the Syrian, and this showed that God's salvation and grace were not exclusively for Israel, but also for pagans. Proclaiming this universalism, however, offended the national and religious pride of its listeners. Finally, many Jews of the time hoped for immediate judgement against Israel's enemies. The fact that Jesus only emphasised the time of grace without mentioning vengeance could be perceived as a denial of divine justice against the wicked, and this offended those who desired a swift and final deliverance. The combination of so many elements gives insight into the violent reaction of his fellow citizens who attempted to drive him out of the synagogue and even to kill him by throwing him off a cliff (Luke 4:28-30). Finally, the rejection of Jesus by his countrymen becomes a symbol of the wider rejection that he will encounter in his ministry.

An informative note. During the first Sundays of Ordinary Time in the liturgical cycles A, B, C, the liturgy makes us reread the First Letter of St Paul to the Corinthians. It is a semi-continuous reading, beginning on the first Sunday of Ordinary Time and ending on the Sunday before Ash Wednesday.

Year A. The readings focus mainly on the first four chapters of the letter.

Main theme: the unity of the Church and the centrality of Christ.

*Sunday I: 1Cor 1:1-3 - Initial greeting and call to holiness.

*Sunday II: 1Cor 1:10-13.17 - Exhortation to unity in the Christian community.

*Sunday III: 1Cor 1:26-31 - The wisdom of God versus human wisdom.

*Sunday IV: 1Cor 2,1-5 - Preaching based on the power of the Spirit.

Year B. The readings continue in chapters 6-9 of the letter. Main theme: moral life and personal and community responsibilities.

*Sunday II: 1Cor 6:13c-15a.17-20 - The body as temple of the Holy Spirit.

*Sunday III: 1Cor 7,29-31 - The urgency of living for the Kingdom of God.

*Sunday IV: 1Cor 8,1b-7.10-13 - The responsibility towards weaker brothers and sisters in faith.

*Sunday V: 1Cor 9,16-19.22-23 - St Paul as an apostle who does everything for everyone.

Year C The readings focus on chapters 12-15 of the letter. Main theme: charisms, Christian love and the resurrection.

*Sunday II: 1Cor 12:4-11 - Diversity of charisms, one Spirit.

*Sunday III: 1Cor 12:12-30 - The Church as the body of Christ.

*Sunday IV: 1Cor 13:4-13 - The hymn to charity.

*Sunday V: 1Cor 15,12. 16- 20 - The resurrection of the dead as the foundation of faith.

Each liturgical year uses a different section of the letter to reflect on the different needs and themes of the Christian life. Key themes such as unity, charity, moral life and hope in the resurrection are highlighted. This semi-continuous scheme allows the faithful to progressively deepen their understanding of the Apostle Paul's teaching.

+Giovanni D’Ercole

God bless us and may the Virgin protect us! 

2nd Sunday in Ordinary Time (Year C) [19 January 2025].

*First Reading from the book of the prophet Isaiah (62,1-5)

How much tenderness God shows to the people of Israel who could truly feel abandoned, especially in the context of their return from exile! In fact, although they returned from Babylon in 538 B.C., the Temple was not rebuilt until 521, and a sense of abandonment crept in during this waiting period. To counter this despair, Isaiah, inspired by God, writes this splendid text to proclaim that God has not forgotten his people nor his beloved city. And soon all will know! "Yes, as a young man marries a virgin, so shall your children marry you; as the bridegroom rejoices over the bride, so shall your God rejoice over you". The prophet Isaiah certainly does not lack audacity! Twice in these few verses, loving desire appears as an expression of God's feelings towards his people. Divine love emerges in these courageous expressions: "They will no longer call you 'forsaken', nor will your land be called 'ravaged', but they will call you 'my desired' (literally: my desire is in you), and your land will be called 'married i.e. my bride', for the Lord finds in you his delight (rather his desire for love) and your land will have a bridegroom." Here is a real declaration of love! Not even a bridegroom would say more to his beloved: you shall be my bride... You shall be as beautiful as a crown, as a golden diadem in my hands... you shall be my delight. How can we not be struck by the beauty of the vocabulary and the poetry that transpires from this text? We find in it the parallelism of phrases, so characteristic of the Psalms: 'For Zion's sake I will not be silent, / for Jerusalem's sake I will not rest... You shall be a shining crown in the hand of the Lord / a royal diadem in the fingers of your God... You shall be called 'My Favourite', and your land shall be called 'Married'. For the Lord has chosen you,/ and your land shall have a bridegroom'.

