GOSPEL John 1, 6-8. 15-18
at that time. He was a man sent from God / his name was John. / He came as a witness / to bear witness to the light, and that all might believe through him. / He was not the light, / but he had to bear witness to the light. / John proclaims: / "It was him that I said / He who comes after me / is before me, / because he was before me." From his fullness / we all received: / Grace upon grace. / Why the Law was given through Moses, / the grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. / God, no one has ever seen / the only Son, that is God / and the Father's heart, / is that he has revealed.
There are many verses of the gospel that leaves you amazed by their beauty.
There are verses that are moving, at least for me. And what we find in the text of this Sunday is one that strikes me most: "From his fullness / we all received: / grace upon grace."
is even mentioned John the Baptist, but no longer hear his preaching and his call to conversion, but just to hear him say: "He who comes after me / is ahead of me."
is coming forward to the One who is Baptist, but that is ahead of us all.
We will see later in all: in the understanding of the human heart, in the depth of his friendship, his compassion for our weakness, especially as we shall see later, only on the Via Crucis. And to our delight, we will see the Risen One, in the splendor of victory over death.
In him we will know the true face of God
That face, that all men want to see, but that only Jesus is capable of detecting only because he is the only begotten Son. And his revelation, it is surprising and moves, "Who is man that you care about him," says the psalmist.
In the life of faith there are many questions which, with effort we can to respond. But the biggest surprise is this: What can we give to God? What can we offer?
We know, nothing we can offer. If we can give something to him and our brothers and only something that is already in the Eucharist is the gift of God How We offer the bread and wine, but they are already God's gifts to humanity and the mystery of the Mass become a gift infinite God himself becomes our food.
So it is always in life: life itself, freedom, the ability to love. All gifts that if we put in the hands of God with confidence, they become even bigger gifts.
In essence, let us open ourselves to wonder, thanksgiving, that this visit of the Lord just wants to have the effect of enriching our lives. How deepening
I put my sermon advent of p. Raniero Cantalamessa, the preacher of the Pope on a very topical subject these days: the atheist scientism and its pretensions.
"WHEN I LOOK AT YOUR HEAVEN, THE MOON AND THE STARS, WHAT EVER THE MAN?" (Ps 8, 4-5)
1. The thesis of scientism atheist
The three meditations for this Advent 2010 want to be a small contribution to the needs of the Church which brought the Holy Father Benedict XVI to the establishment of the Pontifical Council for the Promotion of the new evangelization "and to choose the theme of the next Annual General Meeting of the Synod of Bishops on the theme" The new evangelization the transmission of Christian faith. "
The intent is to identify some basic knots or barriers that make many countries of ancient Christian tradition "refractory" to the gospel message, as the Holy Father's Motu Proprio which established the new Council [1]. The nodes or the challenges that I intend to take into consideration and I would like to try to give an answer faith is scientism, secularism and rationalism. The apostle Paul calls them "the ramparts and fortresses that rise up against the knowledge of God" (cf. 2 Cor 10:4).
In this first meditation we examine scientism. To understand what is meant by this term, we can start from the description that it was John Paul II:
"Another danger is scientism, this philosophical notion which refuses to acknowledge it as valid forms of knowledge other than those which are proper of the positive sciences, relegating to the realm of mere fantasy religious knowledge and theology, both ethical and aesthetic knowledge "[2]. We
thus summarize the main thesis of this school of thought: First
thesis. Science, particularly cosmology, physics and biology, are the only form of serious and objective knowledge of reality. "Modern societies, Monod wrote, are built on science. The owe their wealth, their power and the certainty that even more wealth and power will be available tomorrow in a man if he wants it [...]. Equipped with all power, with all the riches that science offers them, our society still attempt to live and to teach systems of values, already undermined by the same underlying science "[3].
