Pope Francis presided over Palm Sunday Mass in St. Peter’s Square on April 2, 2023. / Daniel Ibanez/CNA
Vatican City, Apr 2, 2023 / 04:25 am (CNA).
Pope Francis presided over Mass for Palm Sunday 2023 in St. Peter’s Square on April 2. Below is the full text of his homily:
“My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Mt 27:46). This is the cry that today’s liturgy has us repeat in the responsorial psalm (cf. Ps 22:2), the only cry that Jesus makes from the cross in the Gospel we have heard. Those words bring us to the very heart of Christ’s passion, the culmination of the sufferings he endured for our salvation. “Why have you forsaken me?”
The sufferings of Jesus were so man, and whenever we listen to the account of the Passion, they pierce our hearts. There were sufferings of the body: we think of the slaps and beatings, flogging and the crowning with thorns, and in the end, the cruelty of the crucifixion. There were also sufferings of the soul: the betrayal of Judas, the denials of Peter, the condemnation of the religious and civil authorities, the mockery of the guards, the jeering at the foot of the cross, the rejection of the crowd, utter failure and the flight of the disciples.
Yet, amid all these sorrows, Jesus remained certain of one thing: the closeness of the Father. Now, however, the unthinkable has taken place. Before dying, he cries out: “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” Jesus’ abandonment.
This is the most searing of all sufferings, the suffering of the spirit. At his most tragic hour, Jesus experiences abandonment by God. Prior to that moment, he had never called the Father by his generic name, “God,” never. [He uses] Father. To convey the impact of this, the Gospel also reports his words in Aramaic. These are the only words of Jesus from the cross that have come down to us in the original language. The event is real, and the Lord’s abasement extreme: It is the abandonment of his Father, the abandonment of God.
We find it hard even to grasp what great suffering he embraced out of love for us. It is not easy to understand. He sees the gates of heaven close, he finds himself at the bitter edge, the shipwreck of life, the collapse of certainty. And he cries out: “Why?” A “why” that embraces every other “why” ever spoken. But why, God, why?
“My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” In the Bible, the word “forsake” is powerful. We hear it at moments of extreme pain: love that fails, or is rejected or betrayed; children who are rejected and aborted; situations of repudiation, the lot of widows and orphans; broken marriages, forms of social exclusion, injustice and oppression; the solitude of sickness. In a word, in the drastic severing of the bonds that unite us to others. There he tells us this word: abandonment. Christ brought all of this to the cross; upon his shoulders, he bore the sins of the world. And at the supreme moment, Jesus, the only begotten, beloved Son of the Father, experienced a situation utterly alien to his very being: the abandonment, the distance of God.
But, why did it have to come to this? For us. There is no other answer: Us. Brothers and sisters, today, this is not a show. Each of us has listened to the abandonment of Jesus, say to each other — each of us say to each other — “For me. This abandonment is the price he paid for me.”
He became one of us to the very end, in order to be completely and definitively one with us. He experienced abandonment in order not to leave us prey to despair, in order to stay at our side forever. Dear brother, dear sister, he did this for me, for you, because whenever you or I or anyone else seems pinned to the wall — and we have seen someone pinned to the wall — you see someone lost in a blind alley, plunged into the abyss of abandonment, sucked into a whirlwind of many “whys” without answer, there can still be some hope: Him, for you, for me.
It is not the end, because Jesus was there and even now, he is at your side. He has endured the distance of abandonment in order to take up into his love every possible distance that we can feel. So that each of us might say: in my failings — each of you has fallen many times — and I can say in my failings, in my desolation, whenever I feel betrayed or I have betrayed someone, when I feel cast aside or I have cast aside others or when I feel forsaken or have forsaken others, we think that Jesus was abandoned, betrayed, cast aside. And there we find him.
When I feel lost and confused, when I feel that I can’t go on, he is with me, he is there. In the thousand fits of ‘why’ and with many ‘whys’ without answer, he is there.
That is how the Lord saves us, from within our questioning “why?” From within that questioning, he opens the horizon of hope that does not disappoint. On the cross, even as he felt utter abandonment, Jesus refused to yield to despair, this limit; instead, he prayed and trusted. He cried out his “why?” in the words of the Psalm (22:2), and commended himself into the hands of the Father, despite the distance he felt (cf. Lk 23:46) or did not feel because he felt abandoned. In the hour of his abandonment, Jesus continued to trust. Even more: at the hour of abandonment, he continued to love his disciples who had fled, leaving him alone, and in the abandonment he forgave those who crucified him (v. 34). Here we see the abyss of our evil immersed in a greater love, with the result that our isolation becomes fellowship.