This text could be called God's 'love poem' and the prophet Isaiah exercised prophetic ministry between 740 BC and 701 BC during the reign of various kings of Judah including Ozias, Jotham, Ahaz, Hezekiah at a time of great political changes and threats mainly due to the expansion of the 'empire of the Assyrians. Isaiah was the first to have the audacity to use such language. Although God loves mankind with such great love, this was true from the beginning, yet mankind was not ready to understand him. The revelation of God as bridegroom, as well as that of God-the-Father, was only possible after several centuries of biblical history. At the beginning of the Covenant between God and his people, this notion would have been ambiguous. Other peoples too easily conceived their gods in the image of men and their family affairs. Rather, at an early stage of revelation, it was necessary to discover the One God who was totally Other than man and to accept his Covenant. It was therefore the prophet Hosea, the first to compare the people of Israel to a bride. He defined as "adulteries" the infidelities of the people, that is, their relapses into idolatry. After him, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, the Second Isaiah and the Third Isaiah (author of the text we are reading today) developed the theme of the wedding between God and his people; in their writings we find the whole vocabulary of the nuptial: the affectionate names, the wedding garment, the bride's crown, fidelity, but also jealousy, adultery.

Here are a few examples: Hosea writes: "You shall call me 'my husband'... I will make you my bride forever... in righteousness and in law, in faithfulness and in tenderness" (2:18.21). In the second Isaiah we read: 'Your bridegroom is the one who created you... Can you reject the woman of your youth? In my eternal fidelity I show you my tenderness." (Is 54:5...8). The most impressive text on this theme is surely the Song of Songs: it is presented as a long love dialogue, composed of seven poems. Actually, at no point are the two lovers identified, but Jewish tradition interprets it as a parable of God's love for humanity. The proof is that this text is proclaimed during the celebration of Passover, the great feast of God's covenant with his people and, through them, with all humanity. In today's passage, one of the bridegroom's favourite pastimes seems to be giving new names to his beloved. You know how important naming is in human relationships: what I cannot or do not know how to name does not exist for me.  Naming someone means already knowing them; and when the relationship with a person deepens, it is not uncommon to feel the need to give them a nickname. In couple or family life, diminutives and nicknames play an important role. Even the Bible reflects this fundamental experience of human life; the name has enormous importance, because it reveals the mystery of the person, his or her profound essence, vocation and mission. The meaning of the name of the main characters is often explained: for instance, the angel announces that Jesus' name means 'God saves', indicating that this child will save humanity in the name of God. Sometimes God changes someone's name when he entrusts him with a new mission: Abram becomes Abraham, Sarai becomes Sarah, Jacob becomes Israel and Simon becomes Peter. In today's text, therefore, it is God who gives new names to Jerusalem: from "forsaken" it becomes "my joy", from "ravaged land" it becomes "married". 

*Responsorial Psalm (from Ps 95/96, 1-2a, 2b-3. 7-8a, 9a-10)

This psalm invites us to contemplate the glory of God: his salvation, his wonders, his power. 'Sing to the Lord a new song... sing to the Lord, bless his name'". There is nothing surprising about this: in Israel, in fact, it is a constant habit to recall God's work throughout the centuries to deliver his people from all that hinders their happiness. From day to day Israel proclaims its salvation... from day to day Israel remembers God's works, his wonders, that is, his ceaseless work of deliverance... from day to day Israel testifies that God has delivered it first from Egypt and then from all forms of slavery. And the most terrible of all slaveries is to mistake who God is, to put one's trust in false values, in false gods that can only disappoint, in idols. Israel has the immense privilege, the extraordinary honour, the joy of knowing and proclaiming that "the Lord is our God, the Lord is One" (as stated in the Jewish profession of faith, the Shema Israel). And faith in Him is man's only way to happiness. This is the message Israel conveys to the world: "Say among the nations: The Lord reigns!" 