Second thesis. This form knowledge is incompatible with the faith that is based on assumptions that are neither provable nor falsifiable. In this line the militant atheist R. Dawkins goes so far as to describe as "illiterate" those scientists who claim to be believers, forgetting how many scientists much more famous than he said they were and continue to declare themselves believers.
third thesis. Science has proven to be false, or at least does not need the hypothesis of God is the affirmation that the media have given wide coverage all over the world in recent months because of a statement British astrophysics Stephen Hawkins. These, contrary to what he had written earlier, in his latest book The Grand Design, The Big Picture, argues that the knowledge gained from physics make it useless to believe in a divine creator of the universe, "the spontaneous creation is the reason why there is something."
Fourth thesis. Almost all, or at least the vast majority of scientists are atheists. This is the claim that militant atheism in science Richard Dawkins, author of the book's God Delusion, The God Delusion, his most active propagator.
All these arguments prove to be false, not based on a priori reasoning or theological arguments and faith, but the same analysis of the results of science and views of many of the most distinguished scientists of the past and present. A scientist from the likes of Max Planck, the founder of the theory of "quanta", he says, of science, that Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, Pascal, Kierkegaard and others had stated reason: "Science-says - leads to a point beyond which there can not drive anymore "[4].
I will not repeat the refutation of the claim stated that it was made by scientists and philosophers of science, with a skill that I have not. I cite, for example, the timely critique of Robert Timossi, in his book The illusion of atheism. Because science does not deny God, which bears the presentation of Cardinal Angelo Bagnasco (Edizioni San Paolo 2009). I limit myself to a primary observation. In the week when the media spread the statement above, that science has made unnecessary the hypothesis of a creator, I found myself in need, in his homily Sunday to explain in very simple Christians in a town of Reatino where is the fundamental error of scientists and atheists because they did not have to be impressed by the sensation aroused by that statement. I did it with an example that might be useful to repeat here in a context so different.
There are night birds, like the owl and the owl, whose eye is made to see us overnight in the dark, not day. The sunlight blinds them. These birds know it all and move at their home in the world overnight, but know nothing of the world day. We adopt for a moment the kind of stories, where animals talk to each other. Suppose that an eagle face friendship with a family of owls and talk to them about themselves: how it illuminates everything, how, without him, everything would plunge into the dark and cold, as their own nocturnal world would not exist without the sun . What if the owl does not respond, "You tell fibs! Never saw your sun. We move very well and we get the food without it, your sun is unnecessary and therefore there is no hypothesis. " You
exactly what the atheist scientist when he says: "God does not exist." Rate a world he does not know its laws apply to an object that is beyond their reach. To see God need to open a different perspective, you must venture out of the night. In this sense, is still valid in the old assertion of the Psalmist: "The fool says there is no God."
2. No scientism, yes to science
The rejection of scientism there should naturally lead to the rejection of science or distrust it. To do otherwise would be a disservice to the faith, even before science. History has painfully taught where does this attitude.
of open and constructive attitude towards science has given us a shining example of the new Blessed John Henry Newman. Nine years after the publication of Darwin on the evolution of species, when not a few spirits around him showed disturbed and perplexed, he reassured them, expressing an opinion that predated the current one and a half centuries of the Church not on the incompatible this theory with biblical faith. It is worth listen to the songs of his letter to the central canon John Walker:
"It [the Darwinian theory] does not frighten me [...] I do not think logically and be denied the row created by the fact that the Creator, millions years ago, has imposed laws to matter. Do not deny or circumscribe the fact that the Creator has created the autonomous action which gave rise to the human intellect, with almost a creative talent, much less then deny or limit its power, if we believe that He has assigned to the matter more likely to shape and build through its instrumentality through countless blind ère the world as we see it [...]. The theory of Mr. Darwin is not necessarily an atheist, it is true or not, may simply be suggesting a more extended star of Divine Foreknowledge and capacity .... At first glance I do not see how 'the random evolution of organic beings' is inconsistent with God's plan - It's casual for us, not for God "[5].
