Katholieke Stichting Medische Ethiek
28 maart 2024

Frans parlement zet stap richting verankering abortus in grondwet

Katholiek Nieuwsblad, 5 februari 2024

Het Franse parlement heeft dinsdag groen licht gegeven om het recht op abortus in de Franse grondwet op te nemen. Krap twee weken geleden namen duizenden Franse burgers nog deel aan de Mars voor het Leven in Parijs.

Het plan om toegang tot abortus in de Franse grondwet op te nemen werd in oktober 2023 aangekondigd door president Emmanuel Macron. Franse media duidden dit als een reactie op de het terugdraaien van Roe v. Wade arrest door het Amerikaanse Hooggerechtshof. Daarmee kunnen afzonderlijke Amerikaanse Staten zelf beslissen over het recht op abortus.

Recht op abortus

Kort na de aankondiging uitte aartsbisschop Pierre d’Ornellas van Rennes, ernstige zorgen in een interview met Vatican News. De woordvoerder van medisch-ethische zaken namens de Franse bisschoppen merkte op dat Frankrijk “praktisch het enige land ter wereld zou zijn” dat het recht op abortus in een grondwet verankert.

“Wat gebeurt er als abortus als principe in de grondwet wordt vastgelegd? Betekent dit dat het recht op leven een uitzondering wordt?”, waarschuwt d’Ornellas.

234.000 abortussen in 2022

De aartsbisschop zei verder dat het abortuscijfer in Frankrijk al twee keer zo hoog is als in Duitsland. “Ik denk niet dat het vastleggen van vrije toegang tot abortus in de grondwet het feit zal wegnemen dat het ‘altijd een tragedie’ is.”

In 2022 werden maar liefst 234.000 abortussen in Frankrijk geregistreerd, blijkt uit officiële cijfers. Ten opzichte van 2021 was er sprake van een stijging van 17.000, waarmee het jaar 2022 het hoogst aantal abortussen telt in de laatste dertig jaar.

‘Gegarandeerde vrijheid’

De voorgestelde grondwetswijziging zou “gegarandeerde vrijheid” bieden aan vrouwen om een abortus te ondergaan. Geen van de grote politieke partijen in het Franse parlement trekt het “recht” op abortus in twijfel. Het wetsvoorstel kreeg 493 stemmen voor en 30 tegen.

Mars voor het leven

Frankrijk decriminaliseerde abortus op 17 januari 1975. Elk jaar wordt de Parijse Mars voor het leven gehouden op de derde zondag van januari, ter herinnering aan de datum van de wetgeving.

Dit jaar gingen volgens de organisatoren 15.000 Franse katholieken en pro-life activisten de straat op in Parijs op 21 januari – minder dan twee weken voor de stemming van dinsdag in het Franse Lagerhuis.

Franse senaat

Na de stemming van dinsdag in de Nationale Assemblee moet de Franse Senaat instemmen met precies dezelfde formulering. Die stemming staat gepland voor eind februari.

Paus Franciscus, die herhaaldelijk abortus heeft veroordeeld, sprak over het recht op leven tijdens de vlucht van de Franse stad Marseille naar Rome op 23 september vorig jaar.

‘Je speelt niet met het leven’

In een reactie op de vraag van journalisten of hij de kwestie van euthanasie met Macron had besproken, zei de paus: “Ik heb duidelijk gesproken toen hij naar het Vaticaan kwam. Ik heb hem duidelijk mijn mening verteld. Je speelt niet met het leven, niet aan het begin en niet aan het einde.”

Overgenomen met toestemming van Katholiek Nieuwsblad.


Nederland maakt actieve levensbeëindiging mogelijk voor kinderen onder 12 jaar

Katholiek Nieuwsblad, 2 februari 2024
door Emma Koevoets

Een nieuwe regeling voor actieve levensbeëindiging bij kinderen van 1 tot 12 jaar ging gisteren van kracht. Het gaat om ongeneeslijk zieke kinderen voor wie palliatieve zorg niet genoeg verlichting zou bieden. Moraaltheoloog Lambert Hendriks ziet daarin de neiging om “iedere uitzondering wettelijk af te dekken”.

