Let us understand that today we are living something very important in the world, and in the Church. We are in the presence of a springtime in the Church, of renewal in the Church, yet in the midst of a world whose structure is crumbling. What was once a Christian culture is falling apart, disappearing. And so we must be very attentive to the way we are living. It is remarkable to see how attentive the Holy Father is to this renewal.

And so let us try, during these few days, to look at Scripture, and especially at Jesus, Mary, and Saint John. Let us try to understand this last week as Saint John describes it in his Gospel, the last week of Jesus on earth. The Church has to go through her last week also. It could be understood literally as Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday.... But this is not what we are looking at. Rather, we look at the last step in the life of the Church. I think that the Church has to live on earth something analogous to the last week of Jesus. If we look at the last week as Saint John describes it, it really corresponds to the grace of Lent. Our Lent is true only if we look attentively at this last week of Jesus. It is extremely rich. Saint John is the only one who has really and fully described for us this last week of Jesus.
I remember how during the Council, I went to Rome only a day before an encyclical letter was to be published. There was a great deal of turmoil, for many people were asking themselves, "Is the Holy Father allowed to write an encyclical during the Council? Is it not the duty of the Holy Father to be silent in order to let the Fathers of the Council speak"? But some were saying, "No. When there is a danger, the Holy Father has to speak." In fact, it is only the second solution which stands. During a council the Holy Father is not on vacation, and not only does the meaning of a council come from the presence of the Holy Father, but the Holy Father is usually present at all the meetings. This is what happened during the first Vatican Council.

The Holy Father was not always present during the second Vatican Council, but he looked at everything afterwards. John XXIII did this, to some extent, out of humility; people asked him why. He responded that because the previous Pope had acted this way, it would be better to continue in that way. I knew the theologian whom the Holy Father, Paul VI, invited each night to review with him all the decisions of the Council Fathers. He would read attentively to the Holy Father each one of the documents in order to be sure that nothing would be in opposition to the Tradition of the Church. It was this theologian who mentioned this to me. He was a Dominican, and a little bit harsh. The Holy Father had chosen him on that account, and thereby showed how much he wanted to make sure that nothing would go against the Tradition of the Church, that nothing would be understood in an erroneous way.

I remember having gone to Rome on another occasion. Among the French Bishops there was one I knew very well. He was the Bishop of the foreigners in Paris. He was somebody whom I deeply loved and knew very well. When he saw me he told me that there was something bothering him. He said that during this Council nobody was condemning, yet there was so much to be condemned. "How is it that this Council did not condemn anybody"? I said to him. "I understand your fear, but if the Church enters into her last week with this Council, isn't it normal? If you look at the Gospel of Saint John, you see that in the last week Jesus no longer condemns anybody. He accepts to bear the iniquity of the world in order to be crucified. If the Church enters her last week, analogically speaking, it is normal that she, too, no longer condemns anybody. She accepts to be on the cross in order to be with Jesus during this last week."

We discussed this together a great deal. I had been studying the last week for a long time, and it deeply impressed me for it describes the last steps of Jesus on earth. When I told this to this Bishop he said, "Now I understand." I was very enlightened to see this Bishop attempting to look at Vatican II in this light.

So, if you wish, we can together look at His last week in the Gospel of Saint John. It starts with chapter twelve. Until the last week Jesus is the one leading the events: He is the one deciding. But what strikes me as being characteristic of the last week is that Jesus no longer leads.

First there is the gesture of Mary in Bethany, a gesture which manifests a madness of love. She shows an incredible lack of prudence when you consider the situation in Jerusalem at that moment. Perhaps the sisters of Lazarus did not know what some of the Jews were planning at the time; or, if she did know Jesus nevertheless allowed her to perform this gesture.

This second gesture, like one of madness, is the triumphant entry into Jerusalem. Here again is a gesture manifesting a madness of love as seen in the initiatives of the people of Jerusalem. Jesus responds to these initiatives which do not come from Him. The first initiative that Jesus takes is, in fact, the washing of the feet.