His great faith allowed Newman to calmly look at the present or future scientific discoveries. "When a flood of facts, actual or presumed, it is down on him, infinite boundaries while others are already starting to emerge, all believers, Catholic or not, they feel encouraged to consider what we mean those facts" [6]. He viewed these findings in a "an indirect bearing on the religious views." An example of this relevance, I think, is the fact that in the same year in which Darwin developed the theory of evolution, he, whatever, stated his doctrine of "development of Christian doctrine." Referring to the analogy on this point, between the natural and physical and moral, he wrote: "As the Creator rested on the seventh day after the work accomplished, and yet he 'still works', so he communicated once I think all the source, but still favors its development and shall keep the increase in [7].
new and positive attitude on the part of the Catholic Church towards science is a concrete expression of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, in which eminent scientists from around the world, believers and non believers come together to expose and freely discuss their ideas on matters of common interest in science and faith.
3. The man to the cosmos or the cosmos to man?
But, I repeat, it is not my intention to engage here in a general critique of scientism. What I want to highlight a particular aspect of it that has a direct and decisive impact on evangelization: it is the position held, the man in the vision of atheistic scientism.
is now a race among scientists nonbelievers, particularly among biologists and cosmologists, who goes further in affirming the total marginalization and insignificance in the universe and at the same great sea \u200b\u200bof \u200b\u200blife. "The ancient covenant is broken - Monod wrote - and the man finally knows that he is only in the immensity of the universe from which it emerged by chance. His duty, as his destiny is not written in any place "[8]. "I always thought, says another - to be insignificant. Knowing the size of the universe, who do not realize how it really is ... We're just a little 'mud on a planet that belongs to the sun "[9].
Blaise Pascal refuted in advance that argument with an argument that nobody has been able so far and can never disprove:
"Man is only a reed, the more fragile nature, but a reed that thinks. You do not need the whole universe to take up arms to destroy, a vapor, a drop of water is enough to kill him. But if the universe were to crush him, man would still be nobler than what kills him, because he knows he died, and the superiority that the universe has over him, while the universe knows nothing [10].
scientist's vision of reality, along with the man, takes a shot from the center of the universe is with Christ. He is reduced, in the words of M. Blondel, "a historical accident, isolated from the cosmos as a false incident, an intruder or lost in an overwhelming and hostile immensity of the universe "[11].
This vision of man begins to have practical effects also at the level of culture and mentality. This explains certain excesses of ecology that tend to equate the rights of animals and even plants with men. And 'well known that there are animals fed and cared for much better than millions of children. The influence is felt even in religious matters. There are widespread forms of religiosity in which contact and coordination with the energies of the cosmos has taken the place of contact with God as a way of salvation. What Paul said of God: "In him we live and move and exist" (Acts 17, 28), it is called here the material universe.
In some ways, this vision of a return to pre-Christian scheme of which was: God - the universe - man, and the Bible and Christianity as opposed to the scheme: God - man - the cosmos. In other words, the universe is for man, not man for the cosmos. One of the most violent accusations that the pagan Celsus aimed at Jews and Christians is to say that "there is God, and soon after him, we, since we were created by him to complete his resemblance to us is subject to all: the earth , water, air, stars, all there for us and our service is ordered to "[12].
But there is also a profound difference in ancient thought, especially greek, man, albeit subject to the cosmos, is of high dignity, as highlighted by the masterful Max Pohlenz, "Man greek "[13], but here it seems to take pleasure in depressing man and strip him of any claim of superiority over the rest of nature. Rather than "atheistic humanism", at least from this point of view, ought to speak, in my opinion, anti-humanism, or even atheist disumanesimo.
We come now to the Christian vision. Celso was not wrong in doing it derive from the great success of Genesis 1, 26 human created in the image and likeness of God [14]. The biblical vision has found its most beautiful expression in Psalm 8:
When I consider Your heavens, the work of your fingers,
the moon and the stars, which thou hast,
what is man that thou remember?
The son of man that you take care?
But you did only a little lower than God,
and hast crowned him with glory and honor.
You did rule over the works of your hands,
hast put all things under his feet.
