142. During the whole day, 23rd of March, Jesus preached in the Temple with greater authority and resolution. According to Saint Mark (XII, 1), "He began to speak to them in parables" in which He reproached the impious and deicide posture of His enemies, who, mingled with the crowds, were also listening. One was that of the sons sent to work in the vineyard, which Saint Matthew (XXI, 28-32) recounts. As we can deduce, the one who said: "I will not. But afterwards, being moved with repentance, he went" (Matthew XXI, 29), represents those sinners, like the publicans and prostitutes, who though at first resisting grace to a certain degree, later become worthy of the Kingdom of God through repentance and fidelity to that grace. The other son who answered: "I go, sir. And he went not" (Matthew XXI, 30), represents, firstly, those who, having received grace, later reject it through apostasy because of their lack of correspondence, as occurred with many Jews; and, secondly, all those who, knowing the truth, stubbornly reject it at the same time pretend to act uprightly, like the levitical authorities, the pharisees and many other Jews.

143. The Master then presented the parable of the murderous husbandmen, narrated by Saint Matthew (XXI, 33-41), Saint Mark (XII, 1-9) and Saint Luke (XX, 9-16), in which He let be seen the predilection God always had for His People, and how the latter often had corresponded badly, even to the extent of killing His prophets. Such ingratitude would culminate in the deicide of the very Son of the Most High. We emphasize the following words of Saint Luke, who says that Jesus ended the parable by saying that the owner of the vineyard "will come and will destroy these husbandmen and will give the vineyard to others". The Evangelist goes on to say: "Which they hearing, said to Him: God forbid" (Luke XX, 16). We interpret that reply was made to Jesus by his enemies, identified in the Gospel as the murderous husbandmen, who understood the meaning of the parable and recognized interiorly, besides, that it was addressed to them. That is why they answered the Master: "God forbid" (Luke XX, 16), which was to say that such a thing would never happen. In this way, with falsehood and pride, they attempted to excuse themselves before Jesus and the crowds of the offenses which He attributed to them by way of the parable, particularly the crime committed against the vineyard owner's son, who represents the Son of the Most High. They, moreover, boasted of being just before God, represented in the parable as the owner of the vineyard, Who therefore had no cause to take vengeance on them.

144. After explaining this parable, and looking at the members of the Sanhedrin listening, He gave them very severe warnings, doctrinally contained in the following three Gospels: Matthew XXI, 42-44; Mark XII, 10-11; Luke XX, 17-1 8. He first brought to their minds what was foretold of Him by David: "The stone which the builders rejected: the same is become the head of the corner" (Ps. CXVII, 22). Jesus thus cast in their teeth that if they, the builders, rejected and despised Him and built contrary to the Law of the Gospel in order to persist in their false traditions and corrupt morals, nevertheless, as ordained by the Heavenly Father, He, His most beloved Son or Cornerstone, had already been placed as the Head of the Comer, that is, as the indestructible foundation of the New Church, sustained by His infinite power and nourished by His ineffable doctrine, an edifice against which the gates of Hell could not prevail. Saint Matthew says that Jesus then added: "Therefore I say to you that the Kingdom of God shall be taken from you and shall be given to a nation yielding the fruits thereof" (Matthew XXI, 43), that is to say, that the Sanhedrin and the Jewish People who followed their evil doctrines would be excluded from the true Church, and that grace would go to another people which accepted the Gospel. He thus referred to the Gentiles. We teach that Jesus, with majestic severity, then addressed to them the following ruling: "And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall grind him to powder" (Matthew XXI, 44; Luke XX, 18). Hence He warned them that whatever they did against Him and His Church would redound to the greater glory of the latter and to their greater reprobation. Saint Matthew goes on to say that "when the chief priests and pharisees had heard His parables, they knew that He spoke of them. And seeking to lay hands on Him, they feared the multitudes, because they held Him as a prophet" (Matthew XXI, 45-46). Saint Luke (XX, 19) gives it with the same meaning, as does Saint Mark (XII, 12), who adds: "And leaving Him, they went their way" (Mark XII, 12).

