Whoever believes will have eternal life (cf. Jn 3: 36). In faith, in this "transformation" that repentance brings, in this conversion, in this new way of living, we arrive at life, at real life.

At this point two other texts come to mind. In the "priestly prayer" the Lord says: this is life, knowing you and your Anointed? (cf. Jn 17: 3). Understanding the essential, knowing the decisive Person, knowing God and the One whom he has sent is life life and understanding the understanding of the realities that constitute life. And the other text is the response of the Lord to the Sadducees regarding the Resurrection, when, using the Books of Moses, the Lord proves the Resurrection as a fact, by saying: God is the God of Abraham, of Isaac, of Jacob (cf. Mt 22: 31-32; Mk 12: 26-27; Lk 20: 37-38). God is not a God of the dead. If God is the God of these, then they live. Whoever is inscribed in God's name participates in God's life, and lives. Therefore to believe is to be inscribed in the name of God. Thus we are alive. Whoever has a share in God's name is not dead but rather belongs to the living God. In this sense we should be able to understand the dynamism of faith, which entails enrolling our names in the name of God and in this way entering into life.

Let us pray the Lord that this may come about and that today, with our own lives, we may truly come to know God, so that our name enter into God's name and our existence become true life: eternal life, love and truth.

[Pope Benedict, homily of 15 April 2010]

1. We resume today, after a rather long pause, the meditations which we have been holding for some time and which we have called reflections on the theology of the body.

In continuing, it is worthwhile, this time, to refer to the words of the Gospel, in which Christ refers to the resurrection: words that have a fundamental importance for understanding marriage in the Christian sense and also "the renunciation" of married life "for the sake of the kingdom of heaven".

The complex casuistry of the Old Testament in the field of marriage not only prompted the Pharisees to come to Christ to put to him the problem of the indissolubility of marriage (cf. Mt 19:3-9 ; Mk 10:2-12 ), but also, another time, the Sadducees, to question him on the law of the so-called Levirate (this law, contained in Deut 25:7-10 , concerns brothers living under the same roof. If one of them died without leaving children, the brother of the deceased was to take the widow of the dead brother as his wife. The child born of this marriage was recognised as the son of the deceased, so that his lineage would not be extinguished and the inheritance would be preserved in the family [cf. Deut 3:9-4:12 ]). This conversation is reported in agreement in the Synoptics (cf. Mt 22:24-30 ; Mk 12:18-27 ; Lk 20:27-40 ). Although all three redactions are almost identical, nevertheless some slight but, at the same time, significant differences are noticeable between them. Since the colloquy is referred to in three versions, those of Matthew, Mark and Luke, a more in-depth analysis is required, as it includes contents that are of essential significance for the theology of the body.

Next to the other two important conversations, namely: the one in which Christ refers to the "beginning" (cf. Mt 19:3-9 ; Mk 10:2-12 ), and the other in which he refers to the intimacy of man (to the "heart"), pointing to the desire and concupiscence of the flesh as the source of sin (cf. Mt 5:27-32 ), the colloquy, which we now propose to analyse, constitutes, I would say, the third component of the triptych of Christ's own utterances: a triptych of essential and constitutive words for the theology of the body. In this colloquy Jesus refers to the resurrection, thus revealing a completely new dimension of the mystery of man.

2. The revelation of this dimension of the body, stupendous in its content - and yet connected with the Gospel reread as a whole and to the core - emerges in the colloquy with the Sadducees, "who affirm that there is no resurrection" (1); they came to Christ to present him with an argument that - in their opinion - validates the reasonableness of their position. This argument was meant to contradict the "resurrection hypothesis". The reasoning of the Sadducees is as follows: "Master, Moses left us written that if the brother of one dies and leaves his wife childless, the brother shall take his wife to give offspring to his brother" ( Mk 12:19 ). The Sadducees refer here to the so-called law of Levirate (cf. Deut 25:5-10), and referring to the prescription of this ancient law, they present the following "case": "There were seven brothers: the first took a wife and died without leaving any offspring; then the second took her, but died without leaving any offspring; and the third likewise, and none of the seven left any offspring. Finally, after all died also the woman. In the resurrection, when they rise again, to which of them will the woman belong? For seven had her as a wife" ( Mk 12:20-23 ). The Sadducees, addressing Jesus on a purely theoretical "case", attack at the same time the primitive conception of the Pharisees on life after the resurrection of bodies; in fact they insinuate that belief in the resurrection of bodies leads to the admission of polyandry, which is contrary to the law of God).