The creation of man in the image of God has implications for the somewhat disturbing conception of 'man that the current debate that drives us to bring to light. Everything is based on the revelation of the Trinity visited by Christ. Man is created in God's image, which means that he shares the intimate essence of God is that loving relationship between Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Only the man, as a person capable of relationships, participate in personal and relational dimension of God
This means that he, in essence, albeit at a level of creatures, is what, in uncreated, are the Father , the Son and the Holy Spirit, in their essence. The human person is a "person" for this rational core that makes it able to accept the relationship God wishes to establish with it and at the same time becomes the generator of the reports to others and the real world. It 'clear that c' is an ontological gap between God and human being. However, by the grace (never forget this statement!), This gap is bridged, so that it is less deep than that between the 'man and the rest of creation.
4. The power of truth
Let's see how it could be translated in terms of evangelization this Christian vision of the man-cosmos. First a preface. Summing up the thinking of the teacher, a follower of Dionysius Areopagite has set out this great truth: "This is not to refute the opinions of others, nor is it appropriate to write against a belief or a religion that does not seem good. You have to write only for the truth and not against the other "[15]. You can not give absolute
this principle (sometimes it can be useful and necessary to refute the false doctrines), but it is certain that the positive exposure of the truth is often more effective than the refutation of error otherwise. It is important, I think, take account of this criterion in evangelization and in particular against the three obstacles mentioned: scientism, secularism and rationalism. More efficient than the polemic against them is, in evangelization, the exposure of the pacifist Christian view, relying on force intrinsic when it is accompanied by deep conviction and is done as inculcated San Pietro, "with gentleness and respect" (1 Peter 3:16).
The highest expression of dignity and vocation of man according to the Christian vision has crystallized in the doctrine of the deification of man. This doctrine has not been as important in the Orthodox Church and Latin. The Greek Fathers, above all mortgages that the use of pay had accumulated on the concept of deification (theosis), made it the core of their spirituality. The Latin theology has insisted less on it. "The purpose of life for the Greek Christians - says the" Dictionnaire of Spirituality "- is his divine nature, that of Western Christians is the acquisition of holiness ... The Word was made flesh, according to the Greeks, to return to man the lost image of God in Adam and deified. According to the Latins, he became man to redeem mankind ... and to pay the debt owed to the righteousness of God "[16].
We could say the easiest, the Latin theology, following Augustine, insists more on what Christ came to take away - sin -, Greek insists more on what he came to give men: the 'Image of God, the Holy Spirit and the divine life.
Do not force too much opposition to this, as sometimes we tend to do by Orthodox authorities. Spirituality Latin sometimes expresses the ideal that if we avoid the term glorification, it should be remembered, is foreign to the biblical language. In the liturgy of the hours of Christmas Eve we will hear the vibrant exhortation of Saint Leo the Great, which expresses the same view of the Christian vocation: Christian, your dignity, and made partaker of the divine nature, do not return to a time of abjection with misconduct. Remember who is the Head, the Body of which you are a member "[17]. Unfortunately, some authors
Orthodox were still the controversy of the fourteenth century between Gregory Palamas and Barlaam and seem to ignore the rich mystical tradition of Latin America. The doctrine of St. John of the Cross, for example, that the Christian, redeemed by Christ and made his son in the Son, is immersed in the flow of transactions and participates in the Trinitarian God's inner life, is no less high than that of the divine nature, even if expressed in different terms. The teaching on the gifts of intellect and wisdom of the Holy Spirit, so dear to St. Bonaventure and medieval authors, was animated by the same mystical inspiration.
