Serving oneself and "the audience"

(Lk 11:42-46)

The conflict between Jesus and the religious authorities takes on violent features.

Ideological or devout choice can be lost in the formalism of those who endlessly discuss minutiae and forget the goals of inner commitment, in favor of a sort of circus show (v.43).

When the notables disdain service and choose honors, the simple passing by them causes to contract the same impurity of the soul: average and normal life, internal corruption.

In short, the Divine Law has been so burdened as to make devout practice suffocating, worried about quibbles.

For those who can bear the procedures, then, perfection in outward things can nourish pride even in interhuman relationships. And the Grace that enriches will no longer dictate the conduct.

The willingness to build up the Church in Christ requires us to be authentic and simple, not dehumanized; a sign of the Covenant, not hateful.

There is a counter-witness that stifles the growth of life and crushes the freedom of those who are animated by Spirit of God.

Among other things, leaders and “jurists” willingly leave their privacy outside the provisions they impose on others (v.46).

In short, the care for details is good and propulsive (v.42) only if it joins the intimate discovery of one’s Mission and Call, character that promotes growth and our future.

While Mt 23:27 speaks of whitewashed tombs, Lk speaks of hidden sepulchers, which are not seen (v.44).

Simple, naïve, pure people who approach it, do not realize that they are insisting on dead idols.

In the Semitic mentality, touching or trampling on a tomb meant contracting impurities.

Jesus means that we must be very careful of these dangerous people, who seize and plagiarize souls, turning them away from God in the name of God.

Manipulative guides, who distract from the sense of the Good News in our favor, inoculating a mentality that annihilates growth.

At all times the recitation of disembodied, schematic, off-scale or confusing and empty holiness retains deviant appearances.

But the proponents of the soul’s death are immediately recognized: they are those who insist on sophisticated worldviews, on abstract ideas; on the trifles of habits, or disciplinary appearances - and forget the goals of the Kingdom.

The topic is crucial:

«We want to be a Church that serves, that leaves home and goes forth from its places of worship, goes forth from its sacristies, in order to accompany life, to sustain hope, to be the sign of unity […] to build bridges, to break down walls, to sow seeds of reconciliation» (FT n.276).

Resolutive work, obtained in a laborious, «craftsmanship» way (n.217).

As with fashions, attention to the too great or to the unincarnated modes brings people closer to skeletons.

Let us therefore help ourselves to bring the Word back inside, so that it becomes our active face, without duplicity, with broad hope, separated from the present scene and from any narcissistic workshop.

[Wednesday 28th wk. in O.T.  October 15, 2025]

Serving oneself and "the public”

(Lk 11:42-46)

The conflict between Jesus and the religious authorities takes on violent overtones, as the poltronists get hung up on the details and neglect the essentials.

In particular, the experts disdain the experience of Communion - which is indeed a project, but on the contrary a life insurance [with power and privileges].

According to the young Rabbi, the religious choice itself can be burdensome and intolerable.

Unfortunately, the devout option is not infrequently lost in the formalism of those who endlessly discuss petty precepts and forget the goals of inner commitment, in favour of a sort of circus show (v.43).

Indeed, there is no shortage of official notables who disdain service and choose honours, so that simply passing by them causes them to contract the same impurity of soul: average and normal life, internal corruption.

In short, the divine Law has been so burdened as to make sacred practice all artificial, asphyxiating, out of scale or preoccupied with minutiae.

For those who can stand the rigmarole, then, perfection in external things can feed pride even in inter-human relations.

The ancient spiritual fathers used to say that pride is a thief, because in the case of good deeds, self-love steals gratuitousness and feeds arrogance. Thus the Grace that enriches us no longer dictates our conduct.

Our readiness to build the Church in Christ demands that we be authentic and simple, not dehumanised; a sign of the Covenant, not hateful.

There is a counter-witness that stifles the growth of life and curtails the freedom of those who are animated by the Spirit of God: that of the popular leaders [Pharisees] and the hard-line jurists [scribes].

Not for nothing do they willingly leave privacy out of the arrangements they impose on others (v.46).

The experience of Love is 'law', not for the sake of a body, a pack, a group of interests, but for a rich conviviality of differences.

This is the 'norm', the 'canon' - if you like - but not to construct the impersonal good of the pressure group, and to be protected by it.

Although it would guarantee prestige in society - even ecclesial - it would become a sprawling, intrusive imposition.

The abstract, overly cerebral, ideological or fanciful gaze, and bigoted mummies, make the environment arid, dissipate energy, and make the experience of faith vacuous.

They insist on fulfilments, models, designs and penances, or conversely dissipations that drive love away, and discourage attempts to read oneself and dispositions from within.