3. Christ's answer is one of the key-answers of the Gospel, in which another dimension of the question is revealed - precisely from and in contrast to purely human reasoning - namely that which corresponds to the wisdom and power of God himself. Similarly, for example, the case of the tribute coin with the image of Caesar and the correct relationship between what in the sphere of power is divine and what is human ("Caesar's") (cf. Mt 22:15-22 ). This time Jesus replies as follows: "Are you not in error, since you do not know the Scriptures, nor the power of God? For when they rise from the dead, they will not take wives or husbands, but will be as angels in heaven" ( Mk 12:24-25 ). This is the basic answer to the 'case', that is, to the problem enclosed within it. Christ, knowing the conceptions of the Sadducees, and intuiting their authentic intentions, later takes up the problem of the possibility of the resurrection, denied by the Sadducees themselves: "Concerning the dead who must rise, have you not read in the book of Moses, concerning the bush, how God spoke to him, saying: I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and Jacob? He is not a God of the dead, but of the living" ( Mk 12:26-27 ). As we can see, Christ quotes the same Moses to whom the Sadducees referred, and ends by stating: "You are in great error" ( Mk 12:27 ).

4. This concluding statement Christ also repeats it a second time. In fact, he first pronounced it at the beginning of his exposition. He then said: "You deceive yourselves, knowing neither the Scriptures nor the power of God": so we read in Matthew ( Mt 22,29 ). And in Mark: "Are ye not in error, since ye know not the scriptures, nor the power of God?" ( Mk 12,24 ). On the other hand, Christ's own reply, in Luke's version ( Lk 20,27-36 ), is devoid of polemical accent, of that "you are in great error". On the other hand, he proclaims the same thing insofar as he introduces some elements into his answer that are not found in either Matthew or Mark. Here is the text: "Jesus replies: the children of this world take a wife and take a husband; but those who are judged worthy of the other world and of the resurrection from the dead, take neither wife nor husband: neither can they die any more, for they are equal to the angels, and being children of the resurrection, they are children of God" ( Lk 20,34-36 ). Concerning the very possibility of the resurrection, Luke - like the two other synoptics - refers to Moses, that is, to the passage in the Book of Exodus 3:2-6, where it is narrated that the great legislator of the Old Covenant heard from the bush, which "burned in the fire and was not consumed", the following words: "I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, the God of Jacob" ( Ex 3:6 ). In the same place, when Moses had asked the name of God, he had heard the answer: "I am he who is" ( Ex 3:14 ).

Thus then, speaking of the future resurrection of bodies, Christ refers to the very power of the living God.

[Pope John Paul II, General Audience 11 November 1981]

The Gospel (cf. Lk 20:27-38) presents Jesus confronted by several Sadducees, who did not believe in the resurrection and considered the relationship with God only in the dimension of earthly life. Therefore, in order to place the resurrection under ridicule and to create difficulty for Jesus, they submit a paradoxical and absurd case: that of a woman who’d had seven husbands, all brothers, who died one after the other. Thus came the malicious question posed to Jesus: in the resurrection, whose wife will the woman be (v. 33)?