Let us take up the expression: "Say among the nations". In biblical language, the nations or the Gentiles indicate all peoples other than Israel, the so-called goyîm, i.e. the rest of humanity, the uncircumcised, as St Paul says. In the biblical texts, the term goyîm takes on different, sometimes even contradictory meanings. Sometimes it has a decidedly negative meaning: for example, the book of Deuteronomy speaks of the "abominations of the Gentiles" and this condemnation refers to their polytheism, their religious practices in general and, in particular, human sacrifices. The chosen people must remain faithful to God without compromise, discovering the true face of the one God. For this reason, in the first phase of revelation, it is necessary to avoid any contact with the nations or peoples, perceived as a risk of idolatrous contagion. The history of Israel shows how real this risk was several times! Moreover, in the mentality of the time, where deities were seen as allies in conflicts, it was inconceivable to imagine a God who sided with all peoples at once. In this psalm, however, note that the term 'peoples' is no longer negative: the 'peoples' are all those who do not belong to the people of Israel, but who are nevertheless recipients of God's salvation, just like the chosen people. This psalm, therefore, was composed relatively late, probably after the exile in Babylon, when Israel was beginning to realise that the one God is the God of the whole universe and of all mankind, and that his salvation is not reserved for Israel.

"Announce ... to all peoples tell of his wonders". To arrive at this understanding, God led the chosen people through a long and patient pedagogical journey. Israel gradually opened its heart, accepting that its God was also the God of all people, committed to seeking the happiness of all, not just its own. The chosen people has understood that it is the elder brother, not the only son: its vocation is to pave the way for other peoples in the long march of humanity towards God. And the day will come when all peoples, without exception, will recognise God as the one God. Then, all mankind will place its trust in Him alone. The psalm expresses this universal hope: "Give to the Lord, O families of the peoples, give to the Lord glory and power, give to the Lord the glory of his name". 

The last verses of the psalm, which we do not read this Sunday, offer a kind of anticipation of the end of time because the day will come when all creation will celebrate the glory of God: "Let heaven rejoice! Let the earth rejoice! Let the waves of the sea quiver, / let the fields be rejoicing, and the trees of the forest dance for joy before the Lord". On that day we shall see even the trees dance! The present, however, is not easy. One must persevere in faith and testify to one's faith before the peoples/ nations, and the fight against idolatry, against false gods, is never completely won. How timely is this psalm! 

*Second Reading from the First Letter of St Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians (1Cor 12:4-1)