Perhaps in every religion, observances - or 'big ideas' - have created that 'ancient' hypnotism of habitual mechanisms and enveloping atmospheres that make God a reassuring totem, a sacraliser of established positions.

He is a corrosive, punishing worm of passion, ruining people and the destiny of the whole people.

It is a matter, then, of running the utmost risk united with Christ - not to give in to the always lurking temptation to feel better: in favour of a long inner adventure; to touch those spaces where the Call by Name resembles no other.

It is in the intimate and in the candid relationship that we encounter our profound Calling, the unexpressed talents, the divine Author's signature.

In the uniqueness of character, from the Core, the Seed that does not lie guides the vocation; the Risen One who is present reveals himself to be understanding, gentle, attentive, absolutely genuine, personal.

Attention to details and trifles is only good and propulsive (v.42) if it is united with the intimate discovery of one's own singular Mission and Calling, a character that promotes growth, and our future.

Here the call to values that do not grow old, substantial - attentive to situations - does not imply contempt and disregard for what may seem secondary (but is unrepeatable): recognising the concrete woman and man.

Otherwise, the motive for our actions would remain the concern for our own fictitious fame. This would render petty and discredited the experience of Faith that activates us to explore, to make Exodus.

When the Law does not evolve within us and with us, in our inwardness and personality without measure, it will find a way to impose itself, torment us and slow down our experience of life, or contaminate and devastate it.

While Mt 23:27 speaks of whitewashed tombs, Lk speaks of hidden tombs, which cannot be seen (v.44).

The simple, naive, pure people who approach it do not realise that they are insisting on dead idols.

Even false teachers codify everything, and would like to normalise even belief and its expressions.

In the Semitic mentality, touching or treading on a tomb meant contracting impurity.

Jesus means that one must be very very careful of these very dangerous people.

Even in the primitive Christian communities, they gherminated and plagued souls, leading them away from God in the name of God.Manipulative guides, they diverted people away from the sense of the Good News in our favour, inoculating drop by drop a mentality that annihilated growth.

The recitation of disembodied, confusing, narrow and empty holiness (folklore and undergrowth) still retains deviant appearances.

But the proponents of the death of the soul are immediately recognisable: they are the ones who insist on sophisticated worldviews, on abstract ideas; on the quirks of idle pleasures, or of disciplinary appearances - and forget the objectives of the Kingdom.

The issue is crucial.

As Pope Francis reiterated in the encyclical Fratelli Tutti, quoting one of his homilies (in Santiago de Cuba):

"We want to be a Church that serves, that leaves home, that leaves its temples, its sacristies, to accompany life, to sustain hope, to be a sign of unity [...] to build bridges, to break down walls, to sow reconciliation" (no.276).

Decisive work, achieved in a laborious and "artisanal" manner (no.217).

Even among his own people today, the Risen One does not mince his words, and he speaks out decisively against certain insuppressible diseases - abstract [too big] worldviews or attention to the unimportant - that bring people closer to the skeletons.

The living Christ strikes out in invective at the formalism of doctrines and outward practices, which delude themselves into extracting and chiselling lofty earthly situations, obsessively attending only to themselves.

The only thing that Jesus condemns without appeal here is the vain ambition in the exercise of pretended authority - by pomp - considering it a narcissistic workshop (by washed-up histrions).

Let us therefore help ourselves to bring the Word back inside, so that it becomes our factual face, without duplicity, with a broad hope, separated from the present scene.

To internalise and live the message:

Have you renounced the law of death, of manner and quiddity, preferring the law of life?

Or do you serve yourself and 'the public'?

“Beware of practising your piety before men in order to be seen by them” (Mt 6:1). In today’s Gospel Jesus reinterprets the three fundamental pious practices prescribed by Mosaic law. Almsgiving, prayer and fasting characterize the Jew who observes the law. In the course of time these prescriptions were corroded by the rust of external formalism or even transformed into a sign of superiority. 

In these three practices Jesus highlights a common temptation. Doing a good deed almost instinctively gives rise to the desire to be esteemed and admired for the good action, in other words to gain a reward. And on the one hand this closes us in on ourselves and on the other, it brings us out of ourselves because we live oriented to what others think of us or admire in us. 

In proposing these prescriptions anew the Lord Jesus does not ask for formal respect of a law that is alien to the human being, imposed by a severe legislator as a heavy burden, but invites us to rediscover these three pious practices by living them more deeply, not out of self-love but out of love of God, as a means on the journey of conversion to him. Alms-giving, prayer and fasting: these are the path of the divine pedagogy that accompanies us not only in Lent, towards the encounter with the Risen Lord; a course to take without ostentation, in the certainty that the heavenly Father can read and also see into our heart in secret.