Jesus does not fall into the snare and emphasizes the truth of the resurrection, explaining that life after death will be different from that on earth. He makes his interlocutors understand that it is not possible to apply the categories of this world to the realities that transcend and surpass what we see in this life. He says, in fact: “The sons of this age marry and are given in marriage; but those who are accounted worthy to attain to that age and to the resurrection from the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage” (vv. 34-35). With these words, Jesus means to explain that in this world we live a provisional reality, which ends; conversely, in the afterlife, after the resurrection, we will no longer have death as the horizon and will experience all things, even human bonds, in the dimension of God, in a transfigured way. Even marriage, a sign and instrument of God in this world, will shine brightly, transformed in the full light of the glorious communion of saints in Paradise.

The “sons of heaven and of the resurrection” are not a few privileged ones, but are all men and all women, because the salvation that Jesus brings is for each one of us. And the life of the risen shall be equal to that of angels (cf. v. 36), meaning wholly immersed in the light of God, completely devoted to his praise, in an eternity filled with joy and peace. But pay heed! Resurrection is not only the fact of rising after death, but is a new genre of life which we already experience now; it is the victory over nothing that we can already anticipate. Resurrection is the foundation of the faith and of Christian hope. Were there no reference to Paradise and to eternal life, Christianity would be reduced to ethics, to a philosophy of life. Instead, the message of Christian faith comes from heaven, it is revealed by God and goes beyond this world. Belief in resurrection is essential in order that our every act of Christian love not be ephemeral and an end in itself, but may become a seed destined to blossom in the garden of God, and to produce the fruit of eternal life.

May the Virgin Mary, Queen of Heaven and Earth, confirm us in the hope of resurrection and help us to make fruitful in good works her Son’s word sown in our hearts.

[Pope Francis, Angelus 6 November 2016]

What Uniqueness characterizes it?

(Mk 12:13-17)

After the expulsion of the salesmen and the accusation of thievery hurled at the leaders, as well as the parable of the murderous vinedressers (also referring to the élite), here is another clash between Jesus and the religious and political bosses.

Jesus [present in his intimates] systematically dismantles the traps set up by the authorities and the experts.

With tested double-dealing, they approach Him trying to stroke his self-love [v.14a: situations that also often occur to critical witnesses].

The interest of the clever clashes, however, with the focus of Christ on the real good of people and respect for the intelligence of things - not to eagerness for approval or opportunism.

Right in the Temple (Mk 11:27) - the eminent Abode of the one Lord God - these gendarmes provoke the new Rabbi about paying taxes to the Romans (12:14b).

We know what was at stake: the accusation of not being a prophet according to divine right, or [vice versa] that of collaborationism with the occupiers.

The Master does not allow himself to be fooled by the ostentation of closeness to the God of Israel - which is false because it is externally sought - and He plays them all off easily.

In the Temple of Jerusalem, it was forbidden to carry Roman coins, which depicted imperial profiles and insignia contrary to the Commandment 'Thou shalt not make unto thee any image'.

He asked for them, however, because He did not actually have any.

But the paladin saints themselves hand Him one.... The scene borders on the ridiculous.

Drawing the forbidden coin from the pouch concealed under the cloak, the very chiefs reveal their true god: self-interest, well concealed under devout and ostentatious manners, which only act as a smokescreen.

Christ invites us not to allow ourselves to be flattered by the exhibitionist duplicity of the “signs”: what is important is not to deceive people by using pious forms as theatrical masquerades [v.15 Greek text].

The à la page or purity fanatics live only the epidermic angle; and they rely on it: they not infrequently hide well the very material passions they disdain.

It does not work with Christ.

It is a primary element of the testimony of authentic Faith - not the flaunted one.

Not parading dissimulation and material intrigue is crucial. It is also so in difficult, unstable, or seductive situations.

Each one is called to «return» to his true Lord the indelible «image and likeness» engraved on him.

So let the coin be «given back» to its 'master'. This remains essential for anyone to be fully realized, and to flourish.

Woman and man - creatures in whom the «image and likeness» of God is imprinted - have to «render» themselves to the Creator (v.17) who dwells in their essence as persons.

Humanity is sealed by far more intimate and natural affiliations than those of convenience.