Even if we must go very fast, I would at least like to try and understand those things which surround this last week. Here, following the great vision of Isaiah, we are truly facing the Lamb led to slaughter. In the midst of this passivity of the Lamb, initiatives are nevertheless taken by Jesus High Priest. The mystery of the last week is the mystery of the victimal state of Jesus and of Jesus High Priest. In fact, it is the same mystery. What is impressive is that the mystery of the Lamb envelops the mystery of the Priest. It is essential that we understand this.

We talk today about the royal priesthood of the faithful, and since the Council we have been talking about it a great deal. People were not speaking about it much before. It is the mystery of the Lamb. Mary is the first one to live by participation in this mystery of the royal priesthood of the faithful, and she lives it in unity with Jesus Lamb. The whole Church is going to live by this mystery of Jesus Lamb. I think this is what deeply moves today's Church. It is what Jesus demands of His little ones, and this leads Him to take initiatives as the High Priest. The Priesthood of Jesus is the Priesthood of the Son. It is a priesthood of love such that the initiatives of the High Priest and the passivity of the Lamb are one.

It is clear that this last week, from the anointing at Bethany to the piercing of the Heart, demonstrates the poverty of the Lamb. It is only as Lamb that Jesus can say the words He pronounced before Judas: "Poor people, you will always have them, but you will not always have me." These words only have meaning because Jesus is Lamb. It would otherwise be a lack of justice if it would be as if Jesus were demanding that we make a separation between Him and the poor. In fact, Jesus came for them and shows that He is "the poor." The mystery of the Lamb is the mystery of the poor; it is the poverty of Love. This poverty is manifested in an ultimate way with the wound of the heart which is really the center of this last week. We could stop here, for here we see the real poverty of the last week; we must understand that the ultimate manifestation of Jesus is His manifestation as Lamb. Indeed, the first proclamation of John the Baptist according to the Gospel of Saint John is, "This is the Lamb of God who bears the iniquity of the world."

Let us now read chapter twelve together. The starting point of this last week. "Six days before the Passover Jesus came to Bethany where Lazarus was, whom Jesus had raised from the dead." Jesus certainly took this initiative to come to Bethany, but in fact it was only a response to an invitation. It is obvious that the two sisters of Lazarus had prepared everything. Jesus didn't come as a thief. So it was, in fact, the two sisters of Lazarus who had taken the initiative. They gave a dinner for Him, and it was not an improvisation. Martha was serving. Lazarus was one of those reclining at table with Him. See the importance of Lazarus. The two sisters are there to thank Jesus for the resurrection of Lazarus. It is a meal of thanksgiving. This meal of thanksgiving is very unique as Lazarus was there honoring his guests. This meal was a gesture of thanksgiving to Jesus who had raised him from the dead. I don't know if the twelve used to often go to Bethany. I don't think so. I think that it was rather a place of silence reserved for Jesus. Peter, James and John went to Bethany when the Ascension took place. You see how the wisdom of God always makes a distinction and hates confusion. Bethany is a place of friendship; it is a place of thanksgiving.

"Mary took a liter of costly perfumed oil made from genuine aromatic nard and anointed the feet of Jesus and dried them with her hair. The house was filled with the fragrance of oil." We see immediately what gives the character to this meal of thanksgiving: it is a gesture of pure gratuity in which Mary takes the initiative. It is probably on her initiative that Jesus was invited. I think so. She must have told Martha, "We cannot but invite Jesus to thank Him." Such is the delicacy of Mary. Martha was very happy. The more activity requested of her, the happier she was! Such is the generosity of Martha. Martha is generosity, while Mary is discretion, but a discretion which can go very far in thanksgiving. This is shown in her gesture. Mary gives Him a liter of costly perfumed oil made from genuine aromatic nard. Mary had kept some astonishing reserves: one liter of costly perfumed oil, the secret reserve of Mary. We will ask her in heaven what it was! I have a small hypothesis: if Mary is the converted sinner--and it is very possible that Mary was indeed this converted sinner--she most probably had many costly perfumes. And when she converted, she most probably got rid of her perfumes... but she kept this one. That is marvelous, a very feminine behavior; she kept the perfume that she loved most. She kept it not for herself, but in order to manifest her love for Jesus. You see the delicacy of Mary. Martha would have sold everything. Mary kept this perfume and Martha was not aware of it, for Martha would not have understood. So Mary kept this costly perfume for Jesus, one liter.