[Pope Benedict, Ash Wednesday homily 9 March 2011]

2. The present-day mentality, more perhaps than that of people in the past, seems opposed to a God of mercy, and in fact tends to exclude from life and to remove from the human heart the very idea of mercy.

15. Let us offer up our petitions, directed by the faith, by the hope, and by the charity which Christ has planted in our hearts. This attitude is likewise love of God, whom modern man has sometimes separated far from himself, made extraneous to himself, proclaiming in various ways that God is "superfluous." This is, therefore, love of God, the insulting rejection of whom by modern man we feel profoundly, and we are ready to cry out with Christ on the cross: "Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do."137 At the same time it is love of people, of all men and women without any exception or division: without difference of race, culture, language, or world outlook, without distinction between friends and enemies. This is love for people-it desires every true good for each individual and for every human community, every family, every nation, every social group, for young people, adults, parents, the elderly-a love for everyone, without exception. This is love, or rather an anxious solicitude to ensure for each individual every true good and to remove and drive away every sort of evil.

[Pope John Paul II, Dives in Misericordia]

When it is said of someone that they are a person with a double life, it is not to pay them a compliment. On the contrary. It is those people who irritate, cause outrage, or often even cause disgust with behaviour that contradicts the things that they are paying lip service to. Whether it is a politician or a neighbour makes little difference: discovering, so to speak, a 'double life', is something that always hurts. And let us not mention the disillusionment it can generate, especially in young people.

But if preaching well and braying badly is always an irritating thing, when it is a priest doing it, it is even more intolerable. Because there is something more at stake. Pope Francis said it very clearly, and as always in a very direct and effective style, a few days ago. When, in the homily of the morning Mass at Santa Marta, he stressed how "it is ugly to see pastors of double life", indeed it is a real "wound in the Church". For the Pope, they are "sick pastors, who have lost their authority and go on in this double life"; and, he added, "there are many ways of carrying on the double life: but it is double ... And Jesus is very strong with them. Not only does he tell people not to listen to them but not to do what they do, but what does he say to them? "You are whited sepulchres": beautiful in doctrine, from the outside. But inside, rottenness. This is the end of the pastor who has no closeness with God in prayer and with people in compassion'.

For it is this that makes the difference. Francis reiterates it firmly: 'What gives a pastor authority, or awakens the authority that is given by the Father, is closeness: closeness to God in prayer and closeness to people. The pastor detached from the people does not reach the people with the message. Closeness, this double closeness. This is the anointing of the pastor who is moved by God's gift in prayer, and can be moved by people's sins, problems, illnesses: let the pastor be moved. The scribes ... had lost the 'ability' to be moved precisely because 'they were not close either to the people or to God'". And without this closeness, or when for whatever reason it is lost, 'the shepherd ends up in inconsistency of life'.

It seems like re-reading the words that John Paul II, in his Holy Thursday letter addressed to priests around the world in 1986, dedicated to the Holy Curate of Ars, pointing to him, on the second centenary of his birth, as an example for all priests. 'It is certainly not a matter of forgetting,' wrote Benedict XVI, again on St John Mary Vianney, in his letter of indiction for the 2009 Year for Priests, 'that the substantial effectiveness of the ministry remains independent of the holiness of the minister; but neither can we overlook the extraordinary fruitfulness generated by the encounter between the objective holiness of the ministry and the subjective holiness of the minister. The Curé d'Ars immediately began this humble and patient work of harmonisation between his life as a minister and the holiness of the ministry entrusted to him, deciding even to 'inhabit' his parish church materially: 'As soon as he arrived, he chose the church as his dwelling... He would enter the church before dawn and only leave it after the evening Angelus. There one had to look for him when one needed him,' reads the first biography'. Consistency, then. Not duplicity. Because God's people need everything except whitewashed sepulchres.

[Pope Francis, St. Martha; Salvatore Mazza in Avvenire 13 January 2018]

27th Sunday in Ordinary Time (year C)  [5 October 2025]

May God bless us and may the Virgin protect us. Paul's recommendations to Timothy are also very useful for us. And the word of the Gospel opens our hearts to humble trust in the fulfilment of our mission.