145. As we interpret Saint Matthew, who says: "And Jesus answering, spoke again in parables to them, saying..." (Matthew XXII, 1), we see that the Lord continued His teaching in the Temple on that morning of Wednesday the 23rd of March. Since His enemies were once again present, He expounded, among others, the parable of the marriage feast of the king's son or wedding invitation, which the same Evangelist (Matthew XXII, 2-14) recounts. We are shown in it, principally, the spiritual punishment of the Jewish People and the material destruction of their cites, especially Jerusalem, for not having corresponded to the loving invitation Jesus made them - beginning with the levitical hierarchy, which obstinately rejected Him - to the Kingdom of God. For that reason, He had chosen the Apostles and disciples, men of humble state, who would preach the Gospel to the Gentiles, these to benefit from the graces that had been prepared for the Jews. This doctrine applies to the apostasy of the Roman Church and the continuity of the true Church in El Palmar de Troya, and in general to all who are called to salvation but reject it. The parable ends with the strange occurrence of the guest who went to the banquet without the required garment, and for that reason was expelled by the king and severely punished. Accordingly, here we recognize Judas Iscariot, who having been chosen Apostle failed to avail himself of grace, and on Holy Thursday in the Cenacle even dared to participate in the sacred mysteries without the required spiritual dispositions. On that account he already deserved Christ's reproach, in which He predicted his condemnation when saying of him that it were better had he not been born. Similar to the example of the traitor are those who receive the Sacraments sacrilegiously. We also recognize in the Gospel text those who, in the Particular Judgement, in the presence of the Supreme Judge reject the final invitation to salvation which the Divine Mary offers them, only to be confirmed in disgrace, sentenced as reprobates and deprived of eternal happiness.

146. After the parable of the marriage feast of the king's son, we interpret from Saint Matthew (XXII, 15)and Saint Luke (XX, 20) that Jesus' enemies once more withdrew from where He was preaching and all gathered in another part of the Temple to prepare traps in order to seize Him. Let us see both texts: "Then the pharisees going, consulted among themselves how to ensnare Him in His speech" (Matthew XXII, 15); "And being upon the watch, they sent spies, who should feign themselves just, that they might take hold of Him in His words, that they night deliver Him up to the authority and power of the governor" (Luke XX, 20). The first stratagem they laid for Jesus was to send to Him some pharisees and Herodians, as Saint Matthew (XXII, 16)and Saint Mark (XII, 13) tell us, with the pretext of the payment of the tribute to Caesar, an episode recounted by the first three Evangelists (Matthew XXII, 16-22; Mark XII, 14-17; Luke XX, 21- 26). We see, for example in Saint Matthew, how with false flattery they asked the Master: "Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar, or not?" (Matthew XXII, 17). We teach that Jesus' enemies, when presenting the issue, hoped that He, to defend His title of Messias and win over the people, would exempt them from the obligation of paying the tribute to Caesar. That would imply a grave offence of insubordination against the Emperor, for which they could denounce Him before the tribunal of the Roman President, at that time the procurator Pontius Pilate, with jurisdiction and power among the Jews to sentence to death. Jesus, however, with divine wisdom proved to them that if they officially used the coin shown Him with the effigy and inscription of Caesar, it was an obvious sign of their condition as subjects - and therefore tributaries - of the Roman Empire, wherefore they were morally obliged to pay those taxes, without being exempted thereby from their obligations to God, Whose tributaries they principally were. For that reason, when He said to His enemies: "Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's: and to God the things that are God's", He disarmed them before the people. For Saint Luke says that "they could not reprehend His word before the people: and wondering at His answer, they held their peace" (Luke XX, 26). Saint Matthew (XXII, 22a) and Saint Mark (XII, 17) say the same.