Mary understood the tragedy that this last week represented. In the depth of her heart she knew that this was the last week. She knew of the tension that then existed; the Jews had decided to kill Jesus, and Mary surely knew it. This enables us to understand why, under the motion of the Holy Spirit, she wanted to show Jesus, in silence, how much she loved Him, how much she wanted to thank Him for everything, not only for the resurrection of Lazarus but for much more. The resurrection of Lazarus was only an opportunity. There is something much greater in the heart of Mary. It is her response to the love of the Heart of Jesus. Jesus loved her in a unique way, and she wanted to manifest her thanks in a gesture of gratitude. Perfume expresses this very well. This costly perfume expresses in a symbolic way all the tenderness, all the thanksgiving of her love for Jesus. She knew that it was her tears after the death of Lazarus which had moved the Heart of Jesus, and she thanked Jesus for this. Jesus received her tears and had answered in a royal way, as only the Son of God could respond. We have to be very attentive to this. First, she had anointed the feet of Jesus and had dried them with her hair; these were the gestures of a sinner: crying and drying. They are the gestures of one who knows how much Jesus loves her in order to show Jesus that she is still the sinner, the loved sinner, the one who is forgiven. It is not at all a flashback of the psychological type. Mary in fact uses her condition as a sinner in order to better manifest her love. See the two extreme situations. She dried the feet of Jesus with her hair and poured this costly perfume, manifesting at the same time extreme poverty and superabundance. This is very important. She could simply have poured her costly perfume on the feet of Jesus. That would have been enough. No, she also wanted to envelop Him with her own poverty, with her own misery. The whole house was filled with the fragrance of oil. This shows the quality of the perfume she used; the whole house was filled! Her gratitude is very realistic, and she performs this gesture in order to manifest her love for Jesus. I think that at that moment all those present understood what she was doing. There must have been a great silence. When a gesture of love is done with such gratitude and magnificence, everybody is moved by this love. One cannot but be moved by this great gratitude and this magnificence of love, especially coming from a woman, a woman that Jesus loves.

I think that Judas, according to the Gospel of Saint John, betrayed out of jealousy. I believe he was unable to accept the love that Jesus had for John. This is my own interpretation. But when I look at the Gospel of John, I see that it is here that the attitude of Judas is shown most explicitly. It is important for us to understand that the peak moments of the struggle were due to jealousy. It is a complex of jealousies that we must look at: the jealousy of Judas and the jealousy of the High Priest. It is a cooperation among these jealousies which provoked the condemnation and the death of Jesus. John underlines this here: "Judas Iscariot, one of his disciples and the one who had betrayed him said, 'Why was this oil not sold for 300 days' wages and given to the poor'"? I believe Judas Iscariot was expressing, through these words, the anger he felt on account of this gesture of love, a gesture which reminded him of the love of Jesus for John.

We know the extent to which the devil has gone in attacking the Fatherhood during the past century. At times he even attacks motherhood in order to get at fatherhood, for the motherhood of Mary has no other aim than to help us discover fatherhood. Mary is an admirable mother, and therefore an extremely poor mother; a mother who is totally given in order to help us enter into the Fatherhood of the Father. That is why in our prayer of consecration to Mary we immediately look at her as daughter of the Father. It is this daughter of the Father who wants to help us enter into the deepest of her secrets. Now what is deepest in the heart of Mary is her bond with the Father. The Father has given her His Son so that she might enter more deeply into His Fatherhood. She is associated in a way to His Fatherhood. In the wisdom of God, her whole motherhood has no other end than to manifest to us this Fatherhood. That is why the two major attacks of the devil concern the motherhood of Mary and fatherhood. The ideology of Freud has attacked fatherhood, not God's Fatherhood directly, but human fatherhood. One of Freud's disciples who wanted to be more Freudian than Freud himself has even gone so far in an attack on motherhood as to say that it is what is most perverted in the heart of man and woman.