*First Reading from the Book of the Prophet Habakkuk (1:2-3; 2:2-4) 

The prophet Habakkuk is not very popular today, but he certainly was at the time of the New Testament, since he is quoted several times. For example, the Virgin Mary's phrase in the Magnificat: "I rejoice in the Lord, I exult in God my saviour" was already found, centuries earlier, in the book of Habakkuk (Hab 3:18); it is also from him that St Paul drew and quoted several times a phrase that is part of our reading today: "The righteous shall live by his faith" (Rom 1:17; Gal 3:11). This little book is really a booklet, only three chapters, each with about twenty verses, but what a wealth of feelings! From lamentation to violence, from invocation for help to pure exultation. His cries of anguish bring to mind Job: "How long, O Lord, shall I cry for help, and you will not hear? I will cry out to you, 'Violence!' and you will not save?" (Hab 1:2). Yet hope never abandons him: when St Peter invites his readers to be patient, he repeats an expression inspired by Habakkuk: "The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise..." (2 Pt 3:9). The first verses resemble the book of Job: "How long, Lord, shall I cry for help, and you will not hear? I will cry out to you, 'Violence!' and you will not save?" It is a plea in the face of rampant violence, but above all it is a cry of extreme anguish, that of God's silence. Here, as in the book of Job and in many psalms, the Bible dares to say things in which man seems to call God to account: 'How long, O Lord, shall I cry for help, and thou wilt not hear? I will cry out to you, 'Violence!' and you will not save?" The violence Habakkuk speaks of is that of Babylon, the new emerging power in the Middle East. Since the beginning of time, the same atrocities of war have been repeated, as we can clearly see even today. Yet Habakkuk does not lose his faith. In another verse, he states: 'I will stand at my watch, I will station myself on the ramparts, and I will keep watch to see what the Lord will say to me' (Hab 2:1). There are at least two things in this expression: first of all, it is the watchman's expectation, certain that dawn will come; it is the same theme as in Psalm 129/130: 'My soul waits for the Lord more than watchmen wait for the dawn." The second is the awareness that his questioning is somewhat bold: the prophet has asked God for an explanation and expects to be rebuked. Instead, God's response does not bring any condemnation; he only invites him to patience and trust: the days of the enemy's victory will not last forever (cf. Hab 2:2-3). In today's text, Habakkuk does not describe the content of the vision, which will be the subject of the following chapter, but we can already guess that it concerns the liberation of the oppressed. However, one fact remains: God has not really answered the question; he has not said why he sometimes seems deaf to our prayers. He has only reaffirmed that he never abandons us. Habakkuk's message seems to be this: in trials, even the most terrible ones, the only possible path for the believer is to keep faith in God: to accept not understanding, but not to accuse God. Any other position is destructive because distrust of God brings only pain. This is probably the meaning of the final formula: 'The righteous shall live by his faith' (Hab 2:4), or, in other words, it is trust in God that keeps us alive, otherwise suspicion and rebellion wear us down. On the contrary, it is legitimate to cry out in pain: if the Bible has us read cries of anguish and even reproaches directed at God in the book of Job and in the Psalms, it is because believers have the right to cry out in suffering, in impatience in the face of the violence that crushes them. Let us return to the final sentence: 'Behold, the unrighteous man shall perish, but the righteous shall live by his faith' (Habakkuk 2:4). The proud one is Babylon, which boasts of its conquests and thinks it can build lasting prosperity on them; the righteous one, on the other hand, knows that only God gives life. The most famous example in the history of Israel is Abraham: when he left his land and his family to respond to God's call, he did not know where he would be led. When, still obeying God, he prepared to offer his only son, he did not understand, but he continued to trust the One who had given him his son. And once again, his faith gave life to him and his son (Gen 22). Scripture says of him: 'Abraham believed the Lord, and he credited it to him as righteousness' (Gen 15:6).

*Responsorial Psalm (94/95:1-2, 6-7ab, 7d-8a, 9)

We are in the temple in Jerusalem, pilgrims are crowding the steps of the temple for a great celebration: "Come, let us sing to the Lord, let us acclaim the rock of our salvation". The rock of our salvation: this expression alone is a profession of faith. Israel has chosen to rely on God and God alone, as in the early days of the Covenant. The Bible often compares the history of the people of Israel to an engagement with their God. After the initial enthusiasm and promises, doubts and infidelities arose. God, however, always remained faithful, and after every storm and every infidelity, Israel always returned to Him, like a repentant bride grateful for the ever-renewed Covenant: Let us go to Him with thanksgiving. The Hebrew word here is tôdah: it indicates a specific moment in the worship of the Covenant, the sacrifice of tôdah, which expresses gratitude, thanksgiving, praise, repentance, and the desire to love... In modern Hebrew, thanks is still said tôdah. An English term that would sum up this psalm well is gratitude: recognising God, knowing who He is, knowing who we are, and then gratitude overwhelms us.First and foremost, recognising God: our Creator but, even more so, our liberator. It seems simple to trust in this God who guides and protects us, this God who freed us from slavery in Egypt. It is simple, as long as there are no problems. But when trials come, doubts arise. Yet it is precisely in trials that our trust is tested, and this is where the question of trust arises. In the Bible, listening means trusting; listening to his voice is also the opposite of hardening one's heart. In fact, the psalm continues: 'Today, if you hear his voice! Do not harden your hearts as at Meribah, as on the day of Massah in the desert, where your fathers tempted me, testing me even though they had seen my works'. Massa and Meriba mean, precisely, temptation and provocation. The episode of Massa and Meriba has remained famous in the memory of Israel as a symbol of the temptation to suspect God as soon as the first difficulty arises. The people began to regret slavery because their newly won freedom seemed very uncomfortable. In Egypt they were slaves, of course, but at least they survived... in the desert, the people were thirsty and a revolt broke out. The text says that the people murmured, but the term is probably stronger than in our English today, because Moses exclaims to God: "A little more and they will stone me!" (Ex 17:4). God intervenes, and water gushes from the rock (here the image returns: God, my rock). How much better it would have been to trust! In suffering, as we saw in Habakkuk in the first reading, we can cry out, beg, call on God, but never doubt Him. Massa and Meriba remain the names of that suspicion that can always resurface in our hearts.