[Tuesday 9th wk. in O.T.  June 2, 2026]

"Render unto Caesar what belongs to Caesar and to God what belongs to God," was the response of Jesus when asked about paying taxes. His questioners, of course, were laying a trap for him. They wanted to force him to take sides in the highly-charged political debate about Roman rule in the land of Israel. Yet there was more at stake here: if Jesus really was the long-awaited Messiah, then surely he would oppose the Roman overlords. So the question was calculated to expose him either as a threat to the regime, or a fraud.

Jesus’ answer deftly moves the argument to a higher plane, gently cautioning against both the politicization of religion and the deification of temporal power, along with the relentless pursuit of wealth. His audience needed to be reminded that the Messiah was not Caesar, and Caesar was not God. The kingdom that Jesus came to establish was of an altogether higher order. As he told Pontius Pilate, "My kingship is not of this world."

The Christmas stories in the New Testament are intended to convey a similar message. Jesus was born during a "census of the whole world" taken by Caesar Augustus, the Emperor renowned for bringing the Pax Romana to all the lands under Roman rule. Yet this infant, born in an obscure and far-flung corner of the Empire, was to offer the world a far greater peace, truly universal in scope and transcending all limitations of space and time.

Jesus is presented to us as King David’s heir, but the liberation he brought to his people was not about holding hostile armies at bay; it was about conquering sin and death forever.

The birth of Christ challenges us to reassess our priorities, our values, our very way of life. While Christmas is undoubtedly a time of great joy, it is also an occasion for deep reflection, even an examination of conscience. At the end of a year that has meant economic hardship for many, what can we learn from the humility, the poverty, the simplicity of the crib scene?

Christmas can be the time in which we learn to read the Gospel, to get to know Jesus not only as the Child in the manger, but as the one in whom we recognize God made Man.

It is in the Gospel that Christians find inspiration for their daily lives and their involvement in worldly affairs – be it in the Houses of Parliament or the Stock Exchange. Christians shouldn’t shun the world; they should engage with it. But their involvement in politics and economics should transcend every form of ideology.

Christians fight poverty out of a recognition of the supreme dignity of every human being, created in God’s image and destined for eternal life. Christians work for more equitable sharing of the earth’s resources out of a belief that, as stewards of God’s creation, we have a duty to care for the weakest and most vulnerable. Christians oppose greed and exploitation out of a conviction that generosity and selfless love, as taught and lived by Jesus of Nazareth, are the way that leads to fullness of life. Christian belief in the transcendent destiny of every human being gives urgency to the task of promoting peace and justice for all.

Because these goals are shared by so many, much fruitful cooperation is possible between Christians and others. Yet Christians render to Caesar only what belongs to Caesar, not what belongs to God. Christians have at times throughout history been unable to comply with demands made by Caesar. From the Emperor cult of ancient Rome to the totalitarian regimes of the last century, Caesar has tried to take the place of God. When Christians refuse to bow down before the false gods proposed today, it is not because of an antiquated world-view. Rather, it is because they are free from the constraints of ideology and inspired by such a noble vision of human destiny that they cannot collude with anything that undermines it.

In Italy, many crib scenes feature the ruins of ancient Roman buildings in the background. This shows that the birth of the child Jesus marks the end of the old order, the pagan world, in which Caesar’s claims went virtually unchallenged. Now there is a new king, who relies not on the force of arms, but on the power of love. He brings hope to all those who, like himself, live on the margins of society. He brings hope to all who are vulnerable to the changing fortunes of a precarious world. From the manger, Christ calls us to live as citizens of his heavenly kingdom, a kingdom that all people of good will can help to build here on earth.

[Pope Benedict, article for the Financial Times 20 December 2012]

1. Jesus' incisive statement: 'Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's' (Matthew 22:21), answers a problem that was much discussed in his day and is still very much felt today. What attitude should believers have towards civil authority and the laws of the state? What commitment should they make as citizens with regard to their duties in the social and political spheres?