But we have to be able to use the devil. We are not allowed to say that we are not interested in what he does, especially when he is very noisy. We must do all we can to understand the devil. Now we know that he is constantly angry at the mystery of the Most Blessed Trinity and at the mystery of the Redemption. His anger must help us to better understand the secret of the wisdom of God, a secret prepared for us which the devil does not know. He is ignorant of it and is curious.

Today's Church is living a struggle which goes very deep. As I was telling you, when you look at the Freudian ideology, you see that it is in opposition to the beatitude of the peaceful, the peacemakers. This ideology continues the Freudian analysis and tries to take it further. In doing so, it attacks the human dispositions which allow for the beatitude of the peaceful.

Mary Mother and Queen: Mary disposes us in such a way that the grace of Christ can fully root itself in our hearts. That is why, when we look at this attack of the devil against fatherhood and motherhood, we can say we are in the presence of something ultimate. I think that we must be very attentive to these attacks of the devil, especially during this time of Lent. On the first Sunday of Lent Jesus goes to the desert and is tempted. The Gospel of Saint John tells us that Jesus is tempted for us. Jesus does not need to be tempted: temptations do not strengthen Him as they can for us. Jesus accepts to be tempted which, for the Son of God, is an abnormal situation. He is the Prince of Peace. Yet the Prince of Peace accepts to be tempted in the desert for us. The desert is the Church because it is the place of adoration. Martha Robin loved to say that the desert of God is Mary because, in the Church, the place of adoration is in the Heart of Jesus and the Heart of Mary.

The Scriptures say that Jesus went to the desert in order to be tempted, but we must be careful to understand that to be tempted was not His finality. If Jesus goes to the desert, it is out of love for us and in order to show us that we should not be afraid of the desert, even though we know that we can be sure that temptations will be stronger there. Jesus wanted to live all these temptations out of love for us so that we could be victorious over all temptations, with Him and in Him, so that we could live them in love and so that we might not be afraid of them any longer. The goal is not to look for temptations, but we know that if we go to the desert in order to adore, the devil will be behind us. He is always following us when we try to be alone with God, and this because we want to be alone with God. We can only adore when we get rid of all within us that we look at as quality, all that is at the level of our conditioning and that glorifies us. We have to get rid of all this; the Book of Revelation shows that we must get rid of our crowns. We can only adore God when we get rid of our crowns and, therefore, accept to be a very small and fragile creature.

Adoration strengthens us for it leads us back to the source: God our Creator. But at the same time adoration is a source of fragility in us, because it puts us in the presence of our nothingness as a small creature who totally depends on God. Our only strength is in this poverty, the poverty of a small creature totally relative to God.

To go to the desert with Jesus is to accept to face struggles. The whole time of Lent is a time of desert and of struggles, the struggles of the Church. Not only are these struggles very special to those who are trying to grow closer to Jesus, but they are the struggles of the whole Church. We must be novices of the Holy Spirit during our whole life. If you have not yet understood this, I hope you will understand it this year: Lent is a novitiate for each one of us. That is why it is usually so poorly lived; we do not like at all to be novices of the Holy Spirit. We like to have strong, solid fortifications, so that we can appear strong. The strength of all that we have acquired becomes our strength.

