Vatican City, Jun 29, 2020 / 08:30 am (CNA).- Here is the full text of Pope Francis’ homily on the Solemnity of Saints Peter and Paul delivered June 29, 2020 at the Basilica of St. Peter, and checked against delivery.
On the feast of the two Apostles of this city, I would like to share with you two key words: unity and prophecy.
Unity. We celebrate together two very different individuals: Peter, a fisherman who spent his days amid boats and nets, and Paul, a learned Pharisee who taught in synagogues. When they went forth on mission, Peter spoke to Jews, and Paul to pagans. And when their paths crossed, they could argue heatedly, as Paul is unashamed to admit in one of his letters (cf. Gal 2:11). In short, they were two very different people, yet they saw one another as brothers, as happens in close-knit families where there may be frequent arguments, but unfailing love. Yet the closeness that joined Peter and Paul did not come from natural inclinations, but from the Lord. He did not command us to like one another, but to love one another. He is the one who unites us, without making us all alike. He unites us in our differences.
Today’s first reading brings us to the source of this unity. It relates how the newly born Church was experiencing a moment of crisis: Herod was furious, a violent persecution had broken out, and the Apostle James had been killed. And now Peter had been arrested. The community seemed headless, everyone fearing for his life. Yet at that tragic moment no one ran away, no one thought about saving his own skin, no one abandoned the others, but all joined in prayer. From prayer they drew strength, from prayer came a unity more powerful than any threat. The text says that, “while Peter was kept in prison, the Church prayed fervently to God for him” (Acts 12:5). Unity is the fruit of prayer, for prayer allows the Holy Spirit to intervene, opening our hearts to hope, shortening distances and holding us together at times of difficulty.
Let us notice something else: at that dramatic moment, no one complained about Herod’s evil and his persecution. No one insulted Herod — and we are so used to insulting those who hold responsibility. It is pointless, even tedious, for Christians to waste their time complaining about the world, about society, about everything that is not right. Complaints change nothing. Let us remember that complaints are the second door closed to the Holy Spirit, as I said on the day of Pentecost: the first is narcissism, the second discouragement, the third pessimism. Narcissism takes you to the mirror, to continually look at yourself; discouragement to complaints; pessimism to the dark, in the dark. These are the attitudes that close the door to the Holy Spirit. Those Christians did not cast blame; they prayed. In that community, no one said: “If Peter had been more careful, we would not be in this situation.” No one. Peter, as a human, had reasons to be criticized, but no one criticized him. They did not talk about Peter; they prayed for him. They did not talk about Peter behind his back, but they spoke to God. We today can ask: “Are we protecting our unity with prayer? The unity of the Church? Are we praying for one another?” What would happen if we prayed more and complained less? … with speech that was a little more calm. The same thing that happened to Peter in prison: now as then, so many closed doors would be opened, so many chains that bind would be broken. And we would be amazed, like the girl who — seeing Peter at the gate — did not open it, but ran inside, amazed with the joy of seeing Peter. Let us ask for the grace to be able to pray for one another. Saint Paul urged Christians to pray for everyone, especially those who govern (cf. 1 Tim 2:1-3). “But this ruler is to be …,” and the descriptions are many. I will not say them because this is not the time nor the place to say the qualifications that are heard against the rulers. Let God judge them, but let us pray for those who govern. Let us pray; they need prayer. This is a task that the Lord has entrusted to us. Are we carrying it out? Or do we simply talk, criticize, and do nothing? God expects that when we pray we will also be mindful of those who do not think as we do, those who have slammed the door in our face, those whom we find it hard to forgive. Only prayer unlocks chains, only prayer paves the way to unity.
Today we bless the pallia to be bestowed on the dean of the College of Cardinals and the metropolitan archbishops named in the last year. The pallium is a sign of the unity between the sheep and the Shepherd who, like Jesus, carries the sheep on his shoulders, so as never to be separated from it. Today too, in accordance with a fine tradition, we are united in a particular way with the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople. Peter and Andrew were brothers, and, whenever possible, we exchange fraternal visits on our respective feast days. We do so not only out of courtesy, but as a means of journeying together towards the goal that the Lord points out to us: that of full unity. Today they were unable to come due to the problem of travel due to the coronavirus, but when I went down to venerate the remains of Peter, I felt in my heart my beloved brother Bartholomew. They are here with us.