The occasion is offered to Jesus by a question that was much debated at the time concerning the lawfulness or otherwise of paying tribute to the emperor of Rome. The positions, in fact, were diversified and the reasons given to support the lawfulness or unlawfulness of the taxes imposed by the Romans were also different.

In this context, the question put to Jesus by the Pharisees: "Is it lawful or not to pay tribute to Caesar?" constituted an insidious challenge to the Master, considered by all as the one who taught the way of God according to truth.

As sometimes happens in the Gospel, faced with the trap set by his enemies, Jesus, with his answer, rises above the contingent controversy and goes far beyond the particular and mutually divergent positions.

On the one hand, by commanding them to return to Caesar what belongs to him, he declares that paying the tax is not an act of idolatry, but a duty of honest citizens; on the other hand, by recalling the primacy of God in human life and history, he asks them to return to him what is due to him as the one and only true 'Lord'.

2. With this statement, Jesus makes a clear distinction between the duties required of believers, as citizens and as children of God. Without, however, placing them in conflict. Thus, from a particular issue, such as the tribute to be given to Caesar, new horizons emerge for the mission of Christians in society.

By reason of faith, each one (of you) is called to transform history, to permeate all human and social reality with the spirit of the Gospel. No one can or should alienate himself from the required tasks of working to ensure a more just and fraternal civil coexistence. This duty must be done, however, in full fidelity to the Gospel message, in docile submission to the Spirit, without ever shirking what is required by the laws of the state that aim to do so. It must be done above all by giving primacy to what is in the first place: God, his plan of salvation, his law, spiritual and transcendent values.

The profession of faith in Christ, belonging to the kingdom of God and the lifestyle that flows from it are to be lived not "outside", but "inside" history as a "service" to be rendered to the city of men and therefore to the common good and the integral promotion of each person.

Faith, integrally lived, impels you to assume strong and precise responsibilities in that immense human endeavour to promote and safeguard fundamental human rights for a peaceful and fraternal coexistence among all.

3. It is therefore a commitment connected with an authentic and hard-working faith, which demands adequate training, deep convictions, consistent witness. And so it also takes on the characteristics of a true service of charity towards all men.

[Pope John Paul II, homily 21 October 1990]

"A true Christian cannot be a hypocrite and a hypocrite is not a true Christian": against the temptation of the "double face" Pope Francis used direct language, without equivocation. He did so in the Mass celebrated at Santa Marta on Tuesday 6 June, during which he examined the passage from Mark's Gospel (12, 13-17) in which "some Pharisees and Herodians" try to catch Jesus in the act.

"In the Gospel passage," he noted, "there is a word that Jesus uses a lot to qualify the doctors of the law: 'But he knew their hypocrisy': 'hypocrites' is the word he uses most to qualify them". They, Francis explained, are "hypocrites because they make people see one thing but think another": they in fact, he added alluding to the Greek etymology of the word, "they speak, they judge, but from below it is something else". Nothing could be further from Jesus: hypocrisy, in fact, "is not the language of Jesus. Hypocrisy is not the language of Christians'. It is an absolutely "clear" fact.

But if Jesus is concerned to highlight this characteristic, it is good to understand it in depth and thus bring out "how they proceed", how the hypocrites behave.

First of all, the Pope said, 'the hypocrite is always an adulator, either in a major tone or in a minor tone, but he is an adulator'. Thus, for example, they address Jesus saying to him: 'Master, we know that you are truthful and not in awe of anyone because you do not look anyone in the face but teach the way of God according to the truth'. That is, they use 'that flattery that softens the heart and softens life'.

So, the "hypocrites always begin with flattery. And then they ask a question'. The techniques of flattery also include 'not telling a truth', 'exaggerating', and 'raising vanity'. In this regard, the Pontiff recalled a priest - "I met a long time ago, not here" - who, "poor man, he drank all the flattery they gave him, it was his weakness. And his companions said of him that he had learned the liturgy badly", because he had not understood the true meaning of "incensation".

