Vatican City, Apr 11, 2020 / 03:40 pm (CNA).- Here is the full text of the Easter Vigil homily of Pope Francis, delivered April 11 at St. Peter’s Basilica.
“After the Sabbath” (Mt 28:1), the women went to the tomb. This is how the Gospel of this holy Vigil began: with the Sabbath. It is the day of the Easter Triduum that we tend to neglect as we eagerly await the passage from Friday’s cross to Easter Sunday’s Alleluia. This year however, we are experiencing, more than ever, the great silence of Holy Saturday. We can imagine ourselves in the position of the women on that day. They, like us, had before their eyes the drama of suffering, of an unexpected tragedy that happened all too suddenly. They had seen death and it weighed on their hearts. Pain was mixed with fear: would they suffer the same fate as the Master? Then too there was fear about the future and all that would need to be rebuilt. A painful memory, a hope cut short. For them, as for us, it was the darkest hour.
Yet in this situation the women did not allow themselves to be paralyzed. They did not give in to the gloom of sorrow and regret, they did not morosely close in on themselves, or flee from reality. On the Sabbath they were doing something simple yet extraordinary: preparing at home the spices to anoint the body of Jesus. They did not stop loving; in the darkness of their hearts, they lit a flame of mercy. Our Lady spent that Saturday, the day that would be dedicated to her, in prayer and hope. She responded to sorrow with trust in the Lord. Unbeknownst to these women, they were making preparations, in the darkness of that Sabbath, for “the dawn of the first day of the week”, the day that would change history. Jesus, like a seed buried in the ground, was about to make new life blossom in the world; and these women, by prayer and love, were helping to make that hope flower. How many people, in these sad days, have done and are still doing what those women did, sowing seeds of hope! With small gestures of care, affection and prayer.
At dawn the women went to the tomb. There the angel says to them: “Do not be afraid. He is not here; for he has risen” (vv. 5-6). They hear the words of life even as they stand before a tomb… And then they meet Jesus, the giver of all hope, who confirms the message and says: “Do not be afraid” (v. 10). Do not be afraid, do not yield to fear: This is the message of hope. It is addressed to us, today. Today. These are the words that God repeats to us this very night.
Tonight we acquire a fundamental right that can never be taken away from us: the right to hope. It is a new and living hope that comes from God. It is not mere optimism; it is not a pat on the back or an empty word of encouragement, with a passing smile. No. It is a gift from heaven, which we could not have earned on our own. Over these weeks, we have kept repeating, “All will be well”, clinging to the beauty of our humanity and allowing words of encouragement to rise up from our hearts. But as the days go by and fears grow, even the boldest hope can dissipate. Jesus’ hope is different. He plants in our hearts the conviction that God is able to make everything work unto good, because even from the grave he brings life.
The grave is the place where no one who enters ever leaves. But Jesus emerged for us; he rose for us, to bring life where there was death, to begin a new story in the very place where a stone had been placed. He, who rolled away the stone that sealed the entrance of the tomb, can also remove the stones in our hearts. So, let us not give in to resignation; let us not place a stone before hope. We can and must hope, because God is faithful. He did not abandon us; he visited us and entered into our situations of pain, anguish and death. His light dispelled the darkness of the tomb: today he wants that light to penetrate even to the darkest corners of our lives. Dear sister, dear brother, even if in your heart you have buried hope, do not give up: God is greater. Darkness and death do not have the last word. Be strong, for with God nothing is lost!
Courage. This is a word often spoken by Jesus in the Gospels. Only once do others say it, to encourage a person in need: “Courage; rise, [Jesus] is calling you!” (Mk 10:49). It is he, the Risen One, who raises us up from our neediness. If, on your journey, you feel weak and frail, or fall, do not be afraid, God holds out a helping hand and says to you: “Courage!”. You might say, as did Don Abbondio (in Manzoni’s novel), “Courage is not something you can give yourself” (I Promessi Sposi, XXV). True, you cannot give it to yourself, but you can receive it as a gift. All you have to do is open your heart in prayer and roll away, however slightly, that stone placed at the entrance to your heart so that Jesus’ light can enter. You only need to ask him: “Jesus, come to me amid my fears and tell me too: Courage!” With you, Lord, we will be tested but not shaken. And, whatever sadness may dwell in us, we will be strengthened in hope, since with you the cross leads to the resurrection, because you are with us in the darkness of our nights; you are certainty amid our uncertainties, the word that speaks in our silence, and nothing can ever rob us of the love you have for us.
This is the Easter message, a message of hope. It contains a second part, the sending forth. “Go and tell my brethren to go to Galilee” (Mt 28:10), Jesus says. “He is going before you to Galilee” (v. 7), the angel says. The Lord goes before us. He always goes before us. It is encouraging to know that he walks ahead of us in life and in death; he goes before us to Galilee, that is, to the place which for him and his disciples evoked the idea of daily life, family and work. Jesus wants us to bring hope there, to our everyday life. For the disciples, Galilee was also the place of remembrance, for it was the place where they were first called. Returning to Galilee means remembering that we have been loved and called by God. Each of us has our own Galilee. We need to resume the journey, reminding ourselves that we are born and reborn thanks to an invitation given gratuitously to us out of love. This is always the point from which we can set out anew, especially in times of crisis and trial.
But there is more. Galilee was the farthest region from where they were: from Jerusalem. And not only geographically. Galilee was also the farthest place from the sacredness of the Holy City. It was an area where people of different religions lived: it was the “Galilee of the Gentiles” (Mt 4:15). Jesus sends them there and asks them to start again from there. What does this tell us? That the message of hope should not be confined to our sacred places, but should be brought to everyone. For everyone is in need of reassurance, and if we, who have touched “the Word of life” (1 Jn 1:1) do not give it, who will? How beautiful it is to be Christians who offer consolation, who bear the burdens of others and who offer encouragement: messengers of life in a time of death! In every Galilee, in every area of the human family to which we all belong and which is part of us – for we are all brothers and sisters – may we bring the song of life! Let us silence the cries of death, no more wars! May we stop the production and trade of weapons, since we need bread, not guns. Let the abortion and killing of innocent lives end. May the hearts of those who have enough be open to filling the empty hands of those who do not have the bare necessities.
Those women, in the end, “took hold” of Jesus’ feet (Mt 28:9); feet that had travelled so far to meet us, to the point of entering and emerging from the tomb. The women embraced the feet that had trampled death and opened the way of hope. Today, as pilgrims in search of hope, we cling to you, Risen Jesus. We turn our backs on death and open our hearts to you, for you are Life itself.
[…]
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.”’