It can not however fail to recognize that the Orthodox spirituality has something to teach on this point the rest of Christianity, theology even more Protestant than to Catholic theology. If there is indeed something quite opposite to the orthodox view of Christian deified by grace, this is the conception of a Protestant, Lutheran, and in particular, the extrinsic and forensic justification, that man is redeemed during the same time just and sinner " , a sinner in himself, right before God
Especially we can learn from the Eastern tradition not to reserve this sublime ideal of Christian life to a spiritual elite called to walk the streets of mysticism, but to offer it to all the baptized, to make object of catechesis to the people, for religious training in seminaries and novitiates. When I think back to the years of my training there, I saw a nearly exclusive emphasis on an ascetic who depends on correcting the vices and the acquisition of virtues. When asked by the disciples on the ultimate goal of Christian life, a Russian saint, Saint Seraphim of Sarov, replied without hesitation: "The real purpose of the Christian life is the acquisition of the Holy Spirit of God How to prayer, fasting, vigils , almsgiving and other good deeds done in the name of Christ, are only means to acquire the Holy Spirit "[18].
5. "All things were made through him"
Christmas is the perfect opportunity to propose to ourselves and to others that this ideal is common heritage of Christianity. Incarnation of the Word is that the Greek Fathers derive the very possibility of deification. St. Athanasius does not tire of repeating: "The Word was made man that we might be deified" [19]. "He became man and man has become God, because it is united with God," writes St. Gregory Nazianzen, in turn, [20]. With Christ is restored, or brought to light that being in the image of God "which bases the superiority of man over the rest of creation.
I noticed above as the exclusion of man brings with it automatic exclusion Christ of the cosmos and history. From this point of view, Christmas is the antithesis to the more radical vision scientist. In it feel solemnly proclaim: "All things were made through Him and without Him nothing was made of what exists" (Jn 1:3), "All things were created through him and to him "(Col. 1, 16). The Church has taken up this revelation and I think it makes us say: "For quem omnia facta sunt" Through him all things were created.
Listening to these words while around us does not repeat that: "The world is self-explanatory, without the hypothesis of a creator," or "we are the result of chance and necessity ", undoubtedly causing a shock, but it is easier for a conversion and a faith blossom from a shock like that from a long apologetic argument. The crucial question is: will we be able, we who aspire to re-evangelize the world, to expand our faith in this size from dizziness? We really believe with all my heart, that "all things were made through Christ and in view of Christ"?
In his book Introduction to Christianity many years ago you, Holy Father, wrote: "In the second article in the 'I' in front of us to the real scandal of Christianity. It is the confession that the man Jesus, an individual justice for 30 years in Palestine, is the 'Christ' (the anointed, the elect) of God, indeed the very Son of God, then focus, the core determinant of human history ... We is indeed legitimate to cling to the fragile stem of a single historical event? We can run the risk of entrusting our whole existence, indeed, the whole story, this piece of straw in any event, floating in the boundless ocean of cosmic matter? "[21].
to these questions, the Holy Father, we will respond without hesitation as she does in that book and how not to get tired of repeating today, in the guise of the Supreme Pope: Yes, it is possible, it is liberating and joyful. Not for our forces, but for the priceless gift of faith we have received and from which we give thanks to God infinte
[1] Benedict XVI, Motu Proprio "Ubicunque et semper", n.
[2] John Paul II's words about man, Rizzoli, Milano 2002, p. 443, cf. also Enc. "Fides et ratio, n. 88
[3] J. Monod, Chance and Necessity, Mondadori, Milan, 1970, pp. 136-7.
[4] M. Planck, knowledge of the physical world, p. 155, (cited by Timossi, op.cit. P. 160)
[5] JH Newman, J. Letter to the canonical Walker (1868), in The Letters and Diaries, vol. XXIV, Oxford 1973, pp. 77 s. (Trad. ital. P. Di Fang).
[6] JH Newman, Apologia Pro Vita her, Brescia 1982, p.277
[7] JH Newman, The development of Christian doctrine, Bologna 1967, p. 95.
[8] Monod, op. cit. p. 136.
[9] P. Atkins, cited by Timossi, op. cit. p. 482.
[10] B. Pascal, Pensées, 377 (ed. Brunschwicg, No 347),
[11] M. A. Blondel et Valensin, Correspondance, Aubier, Paris 1957, p. 47.