Therefore, the Pope continued, 'flattery begins like this, but with a bad intention'. This is also well understood by rereading the Gospel passage: the Pharisees, in order to test Jesus, "flatter so that he will believe this and slip". It is the technique of the hypocrite: 'he makes you see that he loves you, always inflating you, to achieve his goal'.

There is then, Francis added, "a second aspect" to underline that is found in "what Jesus does". Faced with the gesture of the hypocrite who, with his "double face", asks a just question but "with an unjust intention" - they ask: "Is it right to pay to Caesar, is it fair?" - Jesus "knowing their hypocrisy, says clearly: 'Because you want to test me, bring me money, I want to see it'. This is Jesus' method: always "to the hypocrites and ideologues he responds with reality. Reality is like that, everything else is either hypocrisy or ideology".

Therefore, Jesus says, "bring me money". He wants to show "reality" and answer "wisely": "What is Caesar's render it to Caesar - the reality was that money had the image of Caesar - and what is God's to God".

Finally, the Pontiff said, it is necessary to highlight a "third aspect" related to the "language of hypocrisy" and that is that it "is the language of deception, it is the same language of the serpent to Eve, it is the same. He begins with flattery: 'No... if you eat of this you will be great, you will know everything...', in order to destroy it".

Hypocrisy in fact, the Pope explained, 'destroys, hypocrisy kills, it kills people, it even rips out a person's personality and soul. He kills communities'. He added: 'When there are hypocrites in a community there is a great danger there, there is a very bad danger'. Therefore "the Lord Jesus told us: 'Let your speech be: yes, yes, no. The superfluous proceeds from the evil one". It has been clear'. And in this regard, Francis recalled, "James in his letter is even stronger: 'Let your yes be yes and your no be no'".

Clear words that make us understand today 'how much harm' hypocrisy does to the Church. How much harm they cause "those Christians who fall into this sinful attitude that kills". Because, the Pontiff reiterated, 'the hypocrite is capable of killing a community. He is speaking softly, he is judging a person harshly. The hypocrite is a slayer". In conclusion, the Pope summed up his reflection by recalling that hypocrisy "begins with flattery", that it can only be answered "with reality", and that hypocrisy uses "the same language as the devil who sows that bifid tongue in communities to destroy them". Therefore, he suggested, "let us ask the Lord to guard us so that we do not fall into this vice of hypocrisy, of making up our attitude but with bad intentions. May the Lord give us this grace: 'Lord, may I never be a hypocrite, may I be able to tell the truth and if I cannot tell it, be silent, but never, never, a hypocrite'".

[Pope Francis, S. Marta homily, in L'Osservatore Romano 07/06/2017]

(Mk 12,1-12)

Christ introduces everyone to an adventurous, uncomfortable journey, not without pitfalls that throw the situation upside down and destabilize - but it is the Way for each of us to recognize himself.

Otherwise we would not get closer to the Source of perception, imagination, reality and creativity - virtues that are necessary for rebirth, even from global emergency.

Jesus uses the image of the Vineyard to describe the work of God and the response of men - first and foremost of the spiritual guides (v.1).

Religious leaders were like this: hostile to divine action; equipped to appear, nevertheless violent and sclerotic.

The directors to whom Jesus addresses, follow the entire metaphor step by step - and they seem to find themselves unguarded. They only remain speechless at the end.

Why does He ask them imperatively (Mt 21,33): «Listen you» [which is not a simple invitation]?

From the beginning speaks with a master tone. Why?

He is Lord of those to whom he actually addresses: the Christ so much invoked by new caste of "pharisees" back in the communities, where top of the class already claimed to manage the Vineyard in their own way.

In no uncertain terms, the parable denounces the abuse of authority perpetrated in third generation assemblies, especially by their chiefs.

Church elders who were already annoyed to deal with small people, who on the other hand came to the threshold of communities in the hope of being welcomed.

Conversely, it was precisely these «last» the new prophets called by God to awaken the immobility situation (of bosses) - comparable to the same swampy reality of other religions of time.