Kinderen vanaf twaalf jaar zijn volgens de wet wilsbekwaam en mogen medische beslissingen nemen. Voor hen geldt de euthanasiewet al, waardoor ze – samen met hun ouders – kunnen beslissen over hun levenseinde.

Wens van kinderartsen

Deze nieuwe regeling heeft betrekking op een kleine groep van vijf tot tien ongeneeslijk zieke kinderen die ondraaglijk lijden en naar verwachting binnen afzienbare tijd aan hun ziekte zullen overlijden. Ouders en artsen zijn soms van mening dat het leven van deze kinderen onnodig lang gerekt wordt.

Veel kinderartsen in Nederland die betrokken zijn bij de zorg voor ongeneeslijk zieke kinderen wilden dat levensbeëindiging bij deze groep mogelijk werd, meldt Nieuwsuur.

Meer afstandelijke rol

De regeling bepaalt dat ondraaglijk en uitzichtloos lijden niet anders kan worden opgelost. Voor artsen is het cruciaal dat het Openbaar Ministerie aangeeft geen vervolging in te stellen, op voorwaarde dat alle zorgvuldigheidseisen worden nageleefd.

Meldingen zullen worden beoordeeld door een commissie met passende medische deskundigheid, geleid door een strafrechtjurist. Het OM zal een meer afstandelijke rol innemen.

Wilsonbekwame kinderen

Euthanasie is onder strikte voorwaarden legaal in Nederland, gereguleerd door de Wet toetsing levensbeëindiging op verzoek en hulp bij zelfdoding (Wtl). Deze wet is niet van toepassing op kinderen van een tot twaalf jaar oud.

De Nederlandse euthanasiewet gaat namelijk uit van wilsbekwaamheid: de patiënt kan zelf om het eigen levenseinde vragen. Deze jonge tot zeer jonge zieke kinderen zijn hier vaak niet toe in staat.

Juist wilsonbekwaamheid bij euthanasie heeft de afgelopen jaren geleid tot veel politiek debat, ook in vergelijkbare situaties met demente ouderen.

Problematisch

De Nederlandse regeling is wereldwijd uniek en gaat het verst in vergelijking met andere landen. In België bestaat al langere tijd de mogelijkheid om het leven van ernstig lijdende, ongeneeslijk zieke kinderen te beëindigen, maar daar is het slechts een optie als het kind in staat is mee te beslissen.

Moraaltheoloog Lambert Hendriks zegt deze nieuwe regeling als een typisch voorbeeld van Nederlands denken te beschouwen. “Men wil met alle geweld iedere mogelijke uitzondering in een wet of een regeling afgedekt zien.”

Euthanasie was altijd al een problematisch verhaal is voor wie onvoorwaardelijk aan de eerbied voor het leven vast wil houden, aldus Hendriks. “Hier speelt nog een groter probleem mee: wie beslist er eigenlijk over de dood van deze kinderen? De omgeving? Het kind zelf? In hoeverre kan een kind een dergelijke zwaarwegende afweging maken? Kun je zoiets van een kind vragen?”

Geen beter alternatief

Voorheen kon een arts alleen pijn bestrijden door middel van palliatieve sedatie, waarbij de patiënt met een prik of infuus een slaapmiddel krijgt. Ook kunnen artsen en ouders ervoor kiezen om verdere behandeling, zoals medicatie, stop te zetten.

Een radicalere optie is versterven, waarbij het toedienen van eten en drinken wordt gestaakt. Hoewel al deze maatregelen de dood kunnen bespoedigen, kan het stervensproces van een kind toch nog dagen tot zelfs weken duren.