147. We teach that the pharisees and Herodians, having failed in their mission, left Jesus, as we interpret also the text of Saint Matthew (XXII, 22b), who says: "And, leaving Him, went their ways" . They reported what had happened to the Sanhedrin, which as we know was in another part of the Temple. That Council therefore set a second trap for Jesus, sending Him now some sadducees to question Him about the resurrection of the dead, which they denied, maintaining that the soul died with the body, and that there was neither resurrection nor life hereafter with reward or punishment. Thus they laid a fresh snare for Jesus, hoping to make His teaching look ridiculous in the eyes of the people, for the majority of those listening, the pharisees included, did admit the resurrection of the dead. The event is narrated by Saint Matthew XXII, 23-33), Saint Mark (XII, 18-27) and Saint Luke (XX, 27-40). We teach that the sadducees, to which sect many Sanhedrists belonged, with ironic rationalism presented to Jesus the hypothetical case of a woman married successively to seven husbands and who died after the seventh. According to Saint Mark, after presenting Him the case, they asked: "In the resurrection therefore, when they shall rise again, whose wife shall she be of them? For the seven had her to wife" (Mark XII, 23). According to the same Evangelist, Jesus responded: "Do ye not therefore err, because you know not the scriptures nor the power of God? For when they shall rise again from the dead, they shall neither marry, nor be married, but are as the Angels in Heaven" (Mark XII, 24-25). He thereby magisterially taught them that in the other life, after the general resurrection, marriage - proper to wayfarers - will no longer exist; and that the Blessed, by virtue of their glorious resurrection, will lead a life akin to that of the angels. With this teaching Jesus also showed that matrimony is dissolved at the death of one of the spouse, and that, therefore, in the other life the marriage bond no longer exists. In Heaven, however, sublimating the love that united them on earth, an even more exalted bond unites those who were spouses. Jesus finally showed them the truth of the immortality of the soul and of the resurrection of the dead with a text precisely from Exodus (III, 6), for the sadducees believed only in the Pentateuch. Let us see how Saint Mark tells it: "And as concerning the dead that they rise again have you not read in the book of Moses, how in the bush God spoke to him, saying: I am the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob?" (Mark XII, 26). Saint Luke also adds: "For He is not the God of the dead, but of the living: for all live to Him" (Luke XX, 38), thus making evident to them that if in the time of Moses God called Himself the God of those Patriarchs, who then were already dead, it was because they, though dead in body, continued to exist through the survival of - and even more so because of the supernatural life in - their immortal souls. For God would not call Himself the God of the living were this not so. Moreover, as a consequence of the immortality of the soul, the body had necessarily to rise by virtue of the power of God. Saint Matthew ends his account by saying: "And the multitudes hearing it were in admiration at His doctrine" (Matthew XXII, 33), meaning that the fame of Jesus' divine magisterium was further enhanced in their eyes through the impression made on them by the wisdom of His words. Saint Luke goes on to say that "some of the scribes answering, said to Him: Master, Thou hast said well" (Luke XX, 39). We teach that beside the sadducees there were present scribes of the sect of pharisees, some of whom praised the Master for the doctrine on the resurrection of the dead which they also shared. It was not, however, with the intention of honouring Him, but to discredit the sadducees, and to sow discord. Saint Luke ends the episode by saying: "And after that they durst not ask Him any more questions" ( Luke XX, 40), that is, concerning the question of the resurrection of the dead which they had presented. In the Acts of the Apostles, Saint Luke says that "the sadducees say that there is no resurrection, neither Angel, nor Spirit" (Acts XXIII, 8), which supports our teaching regarding that sect, namely that it admitted neither the resurrection of the flesh, nor the immortality of the soul, nor a life other than that on earth. For the expression "neither Angel, nor Spirit" indicates that the sadducees denied the existence, in the other life, of Angels and demons, as well as of souls, deeming souls to be mortal.