Everywhere and even today some potentates discriminate and manipulate consciences in order to protect their world - by eliminating Jesus Present, who recurs in the little, innocent and transparent ones.

Veterans accustomed to directing do not notice that they are decreeing their own condemnation (v.9).

Of course, Christ does not intend to ridicule anyone: He wanted to lead people to ‘tell the truth’ about themselves.

In Gospel the behavior of the titled people does not change. On the contrary, feeling unmasked gets worse it, and only the hesitation of losing face in public can restrain them (v.12).

But now they know who they are - so much so that they are ashamed to openly plot.

Categories that are considered closer to Paradise - those who produce inedible grapes - excluded from the testimony of the Kingdom innervated by tinies’ crowd.

There will inevitably be a new beginning, and the replacement of inept settlers (v.9).

It is «good news»: the Eternal one achieves his purpose despite the repeated refusals of those who should serve Him, and instead use Him.

In short, for Jesus the great enemy of God is expediency.

Even amidst ungenerous brutality and accusations of being deluded dreamers, new and more faithful Heralds of the Spirit are ready for succession.

An unstoppable course, sprinkled by the stream of blood of the Prophets (Mt 21,46).

Outcasts, shunned, expelled and to be crushed - but not locked into mental patterns: capable of giving free rein to regenerative energies.

Consciousness of the world, divorced from compromise.

[Monday 9th wk. in O.T.  June 1st, 2026]

(Mk 12:1-12)

This is a continuing metaphor, rather than a parable; hence the fruit of post-Easter reflection - let us see why.

Christ introduces everyone to an adventurous, uncomfortable path, not without pitfalls that throw things off and destabilise - but it is the Way for each of us to recognise ourselves.

We would not otherwise approach the Source of perception, imagination, reality and creativity - virtues that are necessary for rebirth, even from global emergency.

Jesus uses the image of the Vineyard to describe the work of God and the response of men - first and foremost the spiritual leaders (v.1).

The ancient religious leaders were like this: hostile to divine action; equipped to appear, yet violent and sclerotic.

The directors whom Jesus addresses follow the entire metaphor step by step - they seem to find themselves undone - and are only left speechless at the end.

How is it that he imperatively challenges them (Mt 21:33): "Listen" [which is not a simple invitation]?

From the very beginning, he speaks in a masterly tone. Why?

He is Lord of those whom he actually addresses: the Christ so much invoked by the new caste of 'Pharisees' back in their assemblies, where the top of the class already claimed to manage the Vineyard in their own way.

In no uncertain terms, the parable denounces the abuse of authority perpetrated in third-generation fraternities, especially by their leaders.

Church elders who were already bothering to deal with the petty people who came to the threshold of the communities in the hope of being welcomed.

Conversely, it was precisely these 'last ones' who were the new prophets called by God to awaken the situation of immobility (of the veterans) - comparable to the same swampy reality of other religions at the time.

In this way, let us proceed to a possible identification:

The hedge or wall that surrounds the Vineyard is the proposal that God has revealed to protect us from other senseless and self-destructive models of life [non-Faith paradigms].

The crusher means: nothing was lacking [the Lord took the utmost care], and also the waiting for the time of joy, of the juice of love.

In short: excellent conditions and abundant results; maximum production of intoxication - one would expect. However.

The vinedressers are the constituted authorities. They have been given the task of placing us in the best position and suitable conditions for our growth and flourishing.

In fact, under ideal conditions each one can produce the fruit of love that the 'master of the field' expects.

The two groups of envoys are prophets sent by the Father before and after the Babylonian exile - in vain - to call for concrete adherence, fidelity to the Covenant.

All ended badly, because the point of reference of the pious people and the irresponsible leaders remained identical: appropriation.

Here are the different groups in power at the time of Jesus:

The Temple workers [priests] managed the tithes, the specific taxes, the offerings.

The high priest was chosen from among the members of the families of the aristocracy that flaunted the most power and wealth.