*Second Reading from the Second Letter of Saint Paul to Timothy (1:6-8, 13-14)

When Paul writes his second letter to Timothy, he is in prison in Rome, shortly before his execution; he himself says that he is chained like a criminal and asks Timothy not to be ashamed of him, as others have been. He knows very well that he does not have much time left and feels very alone. This second letter to Timothy is therefore a kind of testament: Timothy will have to take his place and Paul gives him recommendations in this regard. It should be noted that, for reasons of style, vocabulary and even content, it is generally thought that the letters to Timothy were not written by Paul, but by one of his disciples after his death. It is not possible to settle this difficult question and, in order to be faithful to the teaching of these letters, we must not get lost in endless discussions. For the sake of convenience, we will therefore continue to refer to Paul and Timothy. After all, whether it is Paul and Timothy or their future disciples is of little importance to us now: what matters is the content of these letters, which contain Paul's recommendations to a young Christian leader, and therefore concern us closely. The first recommendation is perhaps the most important: "Revive the free gift of God"; this gift of God, if we read the rest of the text, is clearly the Holy Spirit. And, visibly, Timothy will really need it! Paul, chained for the Gospel, knows this all too well. Timothy received this gift of the Spirit through the laying on of hands: the words 'confirmation' and 'ordination' did not yet exist, but we know that, from the beginning of the Church, the gesture of laying on of hands signified the gift of the Spirit. 'Stir up the gift of God within you' means that God's gifts can therefore lie dormant within us. Elsewhere Paul says: "Do not quench the Spirit" (cf. 1 Thess 5:19). Here too, we can hear a message that encourages us to carry the fire of the Spirit within us, and even if it seems that we have covered it with ashes, it is still within us, burning under the ashes, since nothing can extinguish it. This Spirit is not a spirit of fear, but a spirit of power, love and self-control. Here we find a theme dear to Paul: that of the transmission of faith. Paul passed on this precious treasure to Timothy, who in turn must pass it on, and so on: Hold fast to the pattern of sound words which you have heard from me, in the faith and love that are in Christ Jesus. Guard the good deposit with the help of the Holy Spirit who dwells in us. Elsewhere, in his first letter to the Corinthians, Paul wrote: 'I have passed on to you what I myself have received' (cf. 15:3-4). This brings to mind a relay race, in which the runners pass on a baton that remains the same from the beginning to the end of the race, while the deposit of faith is inevitably expressed in different terms over the centuries. Faith, in fact, is not a neatly packaged, untouchable object. The problem, however, is knowing whether the transmission is truly faithful. Many controversies over the centuries have arisen from differences among Christians about the content of the deposit of faith. But in reality, we are not the ultimate guarantors of this fidelity: it is the Holy Spirit who is the supreme guardian of the deposit of faith. In order to faithfully pass on the torch to subsequent generations, we need only to rekindle in ourselves the gift of God, the fire of the Spirit that nothing can extinguish.