148. Saint Matthew says: "But the pharisees, hearing that He had silenced the sadducees, came together" (Matthew XXII, 34). We teach that there were members of the Sanhedrin among the pharisees, and that this meeting also took place in an out of the way part of the Temple. Whilst they were discussing what they ought to do with Jesus, there took place, where He was preaching, what Saint Matthew (XXII, 35-40) and Saint Mark (XII, 28- 34)relate. The latter says: "And there came one of the scribes that had heard them reasoning together, and seeing that He had answered them well, asked Him which was the first commandment of all" (Mark XII, 28). We interpret that he put the question after witnessing the affair of the sadducees. The scribe, who we affirm did not belong to the Sanhedrin, was nonetheless a pharisee and doctor of the Law, as we see in Saint Matthew (XXII, 34-35). After Jesus had taught him what comprised the great commandment, namely to love God and to love one's neighbour as one's self, Saint Mark adds that the scribe said to Him: "Well, Master, Thou hast said in truth that there is one God and there is no other besides Him. And that He should be loved with the whole heart and with the whole understanding and with the whole soul and with the whole strength. And to love one's neighbour as one's self is a greater thing than all holocausts and sacrifices" (Mark XII, 32-33). With these words the scribe reproved the hypocritical posture of his coreligionists, who put external acts of religion before the true spirit, which demands the exercise of charity. That is why, as the same Evangelist says, Jesus "seeing that he had answered wisely, said to him: Thou art not far from the Kingdom of God" (Mark XII, 34). Although in Saint Matthew it appears that doctor of the Law questioned Jesus to tempt Him, we teach, as is clear in Saint Mark, that he did so with a good intention, and that the other pharisees had used the scribe's straightforward character to ensnare Jesus through him. The same Evangelist ends by saying: "And no man after that durst ask Him any question" (Mark XII, 34), meaning that the pharisees feared to approach the Master with further questions. The eminent Doctor, Saint Anne Catherine Emmerich, says that doctor of the Law, some forty years old, was called Manasses, and that after that conversation with Jesus he broke with the other pharisees, and joined the disciples after the Ascension of the Lord.

149. Before continuing the Gospel narrative we must speak once more of Judas Iscariot, who, as we have already seen, plotted to hand over his Master in order to be rid of Him. During the morning of the same 23rd of March, the traitor saw the opportunity to have an interview with some members of the Sanhedrin when, as we know, they were gathered in Council with the pharisees in a part of the Temple separate from where Jesus was preaching to a large crowd. For that reason it was easy for Judas to slip away from the other Apostles and the disciples, and to make contact with those enemies in order to propose handing over his Master to them, though without going into details. He returned a little later to where Jesus was, without the other Apostles' and disciples' seeing him arrive or their having observed his absence.

150. When Jesus saw that the pharisees and member of the Sanhedrin, who a short while before had prepared snares for Him, did not return to where He continued to teach in the Temple, He went to where they were, accompanied by His Apostles, His disciples and a large crowd, as we interpret the following text of Saint Matthew: "And the pharisees being gathered together, Jesus asked them, saying: What think you of Christ? Whose Son is He? They say to Him: David's. He saith to them: How then doth David in spirit call Him Lord, saying: The Lord said to my Lord: Sit on My right hand, until I make Thy enemies Thy footstool? If David then call Him Lord, how is He his Son? And no man was able to answer Him a word" (Matthew XXII, 41--46). As Jesus' enemies pretended not to know the truth about Him as Messias, He asked them whose Son Christ was, they replying David's. At this answer, He reminded them of what was foretold by the Psalmist, with whose text (Ps. CIX, 1), so very familiar to them, Jesus proved that the Christ, as well as being Son of God, was Son of Man through descent from David, and the latter's Lord. He thus not only put to shame the feigned ignorance of His enemies, but warned them also that if they remained obstinate and did not recognize Him as their King and Lord, one day they would have to do so even from Hell itself. Thus they could not contradict Him, given the truth and force of His words and out of fear that many of those listening and who saw in Jesus the Christ would confront them. Saint Matthew goes on to say: "Neither durst any man from that day forth ask Him any more questions" (Matthew XXII, 46), words from which we interpret that the Master's enemies, in view of their debacle, resolved to argue no more with Him, given the public loss of prestige entailed. Neither did they think it necessary, since Judas Iscariot had offered to deliver Him to them. However, their pride would not allow them to bide their time, as we shall see.