Brothers and sisters, a love like this, embracing us totally and to the very end, a love of Jesus like this, has the capacity to turn our stony hearts into hearts of flesh, and make them capable of mercy, tenderness and compassion. It is the style of God, this closeness, with passion and tenderness. God is like this. Christ, in his abandonment, stirs us to seek him and to love him and those who are themselves abandoned. For in them we see not only people in need, but Jesus himself, but him, he is with them, abandoned: Jesus, who saved us by descending to the depths of our human condition. He is like one of them: abandoned unto death. I think back to some weeks ago, that man, called homeless, a German man who died under the colonnade alone, abandoned. He is Jesus for each of us. Many people need our closeness, many abandoned people. I too need Jesus to caress me, to be close to me. Each of us need to find him in the abandoned, in the alone.
He wants us to care for our brothers and sisters who resemble him most, those experiencing extreme suffering and solitude. They are not only those people, but today, brothers and sisters, there are entire peoples who are exploited and abandoned; the poor live on our streets and we look the other way, we turn around; there are migrants who are no longer faces but numbers; prisoners are disowned; people written off as problems. But there are also many Christs, there are many, many Christs, people who are abandoned, invisible, hidden, discarded with white gloves: unborn children, the elderly who live alone — the elderly who live alone could also maybe be your dad, your mom, your grandpa, grandma, abandoned in geriatrics — the sick whom no one visits, the disabled who are ignored, and the young burdened by great interior emptiness, with no one prepared to listen to their cry of pain and who find another way toward suicide. The abandoned of today, the Christs of today.
Jesus, in his abandonment, asks us to open our eyes and hearts to all who find themselves abandoned. For us, as disciples of the “forsaken” Lord, no man, woman or child can be regarded as an outcast, no one left to himself or herself. Let us remember that the rejected and the excluded are living icons of Christ: they remind us of his reckless love, his forsakenness that delivers us from every form of loneliness and isolation. Brothers and sisters, today let us implore this grace: to love Jesus in his abandonment and to love Jesus in the abandoned all around us, in the abandoned all around us. Let us ask for the grace to see and acknowledge the Lord who continues to cry out in them. May we not allow his voice to go unheard amid the deafening silence of indifference. God has not left us alone; let us care, then, for those who feel alone and abandoned. Then, and only then, will we be of one mind and heart with the one who, for our sake, “emptied himself” (Phil 2:7). Totally emptied for us.
[…]
We can only pray that our next Pope is a faithful follower of Jesus Christ.
Archbishop Chaput made this comment:
“As a brother in the faith, and a successor of Peter, he deserves our ongoing prayers for his eternal life in the presence of the God he loved.
Having said that, an interregnum between papacies is a time for candor. The lack of it, given today’s challenges, is too expensive. In many ways, whatever its strengths, the Francis pontificate was inadequate to the real issues facing the Church. He had no direct involvement in the Second Vatican Council and seemed to resent the legacy of his immediate predecessors who did; men who worked and suffered to incarnate the council’s teachings faithfully into Catholic life. His personality tended toward the temperamental and autocratic. He resisted even loyal criticism.”
A pontificate “marked by mercy?” What mercy was ever extended towards the victims of the many sins he trivialized.
Let us pray he has received the real mercy in his final judgment to which his worldly pandering caused him to misunderstand, a mercy we all need.
Cardinal Dolan, on Fox & Friends, responded to a request for what he’d say to the American people on the death of Pope Francis:
“….So we believe he’s still alive, ok? He’s alive in, through, and with Jesus Christ, and, and so it, it, it just sorta’ strengthens our faith in the resurrection. It strengthens our faith in the Passover, as our Jewish brothers and sisters will say, that he’s only passing over from this life to the fullness of life. Now we don’t take that for granted. He was one eloquent teacher of mercy—the mercy of God. So he’s the first one that says, ‘You make sure that the Lord’s mercy extends to me at the moment of my death.’ And we do that. We do that. But we also pray with gratitude, and we also pray with utter confidence–uh–that he’s–uh–that–uh–that the Lord gives his mercy and he’s enjoying eternal reward which he so richly deserves.”
So there is one judgment.
Fr. Gerald Murray also appeared on Fox News today. He calmly pointed to the two paths the Church may take in choosing a new pope.
This guy showed no mercy to faithful Catholics; threw Chinese Catholics under the bus driven by their persecutors; never cared to understand victims of clergy sex abuse … Perhaps it is better to hold one’s tongue on such a day as this, but to present, as the CNA staff, a fairy tale tribute requires response. May he rest in peace.
Absolutely right, jpf!
This papacy is responsible for the coining of the term, “to Rupnik.”
As in, “For the past twelve years, Bergoglio has thoroughly Rupniked the Catholic Church by promoting evildoers within the hierarchy and by covering up for the evil deeds they have done.”