De nieuwe regeling stelt dat het ondraaglijke en uitzichtloze lijden niet op andere wijze kan worden verlicht en dat levensbeëindiging mogelijk is wanneer dit voor arts en ouders het enige redelijke alternatief is.

‘Niet de oplossing’

Hendriks denkt dat deze regeling ongetwijfeld als effect zal hebben dat er in vele situaties – veel meer dan nu – overwogen zal worden of euthanasie bij kinderen niet de oplossing zou moeten zijn.

Hij wijst er op dat er nog te vaak sprake is van tekorten in de zorg, ook in de kinderzorg, en van een niet adequaat omgaan met het bestrijden van pijn en lijden. “Alvorens men het leven van deze kinderen beëindigt, moet daar toch echt eerst naar gekeken worden.”

“En”, voegt hij toe, “als dan echt alle middelen uitgeput lijken te zijn, dan mag nog steeds blijken dat menswaardige zorg te maken heeft met een goed omgaan met het lijden, en niet met het kiezen voor de dood.”

Overgenomen met toestemming van Katholiek Nieuwsblad.


Slimme machines leggen het af tegen menselijke wijsheid

Message for the 58th World Day of Social Communications

24 January 2024
Pope Francis

Dear brothers and sisters!

The development of systems of artificial intelligence, to which I devoted my recent Message for the World Day of Peace, is radically affecting the world of information and communication, and through it, certain foundations of life in society. These changes affect everyone, not merely professionals in those fields. The rapid spread of astonishing innovations, whose workings and potential are beyond the ability of most of us to understand and appreciate, has proven both exciting and disorienting. This leads inevitably to deeper questions about the nature of human beings, our distinctiveness and the future of the species homo sapiens in the age of artificial intelligence. How can we remain fully human and guide this cultural transformation to serve a good purpose?

Starting with the heart

Before all else, we need to set aside catastrophic predictions and their numbing effects. A century ago, Romano Guardini reflected on technology and humanity. Guardini urged us not to reject “the new” in an attempt to “preserve a beautiful world condemned to disappear”. At the same time, he prophetically warned that “we are constantly in the process of becoming. We must enter into this process, each in his or her own way, with openness but also with sensitivity to everything that is destructive and inhumane therein”. And he concluded: “These are technical, scientific and political problems, but they cannot be resolved except by starting from our humanity. A new kind of human being must take shape, endowed with a deeper spirituality and new freedom and interiority”.

At this time in history, which risks becoming rich in technology and poor in humanity, our reflections must begin with the human heart. Only by adopting a spiritual way of viewing reality, only by recovering a wisdom of the heart, can we confront and interpret the newness of our time and rediscover the path to a fully human communication. In the Bible, the heart is seen as the place of freedom and decision-making. It symbolizes integrity and unity, but it also engages our emotions, desires, dreams; it is, above all, the inward place of our encounter with God. Wisdom of the heart, then, is the virtue that enables us to integrate the whole and its parts, our decisions and their consequences, our nobility and our vulnerability, our past and our future, our individuality and our membership within a larger community.

This wisdom of the heart lets itself be found by those who seek it and be seen by those who love it; it anticipates those who desire it and it goes in search of those who are worthy of it (cf. Wis 6:12-16). It accompanies those willing to take advice (cf. Prov 13:10), those endowed with a docile and listening heart (cf. 1 Kg 3:9). A gift of the Holy Spirit, it enables us to look at things with God’s eyes, to see connections, situations, events and to uncover their real meaning. Without this kind of wisdom, life becomes bland, since it is precisely wisdom – whose Latin root sapere is related to the noun sapor – that gives “savour” to life.

Opportunity and danger

Such wisdom cannot be sought from machines. Although the term “artificial intelligence” has now supplanted the more correct term, “machine learning”, used in scientific literature, the very use of the word “intelligence” can prove misleading. No doubt, machines possess a limitlessly greater capacity than human beings for storing and correlating data, but human beings alone are capable of making sense of that data. It is not simply a matter of making machines appear more human, but of awakening humanity from the slumber induced by the illusion of omnipotence, based on the belief that we are completely autonomous and self-referential subjects, detached from all social bonds and forgetful of our status as creatures.