*From the Gospel according to Luke (17:5-10)

 Here we find several verses that follow one another and are not similar. It almost seems as if there are two parts to this text: in the first, a dialogue between Jesus and his apostles about faith, with Jesus' somewhat terrible formula: 'If you had faith as small as a mustard seed, you would say to this tree, "Be uprooted and planted in the sea," and it would obey you'. In the second part, there is a kind of parable about the servant, which also ends with a very strong statement by Jesus: 'When you have done all that you were commanded, say, "We are unworthy servants. We have done what we ought to have done." Jesus is certainly not trying to discourage us; on the other hand, if these verses are so close together, without any interruption, it means that there is a connection between them. Here we have a dialogue between Christ and his apostles, that is, his envoys, which means that this phrase of Jesus concerns the activity of evangelisation. The envoys say to the one who sends them: Increase our faith! This is a prayer that is also very often ours when we become aware of our weakness, our powerlessness, and it seems to us that if we were richer in faith we would be more effective. But how can we reconcile this with Paul's words: "If I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing" (1 Cor 13:2)? In his language, Jesus replies that it is not a question of measuring our faith: that is not the problem. Rather, it is a question of relying on God's power, because it is He who acts, not our faith, however small or great it may be. Jesus deliberately emphasises the paradox: the mustard seed was considered the smallest of all seeds, and the large tree he speaks of (in Greek, sycamore) was considered impossible to uproot. Jesus' statement therefore means: You don't need to have a lot of faith: a tiny mustard seed is enough to do seemingly impossible things. It could then be translated as follows: When you act in the name of the Gospel, remember that nothing is impossible for God. Then there is the expression 'useless servants' archreioi (17:10), which we can translate as follows: you are simply servants who are not even indispensable, called to serve in a task that is beyond you. And - I would say - fortunately so, because who would feel strong enough to bear the responsibility of the Kingdom of God? These words of Jesus, therefore, are not harsh or discouraging, but on the contrary, they are meant to encourage us: if we are only subordinates, the responsibility does not fall on us, but that does not make us useless: if the servant were truly useless, no master would keep him. If God takes us as servants, it is because he wants to need us. If Jesus chose the apostles and said that 'the harvest is plentiful but the labourers are few' (Mt 9:37-38), and if his words continue to resonate two thousand years later, it is because he wants our collaboration. We are what we are, and God associates us with his work of salvation. Jesus says: "When you have done all that you were commanded, say, 'We are unworthy servants. We have done what we ought to have done'" (17:10). In doing so, he suggests two attitudes: first, he invites us once again to abandon the logic of merits and rewards, but above all, he invites us to remain serene in the exercise of our mission. He is the master of the harvest, not us. Then we can better understand the connection between the two parts of this text: the message is the same: a little faith, however small, is enough for God to perform miracles. On condition, however, that we faithfully place ourselves at his service.

+ Giovanni D'Ercole

26th Sunday in Ordinary Time (year C)  [28 September 2025]

May God bless us and may the Virgin protect us. We continue our teaching on wealth and our relationship with the poor, a subject that is particularly relevant for our reflection in the face of the injustices, both large and small, that we see in the news every day.

First Reading from the Book of the Prophet Amos (6:1a, 4-7)

In the Bible, Amos is the first 'writing' prophet, that is, the first of whom a book remains. Other great prophets before him remained very famous: Elijah, for example, or Elisha, or Nathan... but we do not have their written sermons, only memories handed down by those around them. Amos preached around 780-750 BC and certainly had to say things that not everyone liked, since he was eventually expelled after being denounced to the king.  Originally from the south, he preached in the north during a period of great economic prosperity. Last week we read one of his texts in which he rebuked some rich people for building their wealth at the expense of the poor. Today's passage gives us an idea of the luxury that reigned in Samaria: 'Lying on beds of ivory... they eat lambs from the flock and calves from the stall... they sing to the sound of the harp like David and anoint themselves with the finest ointments, but they do not worry about Joseph's ruin'. The rulers do not know or do not want to know that a terrible threat hangs over them: 'they do not care about the ruin of Joseph'. They will then be deported, indeed they will be the first to be deported, and the band of revellers will no longer exist. This prophet of doom, who sought to warn the powerful and the ruling class, was not listened to; on the contrary, he was silenced by getting rid of him. But what he feared came true. Amos therefore addresses the rich and powerful, those in charge. What exactly does he reproach them for? The first sentence gives us the key: 'Woe to those who feel secure on the mountain of Samaria'. In other words: you are comfortable, satisfied with your well-being and even your luxury... well, I pity you because you have understood nothing: you are like people who hide under the covers so as not to see the cyclone coming, and this whole society will collapse, crushed a few years later by the Assyrians, with many dead and the survivors deported. Woe to those who feel secure on the mountain of Samaria'... But what are they doing wrong? The wrong is to base their security on what is passing: some ephemeral military success, economic prosperity and the appearances of piety... so as not to displease God and his prophet. They even boast of their successes, believing they deserve some credit, when everything comes from God. Now, Israel's only security is fidelity to the Covenant. This is the great insistence of all the prophets, as Micah will do a few years later when he preaches in Jerusalem. Hypocrisy reigned in Samaria: when they offer sacrifices, they turn the banquet that follows into a revelry... because the meals that Amos describes are probably sacred meals, like those that followed certain sacrifices. Sacrilegious meals, therefore, that have nothing to do with the Covenant. The difficulty of this passage lies in its conciseness: in fact, to understand it, one must have in mind the whole of prophetic preaching; Amos' logic, like that of all the prophets, is as follows: the happiness of individuals and peoples inevitably depends on fidelity to the Covenant with God; and fidelity to the Covenant means social justice and trust in God, and if one departs from these two points, one is lost. This is what Amos is talking about, and we need only reread last Sunday's text, in which he rebuked the rich for enriching themselves on the backs of the poor. In today's text, the luxury banquets described obviously do not benefit everyone, and the need for God is no longer felt. Isaiah will also say: 'This people honours me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me' (Is 29:13). Samaria was covered with luxurious palaces, built by some at the expense of others; once they had become rich, thanks to flourishing trade, it was easy to expropriate small landowners, reducing some of the poorest to slavery, as in last Sunday's text. Archaeology also provides interesting details on this point: while in the tenth century the houses were all of the same model and represented identical standards of living, in the eighth century, on the contrary, there was a clear distinction between rich and poor neighbourhoods.