The second word is prophecy. Unity and prophecy. The Apostles were challenged by Jesus. Peter heard Jesus’ question: “Who do you say I am?” (cf. Mt 16:15). At that moment he realized that the Lord was not interested in what others thought, but in Peter’s personal decision to follow him. Paul’s life changed after a similar challenge from Jesus: “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?” (Acts 9:4). The Lord shook Paul to the core: more than just knocking him to the ground on the road to Damascus, he shattered Paul’s illusion of being respectably religious. As a result, the proud Saul turned into Paul. Paul, a name that means “small”. These challenges and reversals are followed by prophecies: “You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church” (Mt 16:18); and, for Paul: “He is a chosen instrument of mine to carry my name before the Gentiles and kings and the sons of Israel” (Acts 9:15). Prophecy is born whenever we allow ourselves to be challenged by God, not when we are concerned to keep everything quiet and under control. It doesn’t come from my thoughts, it doesn’t come from my closed heart. It is born if we allow ourselves to be challenged by God. When the Gospel overturns certainties, prophecy arises. Only someone who is open to God’s surprises can become a prophet. And there they are: Peter and Paul, prophets who look to the future. Peter is the first to proclaim that Jesus is “the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Mt 16:16). Paul, who considers his impending death: “From now on there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord will award to me” (2 Tim 4:8).
Today we need prophecy, real prophecy: not fast talkers who promise the impossible, but testimonies that the Gospel is possible. What is needed are not miraculous shows — it hurts me when I hear it said: “We want a prophetic Church.” Well, what do you do for the Church to be prophetic? We need lives that show the miracle of God’s love. Not forcefulness, but forthrightness. Not palaver, but prayer. Not speeches, but service. Do you want a prophetic Church? Start serving and be silent. Not theory, but testimony. We are not to become rich, but rather to love the poor. We are not to save up for ourselves, but to spend ourselves for others. To seek not the approval of this world — that of being good with everyone — no, this is not prophecy, but we need the joy of the world to come. Not better pastoral plans that seem to have their own efficiency, as if they were sacraments, efficient pastoral projects, no, but we need pastors who offer their lives: lovers of God. That is how Peter and Paul preached Jesus, as men in love with God. At his crucifixion, Peter did not think about himself, but about his Lord, and, considering himself unworthy of dying like Jesus, asked to be crucified upside down. Before his beheading, Paul thought only of offering his life; he wrote that he wanted to be “poured out like a libation” (2 Tim 4:6). That was prophecy. Not words. That was prophecy, the prophecy that changes history.
Dear brothers and sisters, Jesus prophesied to Peter: “You are Peter and on this rock I will build my Church”. There is a similar prophecy for us too. It is found in the last book of the Bible, where Jesus promises his faithful witnesses “a white stone, on which a new name is written” (Rev 2:17). Just as the Lord turned Simon into Peter, so he is calling each one of us, in order to make us living stones with which to build a renewed Church and a renewed humanity. There are always those who destroy unity and stifle prophecy, yet the Lord believes in us and he asks you: “You, do you want to be a builder of unity? Do you want to be a prophet of my heaven on earth?” Brothers and Sisters, let us be challenged by Jesus, and find the courage to say to him: “Yes, I do!”
[…]
From the back bleachers, yours truly humbly proposes that “a balanced synthesis between the laws of God and the dynamics of man’s conscience and freedom” respects the immutable and inviolable moral absolutes against intrinsically evil acts, as elaborated in “Veritatis Splendor,” combined with exercise of the moral virtues for matters which are not absolute.
Two points:
FIRST, with regard to such moral absolutes along with God’s infinite mercy, “…the commandment of love of God and neighbor does not have in its dynamic any higher limit, BUT (Caps added) it does have a lower limit, beneath which the commandment is broken” (n. 52).
SECOND, regarding other and more problematic matters, still governed still by the moral virtues (courage, temperance, justice and especially prudential judgment), and mostly the responsibility of those directly accountable for the common good, we can turn to the Catholic Social Teaching as synthesized, already, in “The Compendium” (2004). And, which might be organized to better effect into, first, the always central “transcendent dignity of the human person” and then, second, the following binaries:
(1) Solidarity & Subsidiarity, always together; (2) Dignity of the human Person & Family; (3) Rights & Responsibilities; (4) well-formed Conscience & faithful Citizenship; (5) Option for the Poor & the dignity of Work; (6) Personal Property & intergenerational care for God’s Creation.
SUMMARY: Town hall “synodality” is not enough, and Cardinal Fernandez (Fiducia Supplicans) is too much.
A balanced synthesis . . ? Hopefully an error in translation of the Pope’s words.
Isn’t this universe, world, & our human species (according to The New Testament witness) subject to the Stoikheia – that is the tenant Principalities, Powers, Dominions, Rulers, Authorities, Governments, & Thrones that reject GOD’s authority, self-identifying as “a whole host of evil in high places”.
Aren’t The Church’s many problems caused by melding with these intrinsic evils?