Human beings have always realized that they are not self-sufficient and have sought to overcome their vulnerability by employing every means possible. From the earliest prehistoric artifacts, used as extensions of the arms, and then the media, used as an extension of the spoken word, we have now become capable of creating highly sophisticated machines that act as a support for thinking. Each of these instruments, however, can be abused by the primordial temptation to become like God without God (cf. Gen 3), that is, to want to grasp by our own effort what should instead be freely received as a gift from God, to be enjoyed in the company of others.

Depending on the inclination of the heart, everything within our reach becomes either an opportunity or a threat. Our very bodies, created for communication and communion, can become a means of aggression. So too, every technical extension of our humanity can be a means of loving service or of hostile domination. Artificial intelligence systems can help to overcome ignorance and facilitate the exchange of information between different peoples and generations. For example, they can render accessible and understandable an enormous patrimony of written knowledge from past ages or enable communication between individuals who do not share a common language. Yet, at the same time, they can be a source of “cognitive pollution”, a distortion of reality by partially or completely false narratives, believed and broadcast as if they were true. We need but think of the long-standing problem of disinformation in the form of fake news, which today can employ “deepfakes”, namely the creation and diffusion of images that appear perfectly plausible but false (I too have been an object of this), or of audio messages that use a person’s voice to say things which that person never said. The technology of simulation behind these programmes can be useful in certain specific fields, but it becomes perverse when it distorts our relationship with others and with reality.

Starting with the first wave of artificial intelligence, that of social media, we have experienced its ambivalence: its possibilities but also its risks and associated pathologies. The second level of generative artificial intelligence unquestionably represents a qualitative leap. It is important therefore to understand, appreciate and regulate instruments that, in the wrong hands could lead to disturbing scenarios. Like every other product of human intelligence and skill, algorithms are not neutral. For this reason, there is a need to act preventively, by proposing models of ethical regulation, to forestall harmful, discriminatory and socially unjust effects of the use of systems of artificial intelligence and to combat their misuse for the purpose of reducing pluralism, polarizing public opinion or creating forms of groupthink. I once more appeal to the international community “to work together in order to adopt a binding international treaty that regulates the development and use of artificial intelligence in its many forms”. At the same time, as in every human context, regulation is, of itself, not sufficient.

Growth in humanity

All of us are called to grow together, in humanity and as humanity. We are challenged to make a qualitative leap in order to become a complex, multiethnic, pluralistic, multireligious and multicultural society. We are called to reflect carefully on the theoretical development and the practical use of these new instruments of communication and knowledge. Their great possibilities for good are accompanied by the risk of turning everything into abstract calculations that reduce individuals to data, thinking to a mechanical process, experience to isolated cases, goodness to profit, and, above all, a denial of the uniqueness of each individual and his or her story. The concreteness of reality dissolves in a flurry of statistical data.

The digital revolution can bring us greater freedom, but not if it imprisons us in models that nowadays are called “echo chambers”. In such cases, rather than increasing a pluralism of information, we risk finding ourselves adrift in a mire of confusion, prey to the interests of the market or of the powers that be. It is unacceptable that the use of artificial intelligence should lead to groupthink, to a gathering of unverified data, to a collective editorial dereliction of duty. The representation of reality in “big data”, however useful for the operation of machines, ultimately entails a substantial loss of the truth of things, hindering interpersonal communication and threatening our very humanity. Information cannot be separated from living relationships. These involve the body and immersion in the real world; they involve correlating not only data but also human experiences; they require sensitivity to faces and facial expressions, compassion and sharing.

Here I think of the reporting of wars and the “parallel war” being waged through campaigns of disinformation. I think too of all those reporters who have been injured or killed in the line of duty in order to enable us to see what they themselves had seen. For only by such direct contact with the suffering of children, women and men, can we come to appreciate the absurdity of wars.