We like to be like stars, but the Holy Spirit demands that we be like little children, the small David facing Goliath. This is another type of desert, which is a prefiguration of the desert of Jesus. We see there the small David facing Goliath who had been scourging the people of Israel. Goliath represents today's culture based on technique and efficiency. Today's mankind is enslaved by technique and science. When people look at the Church and the Papacy as things that were only good for the Middle Ages, the Holy Father is hurt. I have heard scientists saying, "Yes, the Church and the Holy Father were good for the Middle Ages, but now they are old-fashioned." It is a supreme insult to say that somebody is surpassed by science and technology.

As a result of this modern attitude, scientists refuse to listen to what the Church is saying on matters which concern the human person. Everything that she has said is rejected as having been good solely for the Middle Ages. Today it has been totally surpassed. They believe that, today, the truth is increasingly dependent upon science and therefore has to change according to science. This is today's culture. It is the struggle between the small David and Goliath all over again. Now when David wanted to fight against Goliath, the King of Israel gave him his own armor. The small David tried to use the armor, but he was not at ease with it. He finally rejected it and faced Goliath without any armor at all. Goliath considered this as the supreme insult, for he himself counted on his armor, while David counted only on the help of God and a very poor weapon. We know how God gave him the victory, and how David put his practical intelligence at the service of his love. David looked at the fragility of Goliath, his vulnerability, and that is where he attacked him.

I think that the way we live in today's society is very similar to the great struggle waged against Goliath. Goliath was very powerful and very aware of the power of his techniques and of science. Today's man believes he no longer needs a Savior. The Holy Father has expressly said it. The first time he went to Paris, he gathered all the French bishops together and told them that the Church was facing a kind of meta-temptation, one she had never faced before. It is a totally different type of temptation. The Holy Father explained that this new temptation is a radical one, totally beyond any other type of temptation: man, having reached the age of adulthood believes that he no longer needs a Savior. Man wants to save himself by himself. There is no longer any room for Jesus as Savior in today's culture. No Holy Father has said this before: that is very impressive. What impresses me more than that, however, is that no Bishop repeated it afterwards, even though it was really the major word given by the Holy Father to all the French Bishops at that time.

Today people are afraid to admit that they are in an ultimate struggle. It might very well be a preparation for a marvelous renewal, or it might be the preparation for an ultimate spring in the Church which ends in the return of Christ. We do not know. You do not know and I do not know either. But we must look at it and try to understand. Christ came to earth in the womb of Mary; He had a small shelter. Mary received Him with love and carried Him with love. Yet when He was to be born, and thereby take His place among mankind, He was told that there was no longer any room for Him in Bethlehem. This was said in Bethlehem by the offspring of David, and hence by those who represented what was best in Israel. Now Jesus was the most noble among this offspring, yet there was no room for Him. This is sad. According to the Gospel of Saint John, the High Priest said, "We have only one king, Caesar." They refused the Kingship of Christ because He came as the Lamb of God. The King was the Lamb. He was the one who accepted to carry the iniquity of the world in His heart, and He was rejected while choosing to be responsible for the entire Church.

The Holy Father proclaims that there is no longer any room for a Savior in today's world. Those words are so powerful for they enable us to understand the depth of the struggle through which we are living. Alone, we are incapable of knowing exactly at which point we are in the struggle, for we are in its midst. Instinctively we try to avoid the struggle by saying that, in any case, it has always existed; and although we are fighting in the Church, we are afraid to face what is happening. We shouldn't be afraid. We should look upon what is happening with the eyes of Jesus and Mary, and we should try to understand these words of the Holy Father. You know that in his first encyclical letter the Holy Father underlined something which is very important. He said that although our small planet has been made habitable by mankind's victory over wild and restrictive animals, nevertheless, because of his desire to dominate, man has used his intelligence for the construction of increasingly dangerous arms, arms more dangerous than any wild animal. Animals always have good hearts. It was even true when they were wild. They have a good heart, so we just have to be good with them in order to allow their goodness to become apparent. Animals attack us when we attack them. In Eastern Africa where it is not permitted to hunt, animals get very close to you, even the good lions. As long as you do not get close to them when they are hungry, everything is fine. You can sit with them at the same table... for dessert, not for the meat! So animals really have an essential goodness, while arms do not. Arms are continually being designed in order to kill, terminate, and destroy with greater efficiency. We know that man possesses a power of destruction. We clearly see how this situation is like having a sword hanging above our heads. It is a source of anguish in the heart of man.