Isn’t the Christ-given work of The Church to confront ‘the ways of the world & its prince’ with our Holy Spirit-anointed radical obedience to & our persevering proclamation of GOD’s holy commandments; whilst not counting the cost . . ?
Now, that’s a challenge young Catholics will respond to – if given half a chance!
“Be calm but vigilant, because your enemy the devil is prowling round like a roaring lion, looking for someone to eat.”
“Think of the love that The FATHER has lavished on us, by letting us be called GOD’s children; and that is what we
A balanced synthesis . . ? Hopefully an error in translation of the Pope’s words.
Isn’t this universe, world, & our human species (according to The New Testament witness) subject to the Stoikheia – that is the tenant Principalities, Powers, Dominions, Rulers, Authorities, Governments, & Thrones that reject GOD’s authority, self-identifying as “a whole host of evil in high places”.
Aren’t The Church’s many problems caused by melding with these intrinsic evils?
Isn’t the Christ-given work of The Church to confront ‘the ways of the world & its prince’ with our Holy Spirit-anointed radical obedience to & our persevering proclamation of GOD’s holy commandments; whilst not counting the cost . . ?
Now, that’s a challenge young Catholics will respond to – if given half a chance!
“Be calm but vigilant, because your enemy the devil is prowling round like a roaring lion, looking for someone to eat.”
“Think of the love that The FATHER has lavished on us, by letting us be called GOD’s children; and that is what we are. Because the world refused to acknowledge Him, therefore it does not acknowledge us.”
“No created thing can hide from Him; everything is uncovered & open to the eyes of The One who to whom we must give an account of ourselves.”
“A balanced synthesis?”
About a year ago a friend thought to balance my bookshelf by unloading seven volumes of the complete works of St. Alphonsus de Liguori (1926!), lifted many years ago from a real pastor who passed away in 1988. I need to spend some time with this…
Thinking about “God’s mercy” and turning almost randomly to Part I of “The Way of Salvation and of Perfection,” we find many dozens of Meditations, including VIII: “The abuse of God’s Mercy”:
The reader is counseled to avoid both despair and presumption [….]. Second, “God is merciful, but he is also just [….]. Then third, “God is not mocked [….] The hope of those who commit sin because God is forgiving, is an abomination in his sight: their hope, says the holy Job, is an abomination [much in italics].”
Any “synthesis” conforming to “the spirit of St. Alphonsus Maria de’ Liguori” will be a daunting and sobering task, given the 3,000 pages of unambiguous fine print such as this.
SUMMARY: Not much here on “time is greater than space.”
A presumption there is a synthesis. If we’re addressing Hegel’s thesis antithesis synthesis it’s argued that Hegel does not give evidence of using the formula in any of his works (see Leonard F Wheat in Undiscovered Thesis-Antithesis-Synthesis Dialectics).
Intelligence in Man is not distinguished by level rather by kind. Among animal species only man can make the following comparative distinctions: 1. universal and particular 2. one and many 3. union and separation 4. essence and existence 5. divine and human 6. inner and outer 7. in itself and for itself 8. potential and actual 9. unconscious and conscious 10. artificial [man-made] and natural 11. God and man. 12. Father and Son Jesus (Wheat).
The proposition of synthesis poses a presumption these appositional parings can be synthesized. Except for the Father and Son Jesus. If we take a moral principle [principle here replaces absolute] can we modify it to satisfy its opposite and retain a morally acceptable compromise? For example communion for divorced and remarried. If using Amoris Laetitia as a guide can we retain the precept Adultery and allow communion – even if based on mitigating circumstances? Is that not accommodation rather than synthesis?
It seems Pope Leo’s premise “balanced synthesis’ between God’s law, human freedom” cannot satisfy both principle/precept and freedom. A solution is found when it’s shown as given the example of Alphonsus Ligouri that a famished man secretly taking fruit from someone’s orchard is not stealing because life or death presents a right. Whereas taking another man’s wife for sensual fulfillment presents an evil. The natural law that undergirds our conscience tells us that.
Leo XIV has made a terrible decision to open up doctrinal moral principles for discussion in reaching a synthesis with human freedom – in a regional Bogotá setting attended by a cadre of Redemptorist lecturers, professors from Columbia, a handful from elsewhere – with immense repercussions [particularly doctrinal fragmentation] for the universal Church.
Leo, a canon lawyer, must be aware that what occurs regionally by a group of unknowns [despite the heady title International Congress of Theologians] with his papal sanction will be taken elsewhere as the rule or at least the option, and for other such regional discussion of doctrine.
Hegel, when addressing thesis antithesis synthesis, theorized these dynamics in reference to the history of nations and cultures. Not to definitive moral principles.
These secular philosophers also know their ruminations including dialectics are taken as rules and options for other things beyond the initial application.