[12] Origen, Contra Celsum, IV, 23 (SCh 136, p.238, cf. IV, 74 (ib. p. 366)
[13] Cf M. Pohlenz, greek Man, Florence 1962.
[14] Origen, op. cit., IV, 30 (SCh 136, p. 254).
[15] Scola Dionysius Areopagite in PG 4, 536, cf. Dionysius Areopagite, Letter VI (PG, 3, 1077).
[16] G. Bardy, in DCT. Spir., III, col. 1389 s.
[17] S. Leo the Great, Sermon 1 on Christmas (PL 54, 190 ff.)
[18] Dialogue with Motovilov in Gorainoff Irina, Seraphim of Sarov, Gribaudi, Torino 1981. p. 156.
[19] S. Athanasius, The Incarnation of the Lord, 54 (PG 25, 192B).
[20] S. Gregory Nazianzen, theological discourse, III, 19 (PG 36, 100A).
[21] J. Ratzinger, Introduction to Christianity, Brescia, 1969, p.149.
Roman Rite
Gospel: Mt from 11.2 to 11
At that time, John, who was in prison, Having heard of the works of Christ, sent by his disciples and said to him, "Are you he that should come or look we for another?". Jesus answered them, "Go and tell John what you hear and see: The blind receive their sight, the lame walk, lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, the poor and proclaim the Gospel. And blessed is he who does not find me a source of scandal. "
While they were leaving, Jesus began to speak to the multitudes concerning John: "What did you go to see in the desert? A reed shaken by the wind? So, what did you go see? A man dressed in clothes of luxury? Here, those who wear clothes luxury are in kings' palaces! Well, what did you go see? A prophet? Yes, I tell you, in fact, more than a prophet. This is he of whom it is written: "Behold, before thee I send my messenger before you, he will prepare your way."
Verily I say unto you, among those born of women there has been none greater than John the Baptist, but the least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he. "
The song today (Matthew) presents John the Baptist in prison was attacked by a big doubt: Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah or not? It had to be a very disturbing question for him, even heartbreaking, because the young Rabbi would not show up at all with the same characteristics that Battista had listed in his prophetic speeches to the crowds, we have heard a song on the 2nd Sunday of Advent A: "He will baptize with the Holy Spirit and fire. He holds the shovel to clean his floor and gather the wheat into his barn, but will burn the chaff with unquenchable fire. " (Matthew 3.11-12 and Luke 3:16-17) These are images from the Old Testament, as seen in Isaiah 41.16, 15.7 and Malachi Jeremiah 3.19.
While in prison, John hears "about the works of Christ" (v.2 b) and these do not correspond to what had become Envoy divine. He thought of a Messiah "Justice" and Jesus himself as master meek and humble of heart, he had hoped in the manifestation of God's wrath against all the injustices and lies, and the Nazarene spoke only of mercy and compassion, so much to sit at table with public sinners. Probably it was also expected as a "sign" of his own Messiahship release from prison of Herod, just as Isaiah foretold 61.1. And this had not happened. Hence the anxious question: "Are you he that should come?"
Christ, how often does' not answer directly yes or a no. He never does not replace the freedom of man, if he accepts him and accept him, because the law is properly the "signs" that attest the identity of Jesus and behaves accordingly. So the teacher responds sending back the Baptist precisely those "works" of which he had heard in prison: the blind, the lame, the lepers, the deaf are healed, the dead are resurrected, and proclaim the Gospel to the poor.
These actions already prophesied in the Old Testament: Isaiah 35.5-6 points in the order the blind, the deaf and the lame, the resurrections announces Isaiah 26.19 and Isaiah 61.1 evangelization of the poor.
So Jesus continues the work of Yahweh, it shows how good and merciful God of Israel, which the exiles had returned from exile, remaining faithful to his covenant. The Nazarene shown to produce and make As foretold in the Old Testament.