151. According to our interpretation of the texts of Saint Mark (XII, 35-37) and Saint Luke (XX, 41--44), once Jesus had publicly confounded His enemies, as we have seen in the previous incident, He continued to teach to the crowds in the Temple, relating among other things: "How say they that Christ is the Son of David? And David himself saith in the Book of Psalms: The Lord said to my Lord, sit Thou on My right hand, till I make Thy enemies Thy footstool. David then calleth Him Lord. And how is He his Son?" (Luke XX, 41--44). We teach that Jesus cited in His preaching the answer about the Christ which His enemies had given Him before, and also referred once more to the words of the Psalmist, so as more forcibly to bring to the attention of the crowds that if His enemies had kept silent during His explanation of the truth concerning Himself, it was because they inwardly acknowledged Him to be the Christ, even though - due to the spiritual blindness they suffered because of their pride and bad faith - they made public display of the contrary. In this way Jesus tried once more to undeceive the people with regard to the levitical hierarchy in order to separate them from it.

152. Jesus ended His sermon in the Temple on that 23rd of March of the year 34 uttering very harsh invectives against the pharisees, scribes, doctors of the Law and, in short, against the Sanhedrin and other spiritual guides of His people. This He did whilst occupying the pulpit that represented the cathedra of Moses, which was located within the Porch of the Israelites, and was also visible from the women's porch and other parts of the Temple. We interpret that Saint Matthew (XXIII, 1) mentions, as does Saint Luke (XX, 45) with the same meaning, that Jesus was speaking to the Apostles, disciples and a large multitude, and was heard, moreover, by those against whom He directed His imprecations.

153. He began by saying: "The scribes and the pharisees have sitten on the chair of Moses. All things therefore whatsoever they shall say to you, observe and do: but according to their works do ye not. For they say, and do not" (Matthew XXIII, 2-3). He thus urged the people to obey them only in what was not contrary to the evangelical doctrine He taught. In order that the people not be deceived by them, for they appeared upright but were the complete contrary, Jesus publicly exposed many of the iniquitous works of His enemies, as can be seen in the sacred texts. He also said of them: "And they love the first places at feasts and the first chairs in the synagogues, and salutations in the market place, and to be called by men, Rabbi" (Matthew XXIII, 6-7). He then told the crowds: "But be not you called Rabbi. For one is your Master: and all you are brethren. And call none your father upon earth: for one is your Father, Who is in Heaven. Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, Christ" (Matthew XXIII, 8-10). According to our interpretation of the sacred text, we see that Jesus disqualified His enemies as fathers and spiritual masters of His people, attributes of which they boasted greatly. For although the levitical hierarchy, as God's representatives, always had the right to be the legitimate fathers and spiritual masters by virtue of their ecclesiastical dignity, nevertheless, with their moral corruption and adulteration of the purity of the Law, they had lost before God that spiritual ascendancy over the people which had been theirs. Far from teaching the people the truth, they turned them away from it, all the more so by rejecting the Messias. When Jesus said to the crowds: "For one is your Father, Who is in Heaven" , and "one is your Master, Christ", it was to teach us that only God, in Himself, that is in essence, is Father and Master, and that Christ, as Man, was invested by the Father with all spiritual paternity and magisterium, wherefore from Him must all other men receive it, according to the degree in which they represent Him. However, only within the true Church can spiritual paternity and magisterium be exercised; and as priests are Christ's most direct and legitimate representatives, they possess by divine right the attributes of Father and Master of souls, because of which only they are to be known and called thus with all propriety. We teach that even from the first ages of the Church, the faithful called the Apostles and other sacred ministers "Father".

principal page