My current bishop is in the tradition of St. John Paul II and Benedict XVI.
He reaches retirement age this year. This morning when I heard of Francis’
death, I could not help feel relief that he would not be appointing my next
bishop.
Lucky you!!!
Francy, I agree. And let’s have none of the “Santo Subito” mania with reference to this Pope.
The “Mercy and Reform” narrative for the Pontiff Francis is a worn out meme, the epilogue of a 12-yr-long PR campaign, signifying…nothing.
“Thy will be done, on earth, as it is in heaven.”
“Mercy and reform”? Ruthless suppression of enemies real and imagined, a gossip hound who took gossip as truth driving his acts of suppression, slapped at adoring women, yelled at them, surrounded himself with perverts whom he protected in exchange for as much protection as he could afford, opened wide doors shut by two prior Popes, sewing confusion and chaos, and published an encylical on prayer telling contemplative orders to get a REAL job, and launched an assault on those orders…a Machiavellian Peronist who spouted power to the people while while ruling as a dictator, a reign of fear in the Vatican, and terror of orthodox bishops.
dropped text…”protected them in exchange for loyalty with as much protection as he could afford”
The dialogue here on the “Pope of the people” shows a vitriol and disparagement of the deceased “Bergoglio,” the name frequently used by those who should never “throw the first stone”. The innuendo reveals much fervor, but few details.
Seems like the court of opinion will rage on with the use of terms that Pope Francis often used. Love, not hate, compassion, not repulsion, build bridges, not walls, plea to remember the poor, being a homosexual is not a sin. I have a Gay friend. Am I supposed to isolate him and reject him?
We must love our neighbor. Inclusion, not isolation, which in some cases causes violence. The Church opposes the Gay lifestyle. I believe that Francis thought the act was sinful. Will the upcoming conclave seek to “solve” the issue?
Harken to the signs of support when many thousands prayed in the courtyard of the Vatican, and condolences from millions around the world on April 21st. The real evidence of support will come from the Conclave and the entire communion of clerics.
Pray for Pope Francis.
The use of the name “Bergoglio” is not, in itself, an insult or attack. Anyone familiar with past popes and commentary knows this.
“I have a Gay friend. Am I supposed to isolate him and reject him?”
Seriously?
First name Carl. There must be more in your turse retort than name-calling. It’s not the last name that causes concern, it’s the context that surrounds it.
Thank you for your comment.
Amen to that sentiment, let’s pray for popes francis & leo.
Last letter D morgan, that line is from Poseidon 2006 Maggie Jacinda Barrett James to Dylan Josh Lucas Johns. Near the start of the film before the wave hit them good and nice.
Everywhere in society worldwide people go by last names. The familiar then comes in when a basis for it is established. Such has been my experience anyway from early schooling to now. I have found that many do not observe it so as to give themselves leeways. On the other hand other people insist on last name so as to have heavy formalities all the time.
Although it might be that in some areas first names have become the norm and the expectation. Perhaps the US is one such place.
If I ever meet the Pope I won’t say “Hi there Prevost”. I’d say “It’s good to meet the Holy Father”; or something such.
I have a homosexualist acquaintance, I call him by his first name.
Sometimes getting serious with my father I could say, “Look here, Mr. Galy …”. But I didn’t start it he did.
With some others remaining on last names is actually how we preserve the familiar in its most healthful setting.
What can be noticed is that people like homosexualists who have put themselves out for roasting then get over-sensitive over everything. Eventually as you have seen there in the US, they want to mount everything into laws suited to them that take total precedence where they alone can call the shots as homosexualists which nobody else may define for them. At that point what material difference does it make re first name / last name. Well, it could matter to homosexualists, I suppose, whether we had a choice in it or not.
You know Mr Morgan, Pope Francis didn’t come up on his own with the concept of homosexual behavior being disordered. It’s clearly explained in our Catechism.
Those attractions are only sinful when acted upon. We each have some kind of disorder and inclination to sin because we all share the same broken human nature.
MorganD, we read: “Will the upcoming conclave seek to “solve” the issue?”
“Issue”? What issue?
Half century ago the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith already offered clarification: https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19751229_persona-humana_en.html
And, then, in 1986 Cardinal Ratzinger, Prefect for the Congregation, referred to this clarification in his “Letter to Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons. In which, he recalled, for example: “…the [1975] Congregation took note of the distinction commonly drawn between the homosexual condition or tendency and individual actions. These were described as deprived of the essential and indispensable finality, as being ‘intrinsically disordered’, and able in no case to be approved of 9cf. no. 8, Section 4).” https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19861001_homosexual-persons_en.html
Perhaps the real “issue” to be solved is today’s amnesiac mindset that disregards the longstanding distinction you now rightfully request, replacing it with, what, der Synodal Weg, Fr. Martin/Sister Jeannine Gramick photo-ops, parts of the metastasized Synod on Synodality, and then a follow-up Study Group #9 on so-called “hot button issues”—this Group charged with proposing “[t]heological criteria [!] and synodal methodologies [! say what?] for shared discernment of controversial [meaning perpetually controverted?] doctrinal [!], pastoral [!], and ethical issues [!].”