It is natural to ask why he fulfills these prophecies and not to those who think of John the Baptist. And here we are right in the heart of the matter. By what criteria, what yardstick should read the Scriptures? How to recognize the task? Well, it is only Jesus, the Word of God, the last word of revelation from the Father pronounced that this criterion can provide a reference point. Only we can trust Him. Only he can enlighten us.
It is very clear and bright is his answer: the Messiah is the One who brings salvation, both material and spiritual. But beware! Healings and resurrections signs and drugs are certainly sensational, but, in terms of structure, v.5 not as the culmination of the resurrection, but the fact that the "poor" and proclaim the Gospel. This, and not a miracle, is the "sign" more specific and decisive, which gives a clear direction to everyone else. "That Jesus is the messenger of God is proved by miracles, but it is the preference for the poor (the sick, sinners, pagans) who reveals the novelty of his choice messianic." (B. Maggioni)
And all this can be an obstacle to see the divine Nazarene Envoy, which is why immediately after he utters the phrase "Blessed is he who does not find me a source of scandal!" ie: the one who does not stumble in front of a Messiah poor and helpless, that makes no use of force.
Now, as always in the Gospel of Matthew the page is viewed at three levels, we are interested in completing the comment:
1st - the level of historical life of Jesus, the great doubt concerning the Christ and the Baptist and of course of his disciples. Indeed, according to Ambrose, Augustine and John Chrysostom, they were even a doubt, and a resulting device, "teaching", that is a question that would have grasped the Baptist in his disciples, so that sent them to Jesus because he is to reassure them.
2nd - the level of community which is addressed to Matthew; in the '80s (when he came up the first Gospel) was a live controversy between the Judeo-Christian community and so-called "John" the Baptist's disciples remained bound to their master, who continued to baptize in his name (see Acts 19.3: "What were you baptized?" The baptism of John ") and even saw him, and not in Jesus, the Messiah! The movement of John called "Baptist" was very popular and heralded a salvation for all through the conversion, penance, and the rite of water baptism. So it was very important at the time of Matthew, to reaffirm and specify clearly that in fact the same as John the Baptist had pointed to Jesus the true Messiah.
3rd - the level of contemporary life. As in every age, we have probably not entirely accurate idea of \u200b\u200bthe Christian God, that creates obstacles (ie we "offend" in the etymological sense), and we are therefore urged to consider carefully the "works" Jesus and the message that emerges from his response, especially the final note, because the "poor" in the Matthean context - cf. Mt.5, 3: "Blessed are the poor in spirit" - not just the poor in a material sense, but also "small", the "humble", the "simple", truly free and open to the heart ' ad.
And today is another possible form of "scandal" about the followers of Jesus
"Have you ever - notes Liliana Gilli - someone looking into my eyes you have asked
This is the scandal believe, really believe and change (in a conversion that is still!), because it is believe that Jesus is the Messiah, because they certainly appreciate his works, but it makes us recognize as our Redeemer that indicates that the Evangelist John as the "glory of the Lord": his death and resurrection. " The song today (Matthew) presents John the Baptist in prison, attacked by a big doubt: Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah or not? It had to be a very disturbing question for him, even heartbreaking, because the young Rabbi would not show up at all with the same characteristics that Battista had listed in his prophetic speech to the crowd, we heard a song on the 2nd Sunday of Advent A: "He will baptize with the Holy Spirit and fire. He holds the shovel to clean up his threshing floor and gather the wheat into his barn, but will burn the chaff with unquenchable fire. " (Matthew 3.11-12 and Luke 3:16-17) These are images from the Old Testament, as seen in Isaiah 41.16, 15.7 and Malachi Jeremiah 3.19.
While in prison, John hears "about the works of Christ" (v.2 b) and these do not correspond to what had become Envoy divine. He thought of a Messiah "Justice" and Jesus himself as master meek and humble of heart, he had hoped in the manifestation of God's wrath against all the injustices and lies, and the Nazarene spoke only of mercy and compassion, so much to sit at table with public sinners. Probably it was also expected as a "sign" of his own Messiahship release from prison of Herod, just as Isaiah foretold 61.1. And this had not happened. Hence the anxious question: "Are you he that should come?"