This letter to the Corinthians is twenty centuries old but surprisingly relevant today. How to remain a Christian in a world that has completely different values? How to discern, among the ideas circulating, those that are compatible with the Christian faith? How to coexist with non-Christians without failing in charity, but also without losing our identity? The world around us talks about sex and money... How can we evangelise it? These were the questions of the Christians of Corinth, newly converted in a predominantly pagan world. They are in truth the same questions we ask ourselves today, we Christians in a society that no longer emphasises the values of the gospel, and Paul's answers concern us all. He addresses divisions in the community, the problems of married life especially when spouses do not share the same faith, as well as the urgency of remaining steadfast in the face of the proliferation of new ideas and emerging new religious cults. Within each of these topics, Paul puts things in their proper place. However, as always, when dealing with concrete topics, Paul reminds us first of all where to lay the foundation, namely in Baptism. John the Baptist had already well predicted this when he spoke of the Baptism inaugurated by Christ by which we are immersed in the fire of the Spirit (Matt 3:11), and it is the Spirit who now acts in us according to our differences. Paul reiterates it: 'all these things the one and the same Spirit works, distributing them to each one as he wills'.  In Corinth, as in the rest of the Hellenistic world, people idolised intelligence and aspired to wisdom often through philosophy. To those who sought to attain wisdom through rigorous reasoning, Paul replies that true wisdom, which is the only knowledge that counts, is not attained through discourse, but is a gift of God given through the Spirit. There is therefore no reason to boast about it: everything is a gift. The word 'gift' (or the verb 'to give') appears no less than seven times in this text! Although such a concept exists in the Bible, Paul however takes up what Israel had already understood - namely that only God knows and reveals true wisdom - and his novelty consists in speaking of the Spirit as a Person. He thus totally detaches himself from the philosophical speculations of the time: he does not propose a new school of philosophy, but announces Someone, and the gifts distributed to the members of the Christian community are not about power or knowledge, but a new inner existence. In this passage, where the name of the Spirit recurs seven times, although addressed to the Corinthians, he does not speak of them, but exclusively of the Spirit at work in the Christian community, who with patience and constancy orients everyone towards the Father (he inspires us to say 'Abba' - Father) and towards our brothers. Paul makes it clear that everyone is given a particular manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. The Corinthians, attracted by extraordinary spiritual phenomena, are thus brought back to the essential: the goal is the good of all, because the Spirit is Love in person. There are diversities of charisms, but only one is the Spirit; there are diversities of ministries, but only one is the Lord; there are diversities of operations, but only one is God, who works all things in all. And so our diversity makes us capable, each in our own way, of manifesting the one Love of God. One of the lessons of this text of Paul is to learn to rejoice in the differences that represent the many facets of what Love enables us to achieve, while respecting the uniqueness of each one. So consider the variety of races, languages, gifts, arts, inventions... such diversity is the richness of the Church and the world, provided it is lived in love. God wants humanity to be like an orchestra: one and the same inspiration, different and complementary expressions, different instruments that create a symphony as long as they all play in the same key; otherwise, you have a cacophony! The symphony Paul speaks of is the song of love that the Church is called upon to intone to the world. We could call it a 'hymn to love', just as there is the hymn to joy or the hymn to life by famous musicians. Complementarity in the Church is therefore not a matter of roles or functions to structure it with a well-defined organisation chart. It is something much more important and sublime: the mission entrusted to the Church to reveal Love. How timely is this text from St Paul in this week of prayer for Christian unity!

*From the Gospel according to John (Jn 2:1-11)

St John uses a different language from the other evangelists and one must learn to discover that important things are often said between the lines. For him, this first "sign" (as he calls it) of Jesus at Cana is of enormous relevance: it alone evokes the great mystery of God's plan for humanity, the mystery of the new creation, the mystery of the Covenant and Wedding between God and his people. The Prologue, that is, the beginning of the first chapter of his gospel, is a great meditation on this mystery, and the account of the miracle at Cana is basically the same meditation expressed, however, in the form of a narrative. These two texts, placed at the beginning of the gospel and reread in symmetrical contemplation, help us to introduce ourselves to the understanding of all that will follow. We shall therefore try to read the Wedding at Cana narrative with the Prologue in mind and in our hearts. These two texts "embrace" the "inaugural week" of Jesus' public life. A week that begins with John the Baptist on the banks of the Jordan being questioned by the Pharisees about his mission while already announcing the coming of Jesus. The next day, he sees him approaching and recognises him as "the Son of God, the one who baptises in the Holy Spirit" (Jn 1:33-34). The next day (note John's precision that seems to recall the first chapter of Genesis where the sacred author each time notes: "it was evening and it was morning"), two other disciples of John the Baptist leave his group to follow Jesus, who invites them to spend the evening with him. The following day, Jesus leaves for Galilee with some disciples. In Galilee, three days later, the miracle of Cana takes place and the evangelist begins the account by saying: "On the third day there was a wedding feast in Cana of Galilee. If we count the days from the beginning we have arrived at the "seventh day" and the reference to a week or a "seventh day" cannot be accidental because the "seventh day" always recalls the fulfilment of creation. "This was the beginning of the signs performed by Jesus": we are at the end of the passage and John notes that it was the beginning; also in the Prologue he states: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. Everything was made through him and without him nothing was made of what exists'. We are here in the context of the seven days of creation, while in the wedding feast of Cana the hour of the wedding between God and humanity is noted, showing that this event takes place on the seventh day of the new creation. At Cana Jesus does not merely multiply the wine, but creates it. Just as at the beginning of all things, the Word, facing God, had created the world, now he inaugurates a new creation. And it is a wedding! The parallelism then continues: on the sixth day of Creation, God had completed his work by creating the human couple in his image; on the seventh day of the new creation, Jesus participates in a wedding feast and is a way of saying that God's creative project is ultimately a covenant project, a wedding project. (Most probably the first reading - Isaiah 62, which speaks of Israel as the "joy of God" and of God as the bridegroom of his people - was placed precisely in relation to this Gospel page).  The Church Fathers saw in the miracle of Cana the fulfilment of the divine promise: here God's wedding with humanity begins.  But what does the term 'the hour' mean?  For John it is a symbolic term of crucial value because it refers to the Hour in which God's plan is fulfilled in Christ. When Jesus says to Mary: "Woman, what do you want of me? My hour has not yet come' he is thinking of his greatest mission: to bring about the wedding between God and humanity. The phrase (Woman, what do you want of me?) is surprising and has generated much discussion. In Greek, the phrase means "What is between you and me?", i.e. "you cannot understand". Here Jesus is confronted with the mystery of his mission: should he perform a miracle, create wine, and thus reveal his divine nature? In this scene one might catch an echo of the temptations in the synoptic Gospels: in the desert, Jesus had refused to turn stones into bread, because that would have been a miracle for himself. At Cana, however, he creates wine for the joy of others. The Son of God performs miracles only for the good of humanity. Then there is the reference to the "third day" which is certainly not accidental. It refers to the resurrection and links Cana to Easter. It is there, in the death and resurrection of Christ, that the Covenant will be definitively sealed. When John says: "And he manifested his glory", he alludes to the definitive glory of the Resurrection. In this perspective, Cana becomes the first visible sign of Christ's glory, a prelude to the full glory of the Risen One. 