The Sadducees were precisely the aristocratic elite; for themselves secular, very wealthy. They willingly involved themselves in the trade also of the Temple, and in the latifundia.

Pharisees were the leaders of popular religiosity, who advocated total observance of the Law, especially the rules of purity. And also that of the different Traditions, even oral.

Their ethical authority was based on exemplarity and a sense of sacred [and moralistic] separation. They were heard and recognised in every village in Palestine.

The 'Elders' were chiefs of the people (local, village or town authorities); descendants of the chiefs of the ancient tribes.

Scribes [doctors of the law] were those who, after a lifetime of studying the Word of God, were elevated to the rank of official theologians of the Sanhedrin.

Although divided into two sects - one favouring the Sadducees, the other the Pharisees - their prestige even managed to obscure the letter of the Torah. Indeed, in case of disagreement between the Law and their interpretation, it was the latter that was esteemed superior.

Jesus, on the other hand, discredited the learned, who willingly distorted and sophistrated the meaning of the sacred Scriptures - always to their own advantage.

He was well aware that his denunciation would cost him his life, because he unmasked the whole system of gains, balances and positions.

However, he never retreated an inch.

Everywhere and even today, certain potentates discriminate and manipulate consciences in order to protect their own providences and their own farcical world of public and private relations.

In spite of all the polite and mannerist fire of interdiction, often taking out the Present Jesus in the small, innocent and transparent.Conversely, the supreme stewards of the House of God must adopt an attitude of service to the Vineyard; they must not plot their own life plans, to which all - including the Father - must adapt.

It was for this reason that the Son demanded to dismantle that structure: even to supplant the Temple, with his living Person.

A genuine mortal threat to the system that by then could not even stand the interference of God himself.

But if it was irreverent to substitute the life of the people for the stone sanctuary, it also seemed sacrilegious to consider the Torah regime transitory.

The Pentateuch was at the heart of the identity of the 'chosen people'. This idea was interpreted with a rigid sense of permanence - although its practice did not bring happiness, but dissatisfaction.

Yet the veterans accustomed to pyramid situations - and to leadership - did not even realise that they were thus decreing their own condemnation (v.9).

Of course, Christ does not intend to ridicule anyone: He wants to bring people to question themselves, and tell the truth about themselves.

In the Gospel, the behaviour of the titulars of official devotion does not change; on the contrary, feeling unmasked, it gets worse.

Only the qualms of losing face in public could hold them back (v.12).

But now they know who they are, so much so that they are ashamed to plot openly.

The categories 'at the centre', who consider themselves closest to Heaven and therefore holders of power (which they demand for themselves), are assiduously those who produce inedible grapes.

Circles excluded from bearing witness to the Kingdom.

The aged forces only know how to oppose. Life-long leaders - pretentious gourds - always love leadership, and (too) their own interest, not that of the petty crowd.

Sadly, the Gospel passage is a fresco of the entire history of salvation, where disdain not infrequently prevails - and it is timely.

There will inevitably be a new beginning, and the replacement of the inept colonists (v.9). 

It is "glad tidings": the LORD achieves his purpose despite the repeated refusals of those who should represent him, and instead use him. Having no fruits of love to return.

In short, it is our story. It is an enigma of redemption, capable of taking on even violence and rebellion.

For Jesus, there is no such thing as a privileged ethnicity or civilisation - because the great enemy of God is not sin in the sense of imperfection, but expediency.

Return that matches disinterest and (interested) contempt: a problem that returns - closing the story.

And yet, when the days of fervour fade and the situation comes to a standstill because of those who see election as a privilege rather than a service, new and more faithful Heralds of the Spirit ceaselessly arrive. Ready for the succession of minds and hearts, even amidst ungenerous brutalities, and accusations of being deluded dreamers.

An unstoppable course, sprinkled by the prophets' stream of blood (Mt 21:46).

Outcasts, shunned, expelled and to be crushed - but not locked into outdated mental schemes: capable of giving free rein to regenerating energies.

Awareness of the world, detached from compromise.