Christ, how often does' not answer directly yes or a no. He never does not replace the freedom of man, if he accepts him and accept him, because the law is properly the "signs" that attest the identity of Jesus and behaves accordingly. So the teacher responds sending back the Baptist precisely those "works" of which he had heard in prison: the blind, the lame, the lepers, the deaf are healed, the dead are resurrected, and proclaim the Gospel to the poor.
These actions already prophesied in the Old Testament: Isaiah 35.5-6 points in the order the blind, the deaf and the lame, the resurrections announces Isaiah 26.19 and Isaiah 61.1 evangelization of the poor.
So Jesus continues the work of Yahweh, it shows how good and merciful God of Israel, which the exiles had returned from exile, remaining faithful to his covenant. The Nazarene shown to produce and make As foretold in the Old Testament.
It is natural to ask why he fulfills these prophecies and not to those who think of John the Baptist. And here we are right in the heart of the matter. By what criteria, what yardstick should read the Scriptures? How to recognize the task? Well, it is only Jesus, the Word of God, the last word of revelation from the Father pronounced that this criterion can provide a reference point. Only we can trust Him. Only he can enlighten us.
It is very clear and bright is his answer: the Messiah is the One who brings salvation, both material and spiritual. But beware! Healings and resurrections signs and drugs are certainly sensational, but, in terms of structure, v.5 not as the culmination of the resurrection, but the fact that the "poor" and proclaim the Gospel. This, and not a miracle, is the "sign" more specific and decisive, which gives a clear direction to everyone else. "That Jesus is the messenger of God is proved by miracles, but it is the preference for the poor (the sick, sinners, pagans) who reveals the novelty of his choice messianic." (B. Maggioni)
And all this can be an obstacle to see the divine Nazarene Envoy, which is why immediately after he utters the phrase "Blessed is he who does not find me a source of scandal!" ie: the one who does not stumble in front of a Messiah poor and helpless, that makes no use of force.
Now, as always in the Gospel of Matthew the page is viewed at three levels, we are interested in completing the comment:
1st - the level of historical life of Jesus, the great doubt concerning the Christ and the Baptist and of course of his disciples. Indeed, according to Ambrose, Augustine and John Chrysostom, they were even a doubt, and a resulting device, "teaching", that is a question that would have grasped the Baptist in his disciples, so that sent them to Jesus because he is to reassure them.
2nd - the level of community which is addressed to Matthew; in the '80s (when he came up the first Gospel) was a live controversy between the Judeo-Christian community and so-called "John" the Baptist's disciples remained bound to their master, who continued to baptize in his name (see Acts 19.3: "What were you baptized?" The baptism of John ") and even saw him, and not in Jesus, the Messiah! The movement of John called "Baptist" was very popular and heralded a salvation for all through the conversion, penance, and the rite of water baptism. So it was very important at the time of Matthew, to reaffirm and specify clearly that in fact the same as John the Baptist had pointed to Jesus the true Messiah.
3rd - the level of contemporary life. As in every age, we have probably not entirely accurate idea of \u200b\u200bthe Christian God, that creates obstacles (ie we "offend" in the etymological sense), and we are therefore urged to consider carefully the "works" Jesus and the message that emerges from his response, especially the final note, because the "poor" in the Matthean context - cf. Mt.5, 3: "Blessed are the poor in spirit" - not just the poor in a material sense, but also "small", the "humble", the "simple", truly free and open to the heart ' ad.
And today is another possible form of "scandal" about the followers of Jesus
"Have you ever - notes Liliana Gilli - someone looking into my eyes you have asked
This is the scandal believe, really believe and change (in a conversion that is still!), because it is believe that Jesus is the Messiah, because they certainly appreciate his works, but it makes us recognize as our Redeemer that indicates that the Evangelist John as the "glory of the Lord": his death and resurrection. "
0 comments:
Post a Comment