A few final notes on a text that would merit much longer reflection

1 - "On the third day": by itself, this precision is certainly a message; again, it is not a simple anecdotal entry to fill a diary, but a theological meditation: the memory of the disciples is forever marked by a certain third day, that of the Resurrection. It thus refers us to the other end, so to speak, of Jesus' public life: to the Passion, Death and Resurrection of Christ. It is a way for John to tell us that there, and only there, God's Covenant with humanity will be definitively sealed and his wedding with humanity will be celebrated. Moreover, the last phrase, "He manifested his glory", is also an allusion to the Resurrection. In the Prologue John said: "The Word became flesh and dwelt among us and we have seen his glory"... . It was precisely at Cana that the disciples first saw the glory of Jesus, in anticipation of the final manifestation of the glory of God in the face of the Christ, dead and risen.

2. The evangelist John specifies that Cana is in Galilee, which broadens the perspective considerably: Galilee, traditionally, is considered the land of the pagans, a crossroads of peoples; Isaiah called it "the land of the shadow, the Galilee of the Gentiles". God therefore marries the whole of humanity, not just a privileged few.

3. "Woman, what do you want of me?"  Let us not try to minimise the obvious vividness of this reaction of the Son towards his mother. In Hebrew, this phrase generally expresses a difference of opinion, sometimes even hostility (Jdc 11:12; Mk 1:24; 2 Sam 16:10; 2 Sam 19:23); however, let us recognise that these are extreme cases. Jesus' reflection might be more like that of the widow of Sarepta towards Elijah at the time of her son's death (1 Kings 17:18): she considers the prophet's presence as an inappropriate intervention. Nevertheless, the difficulty remains: does Jesus, meek and humble of heart, lack respect for his mother? Indeed, perhaps there is here an implicit admission of a genuine inner conflict on the part of the Son concerning his mission. He who did not allow himself to perform miracles for his own benefit (such as turning stones into bread) should here turn water into wine? Here we touch upon the depths of Christ's mystery, a mystery that he himself gradually discovered: being fully human, he had to grow little by little, like each of us, in the understanding of his mission.

4. The water jars at Cana are made of stone, and John intentionally emphasises this: the earthenware jugs were used for drinking water, while the stone jars were intended for water for ritual ablutions. It is precisely this water, symbol of the covenant, that was transformed into the wedding wine.

5. The disciples will only discover the miracle later, because the only ones who are really aware of the fact, as St John points out, are the servants (verse 9): they knew it, so to speak, "in their flesh", because it was they who drew the water, who carried it, and all this in blind obedience, without perhaps understanding what the water would be used for. Of course, it should not surprise us too much that the poor, in this case the last - the servants - are the first to be aware of God's plan!

+Giovanni D’Ercole