*Responsorial Psalm (145/146, 6c.7, 8.9a, 9bc-10)

This splendid litany is only part of Psalm 145/146, and today's liturgy does not include the Alleluias that frame it in the Hebrew text, as it is an Alleluia psalm. This means that, as last Sunday, we are faced with a psalm of praise. Speaking in this psalm are the oppressed, the hungry, the blind, the bent over, the strangers, the widows, and the orphans who recognise God's concern for them. In reality, it is the people of Israel who speak of themselves: it is their own history that they recount and give thanks for God's protection, having experienced all these situations: oppression in Egypt, from which God freed them with a mighty hand and outstretched arm, and oppression in Babylon, where once again God intervened. They experienced hunger in the desert, and God sent manna and quails. God opens the eyes of these blind people, revealing himself progressively through his prophets. It is these broken people that God tirelessly lifts up and makes stand; they are the people seeking justice that God guides. It is therefore a song of gratitude: The Lord brings justice to the oppressed, gives bread to the hungry, frees prisoners, opens the eyes of the blind, lifts up those who have fallen, loves the righteous, protects the stranger and supports the widow and the orphan. The Lord, who returns in a liturgical manner, is the translation of the Name of God in four letters, the Tetragrammaton: YHVH, which speaks of his active and liberating presence. The verse preceding today's verses sums them all up: 'Blessed is he who has the God of Jacob for his help, whose hope is in the Lord (YHVH) his God': the secret of happiness is to rely on God and expect everything from Him. This psalm is chosen for this Sunday as a response to the text of Amos, who warned the people of Samaria to know well in whom to place their trust, fleeing false securities because only God is trustworthy. Recognising our dependence on God and living it with complete trust, because He is total benevolence: this is the definition of faith and the secret of happiness, as the prophets preach.  We must not forget the unique experience that the children of Israel had the privilege of enjoying: throughout their journey to freedom, they experienced the presence of the One they recognised as the Lord who led them in their search for freedom and justice for all, indeed for greater justice, respect and defence of the small and the weak. If we look more closely, we see that the law of Israel has no other goal: to make Israel a free people, respectful of the freedom of others. God leads his people on this long journey of liberation. It is good for us to reread this psalm not only to recognise what God does for his people, but also to give us a course of action: if God has acted in this way towards Israel, we, who are heirs to this long journey of Covenant, are in turn obliged to do the same for others.

*Second Reading from the First Letter of Saint Paul the Apostle to Timothy (6:11-16)