A quite broad scavenger hunt, originally scheduled to report in June 2025 and to be humbly tendered to the ruminations of Cardinal Grech’s congregational (?) “2028 Ecclesial Assembly.”
Name one moment in time anyone you declare to be an “enemy” of Francis who ever expressed Christian values in opposition to the concepts of compassion for all people, whatever their affliction, belief system, of inclinations for sin.
Why are you so weirdly capitalizing the G in “gay?”
Would you also write, “I have an Adulterous friend?”
“I have a Thief friend?”
“I have an Oppressive of the Poor friend?”
“I have a Murderous friend?”
So why this one?
He’s trying to justify the lifestyle to himself. He has often posted comments indirectly supporting homosexuality. Maybe it’s projection or wishful thinking.
Yes, I’m wondering the same thing??!!…good observation.
Suppose, morganD, if I had a Razzle-Dazzle friend, should I pass laws legalizing razzle-dazzle to prove I love him outside there and “genuinely in my heart” too besides. That would be kind of an over-burden of something I would say was not Christian love or anything humane even when I could not quite identify the something right away.
I have a homosexual acquaintance. Why should that part of it be defining anything or overtake what really counts. The only “reason” would be so that it eludes its necessarily near and already long past due vanishing point; and that “reason” is not Christian either. The emphasis on such the past 12 years was diabolical.
I tip my hat to these here writers at CWR with their sharp pencils. Easter Greetings.
Thank you for your truthful insights & your compassion. Before I read your letter/response I was convinced that 99.9% of the readership if this periodical are all right wing haters. You have proven me wrong. Peace & blessings; let us pray for both pope francis & pope leo?!
Thank you for your loving, merciful, and caring remark. It brings a smile to my face.
We are Called not to order ourselves toward our sinful inclinations and desires but to overcome our disordered inclinations and desires, by ordering ourselves to authentic Salvational Love that serves only for that which is True, Beautiful and Good and becoming transformed through accepting God’s Grace and Mercy. For if it were True that it is Loving and Merciful that we or a Loved one, remain in our sin, and not desire to overcome our disordered inclinations toward sin , we would have no need for our Savior, Jesus The Christ.
The desire to engage an a demeaning act of sin of any nature, does not change the nature of the demeaning sinful act.
Although it is True, at the hour of our death, only God can judge the state of our souls, and who is worthy of His Kingdom , our Call to Holiness is a Call to be Temples of The Holy Ghost and discriminate justly between behavior that affirms the inherent Dignity of a beloved son or daughter and is thus an act of Love, and behavior that demeans the inherent Dignity of a beloved son or daughter and is thus devoid of Love .
This article presents a really clear account of Pope Francis’ life and contributions! So informative and eye – opening.
I suppose I should be amazed or shocked by the mean spirited uncharitable un christian uncatholic tone taken by those that responded to this article online. But I sadly am not! This forum is at heart a narrow minded right wing organization of communication that only wishes to aggrandize an ultra conservative set of viewpoints.JP2 is always praised; Francis is always disparaged & made out to be “the antichrist”! I suppose it’s obvious where this publications sympathies lie when so many of your readers refer to Pope Francis as “Bergoglio”! I posted a reply to Christopher Altieri’s article “pope francis’s all out battle against clerical abuse has been a failure” & have grave doubts that it will e published (same with this missive). I suppose I expected too much from right wing RC partisans. I’m a left wing RC partisan who tries to not judge but from now on in I’ll stick to the National Catholic Reporter (NCR) & America for sane balanced nuanced intelligent insights. As to your reader’s brutal judgements on Pope Francis, clearly kindness is at a discount among your readership.
“… who tries to not judge …”
Yes. It’s obvious. Your self-control is commendable. Laudable. Remarkable. Please, continue in your walk of kindness and charity.
It is disrespectful to both The Blessed Trinity and The Papacy to refer to a man as Pope, who could not possibly be validly elected to the Papacy, having denied sexual immorality to be sin, prior to his election, without manifesting any sign that he repented or even desires to repent, and thus setting himself above The Word Of Perfect Divine Eternal Love Incarnate, Our Savior, Jesus The Christ, and Divine Law.