In the Scriptures, anguish is presented as the ultimate sign forecasting the return of the Savior, the return of Christ. It is not war; it is anguish. We find this in the Book of Revelation, as well as in the whole of Scripture. We see how present this anguish is today, and how it is increasing. The Holy Father asked himself the question, "Does man have the courage to go beyond what he has realized in those arms? Will man have the courage to go beyond this capital of power and destruction that he has created"? Animals are not created by man as arms are created by man. It is always very difficult to achieve a work and then go beyond it in a holocaust of love. I think that the first encyclical letter of the Holy Father, which has been forgotten, is very important. All over the world we are living in a state of extreme anguish. Now the Book of Revelation underlines how this anguish will be worldwide. Man everywhere sees it in his fellow man. It is the fragility, the fundamental vulnerability of today's man. But we should not be afraid of it, for we are children of God and we know that in Jesus our Father loves us.

We must rediscover fatherhood in what is most radical. God allows this increase of anguish. He permits man to make more dangerous arms. Thanks to this man can manifest his power. In the most intimate depths of our heart God wants anguish to be overcome by the gift of fear. This is the beginning of wisdom. When we see ourselves facing this anguish, we have to understand that the Holy Spirit is within our heart with His divine capacity to transform. We can unite ourselves to the Heart of Jesus with the gift of fear and so use this anguish in order to open up to a deeper abandonment to the Divine One. We must put ourselves totally in the hands of God and become more and more like little children, like sons of the Father. I think that this is the great grace corresponding to what we are living today. This has to be the greatest grace during this time of Lent. Enter ever more deeply into an abandonment of love, so that you might really place yourselves in the hands of the Father. Understand how much the Father loves us. We are His beloved children.

We are now going through a time of greater fragility than that experienced during the beginning of the century or during the previous century. Our world is so fragile today for it is wholly given into the hands of men. Now we know that there will not be another flood. On His own, God does not want to put an end to mankind. He promised Noah that He would never again send such a flood. Now in saying that, God gave man responsibility over himself. Therefore, God will not stop giving man His fatherly protection, even if man makes the worst possible mistakes through pride, his desire to dominate, or his desire to gain power over life and death. God has left man free to choose. Therefore, we must ask ourselves the question, "How far will God allow us to go"? We don't know. We cannot tell God, "God, you cannot allow us to go any further." We know that God leaves the responsibility for man to man himself. This is something very special, and it may be what we are living today. The Holy Father speaks of a meta-temptation. The Holy Father knows and says that the Church has never gone through this type of temptation. It would seem that the Holy Father wants us to be attentive to this, for he draws our attention to it. But we cannot do much. We cannot say, for example, that we should stop all scientific research. Considering the power that man has to destroy mankind, we cannot do anything at that level either. It is as if our feet and hands were tied. Furthermore, nobody is listening to the Church. People now listen to scientists and technicians, but no longer to the Church, and the Church knows it. This is the Holy Father's greatest source of suffering. It is this weight he carries. Man wants to reach adulthood on his own. He no longer takes into account the fact that the Father has given man His beloved Son as man's only Savior. Man does not want to look at this anymore. Again, this is the deepest suffering of the Holy Father, and it is also the deepest suffering of today's Christian; it is what we have to live in today's world. We must ask the Virgin Mary for her peace and for her awareness: Mary does not want us to enter a state of anguish. Yet she wants us to be fully aware of what is happening in today's world in order that we might carry it with her, in order that we might carry it through a victory of love, in a Pentecost of love linked to the mystery of the Assumption and the great victory of love flowing from the Cross.

This great victory of love is shown to us, manifested to us, with the mystery of the Assumption of Mary. Everything in Mary is the Assumption manifesting this victory of love.