One could not imagine a more complete summary of everything that constitutes the faith and life of a Christian. At the same time, Paul's solemn formulas are surprising: 'Before God and... Christ Jesus, I charge you'. At first reading, one seems to perceive echoes of difficulties in the community of Ephesus, where Timothy had responsibilities: 'Fight the good fight of faith'. A little earlier in the same letter, Paul had already spoken of the fight for the faith in the first chapter (1 Tim 1:18-19). There is therefore a battle to be fought in order to affirm one's faith. The moment is serious, which explains the solemn tone: the fidelity of the young Christian community to its baptism is at stake. The passage we read today is framed by two very similar texts that further clarify the two dangers to be avoided: false doctrines and the pursuit of riches. We must believe that there were real problems with false doctrines: Timothy, guard the deposit, avoid ungodly chatter and pseudo-scientific objections. Because they professed it (meaning this pseudo-science), some strayed from the faith (cf. 1 Tim 6:20-21). And in the same vein, a few verses earlier: If anyone teaches a different doctrine, if he does not adhere to the words of the Lord Jesus Christ and to the doctrine in accordance with godliness, he is blinded by pride. He is ignorant, sick, seeking controversy and verbal disputes (1 Tim 6:3-4). This problem had already appeared at the beginning of the letter, and Paul had recommended that Timothy remain in Ephesus (cf. 1 Tim 1:3-4). He then insists with the same force on the risk of seeking riches because the root of all evil is the love of money (cf. 1 Tim 6:10). These, then, are the two worst dangers to the faith in Paul's eyes, and he invites Timothy to remain faithful to his baptism. In Paul's time, baptisms were administered in front of the entire community, and in the baptismal rite itself, the profession of faith was a very important moment because the 'yes' of our baptism is rooted in Christ's 'yes' to the Father, and we must be able to repeat this 'yes' day after day. Timothy will need all his strength, which is why Paul multiplies his recommendations that he persevere in fighting for the faith in order to obtain eternal life. The weapons of combat are faith, love, perseverance and gentleness, which is the main weapon. True combat has nothing to do with religious wars, and history shows that religious wars have never converted anyone. The goal on which we must always keep our eyes fixed is eternal life, which is also the manifestation ('epiphany') of Christ. Paul concludes with a kind of profession of faith, which is precisely what Timothy must continue to affirm against all adversity: 'God is the blessed and only Sovereign, the King of kings and Lord of lords, the only one who possesses immortality and dwells in unapproachable light, whom no man has ever seen or can see'. God is the All-Other, a theme we find in the Old Testament: it is the transcendence of God, the All-Other who nevertheless draws close to us and, at the appointed time, will reveal the Lord Jesus Christ.

From the Gospel according to Luke (16:19-31)

The last sentence is doubly terrible: "If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be persuaded even if someone rises from the dead."  This statement seems desperate, as if nothing can change a heart of stone, and it is even more terrible coming from the mouth of Jesus. When Luke wrote the Gospel, he knew full well that Christ's Resurrection had not converted everyone; on the contrary, it had hardened the hearts of some even more. Let us move on to the story of the rich man and poor Lazarus: we do not know much about the rich man, not even his name; it is not said that he is evil; on the contrary, later he will think of saving his brothers from misfortune in the afterlife. However, he lives in his own world, so immersed in his comfort, like the Samaritans mentioned by Amos in the first reading, that he does not even see the beggar dying of hunger at his door who would be content with his leftovers. The poor man's name is Lazarus, which means 'God helps', and this already says a lot: God helps him, not because he is virtuous, but simply because he is poor. This is perhaps the first surprise that Jesus has in store for his listeners: this story was a well-known tale from Egypt, about two characters, a rich man full of sins and a poor man full of virtues: when they arrive in the afterlife, they are weighed on the scales, and the good and bad deeds of both the rich and the poor are evaluated. The good, both rich and poor, were rewarded, while the bad, rich or poor, were punished. Even the rabbis before Jesus told similar stories: the rich man was the son of a sinful tax collector, while the poor man was a very devout man; they too were weighed on the scales and the merits of each were carefully evaluated, with the devout man proving to be more deserving than the tax collector's son. Jesus upsets this logic somewhat: he does not calculate merits and good deeds because it is not said that Lazarus is virtuous and the rich man evil, but simply notes that the rich man remained rich all his life, while the poor man remained poor at his door: this signifies the abyss of indifference that was created between rich and poor, simply because the rich man never opened his door. Another important detail in Jesus' story: it is not entirely true that we know nothing about the rich man, because he tells us how he was dressed: in purple and linen, a clear allusion to the clothes of priests. The colour purple, originally the colour of royal clothing, had become the colour of the high priests because they served the king of the world; linen was the fabric of the high priest's tunic. Jesus means that you can be the High Priest, but if you despise your brothers, you do not deserve the title of children of Abraham. In fact, Abraham is mentioned seven times and is certainly a key to the text. Jesus' question is: "Who is truly a son of Abraham?" and he answers that if you do not listen to the Law and the Prophets, if you are indifferent to the suffering of your brothers, you are not a son of Abraham. And he goes further: the poor man would have liked to eat the rich man's crumbs, but it was the dogs that licked his sores. Dogs were unclean animals... so even if the pious rich man had taken the trouble to open the door, he would still have been scandalised and would have fled from that unclean man licked by dogs... Jesus' lesson is therefore: You worry about merits, you try to remain pure, you are proud to be descendants of Abraham... but you forget the essential... No extraordinary signs are needed to convert: the Law with the Prophets is enough, and for us the Gospel is enough: but we must live them!

+ Giovanni D'Ercole