Becoming popularized or well spread it takes on bulk or immenseness sometimes personalized or “authored” and in general through “autonomous” anonymity.
Thanks, dear Fr Dr Peter Morello for illuminating what appears to be yet another crafty scheme to deceive & manipulate The Church towards blatant denial of GOD’s strict but benevolent instructions, that enable us to live a life of Grace.
Ps 118 “How shall we remain sinless? By obeying Your Word.”
“I have sought You with all my heart: let me not stray from Your commands”
“I treasure Your promise in my heart, lest I sin against You.”
“Blessed are You, O LORD, teach me Your statutes.”
Not to dismiss your analysis–which applies especially to the past twelve years–my proposition is that a synthesis of the Hegelian vintage is not possible if attempted within the spirit of St. Alphonsus Maria de Liguori. Which is why I used the terms “daunting and sobering.”
Thomists celebrate Aquinas’ “synthesis” of Faith and Reason, and this direction is clearly not Hegelian. With you, I would prefer if Leo XIV had used the better term “coherence” instead of synthesis, which was preferred by Benedict XVI.
A Hegelian outcome would/will (?) be out of step with Liguori. That’s my point–a not-entirely-subtle invitation for theologians to consider that what the magisterium upholds about God and human freedom is not “rigid, bigoted, fixistic and backwardist.”
Agreed.
Although Peter, Faith and Reason cohesive by nature [as God ordained] are not two opposing premises. God’s Law and human freedom are opposed. Unless we attribute freedom to following God’s Law. Which is not a true synthesis. The phrasing by Leo XIV means freedom from God’s Law.
Although Peter, Faith and Reason cohesive by nature [as God ordained] are not two opposing premises. God’s Law and human freedom are opposed. Unless we attribute freedom to following God’s Law. Which is not a true synthesis. The phrasing by Leo XIV means freedom from God’s Law.
Faith is a gift. Reason a natural faculty. Neither are opposed although differ, both compliment the other.
“God’s Law and human freedom are opposed”?
“It follows that the authority of the Church, when she pronounces on moral questions, in no way undermines the freedom of conscience of Christians. This is so not only because freedom of conscience is never freedom ‘from’ the truth [!] but always and only freedom ‘in’ the truth [!], but also because the Magisterium does not bring to the Christian conscience truths which are extraneous to it; rather it brings to light the truths which it ought already to possess, developing them from the starting point of the primordial act of faith” (St. John Paul II, “Veritatis Splendor,” 1993, n. 64).
“God’s Law and human freedom are opposed. Unless we attribute freedom to following God’s Law”.
By ordained nature the will is not opposed to God’s law. By tendency due to original sin it is opposed.
Jesus Christ is the balance between the laws of God and the dynamics of man’s conscience and freedom.
“It brings to light the truths which it ought already to possess, developing them from the starting point of the primordial act of faith” (St. John Paul II, “Veritatis Splendor,” 1993, n. 64).
John Paul is not precise in this diagram in reference to the natural law within, that prescient knowledge that all men possess realized in the act of apprehension of good from evil. ‘We do not require grace to apprehend this law within’, which law is a reflection of the divine law. That is why all men are subject to judgment if they commit intrinsically evil sin. It is this natural law that undergirds conscience. Insofar as freedom it belongs to the will. Which is why Aquinas holds, evil is in the will.
Faith enlightens the intellect regarding natural law and strengthens the will to observe the law. Whereas revealed knowledge of heroic virtue required for salvation are not found by reason, rather they are gifts of the Holy Spirit, knowledge of which and adherence by grace surpass Man’s natural capacity.
A correction to “John Paul is not precise in this diagram”. John Paul is likely focused on the baptized who are certainly recipients of grace at baptism, and other non baptized to whom God wishes to confer grace – all of whom would be subject “to [the] light [of] truths which it ought already to possess, developing them from the starting point of the primordial act of faith”.
“Balanced synthesis”? The corruptions going on in liturgy said to be according to VATICAN II the pastoral Council, are not pastoral.
At least, this sounds properly Papal –
‘The interview appears in the Spanish-language book “León XIV: ciudadano del mundo, misionero del siglo XXI” (“Leo XIV: Citizen of the World, Missionary of the XXI Century”), a biography by Crux correspondent Elise Ann Allen, published on Sept. 18 in Spanish by Penguin Peru. English and Portuguese editions are expected in 2026.
In the book, Pope Leo, a longtime missionary in Peru before he was pope, underlines that the Church’s primary mission remains spiritual, not political.
“My role is announcing the good news, preaching the Gospel,” he said. “I don’t see my primary role as trying to be the solver of the world’s problems. I don’t see my role as that at all, really, although I think that the Church has a voice, a message that needs to continue to be preached, to be spoken and spoken loudly.”’