The use of artificial intelligence can make a positive contribution to the communications sector, provided it does not eliminate the role of journalism on the ground but serves to support it. Provided too that it values the professionalism of communication, making every communicator more aware of his or her responsibilities, and enables all people to be, as they should, discerning participants in the work of communication.

Questions for today and for the future

In this regard, a number of questions naturally arise. How do we safeguard professionalism and the dignity of workers in the fields of information and communication, together with that of users throughout the world? How do we ensure the interoperability of platforms? How do we enable businesses that develop digital platforms to accept their responsibilities with regard to content and advertising in the same way as editors of traditional communications media? How do we make more transparent the criteria guiding the operation of algorithms for indexing and de-indexing, and for search engines that are capable of celebrating or canceling persons and opinions, histories and cultures? How do we guarantee the transparency of information processing? How do we identify the paternity of writings and the traceability of sources concealed behind the shield of anonymity? How do we make it clear whether an image or video is portraying an event or simulating it? How do we prevent sources from being reduced to one alone, thus fostering a single approach, developed on the basis of an algorithm? How instead do we promote an environment suitable for preserving pluralism and portraying the complexity of reality? How can we make sustainable a technology so powerful, costly and energy-consuming? And how can we make it accessible also to developing countries?

The answers we give to these and other questions will determine if artificial intelligence will end up creating new castes based on access to information and thus giving rise to new forms of exploitation and inequality. Or, if it will lead to greater equality by promoting correct information and a greater awareness of the epochal change that we are experiencing by making it possible to acknowledge the many needs of individuals and of peoples within a well-structured and pluralistic network of information. If, on the one hand, we can glimpse the spectre of a new form of slavery, on the other, we can also envision a means of greater freedom; either the possibility that a select few can condition the thought of others, or that all people can participate in the development of thought.

The answer we give to these questions is not pre-determined; it depends on us. It is up to us to decide whether we will become fodder for algorithms or will nourish our hearts with that freedom without which we cannot grow in wisdom. Such wisdom matures by using time wisely and embracing our vulnerabilities. It grows in the covenant between generations, between those who remember the past and who look ahead to the future. Only together can we increase our capacity for discernment and vigilance and for seeing things in the light of their fulfilment. Lest our humanity lose its bearings, let us seek the wisdom that was present before all things (cf. Sir 1:4): it will help us also to put systems of artificial intelligence at the service of a fully human communication.


Mondiale gelijkheid in gezondheidszorg

Message to the participants in the international conference organized by the Pontifical Academy for Life, 18-19 January 2024

16 januari 2024
Paus Franciscus

To the Participants in the International Conference: “The Declaration of Helsinki: Research in Resource-Poor Settings”

I am pleased to greet all of you at the start of the conference organized by the World Medical Association, together with the American Medical Association and the Pontifical Academy for Life. The theme you are addressing, “The Declaration of Helsinki: Research in Resource-Poor Settings”, is both important and timely, for the Declaration itself highlights the fundamental issue of freedom and informed consent with regard to clinical research. Starting from this foundation, we have seen through the years how this topic has had an influence on medical practice as a whole.

Since its initial version in 1964 and through its subsequent updates, the Declaration has offered an essential contribution to making possible the transition from research on patients to research with patients. We well know how significant this shift has been for the practice of medicine in fostering a new harmony in the relationship between doctor and patient. While the asymmetry present in the therapeutic relationship is all too apparent, the central role that the sick person should have has not yet become a reality. It needs to be continually safeguarded and promoted in the novel circumstances in which medicine finds itself, which are advancing with increasing speed and which include new technological and pharmaceutical resources, economic interests and commercial alliances, and cultural contexts in which it is easier to instrumentalize others for one’s own purposes.

Clinical research in low-income countries is an area that is especially susceptible to such vulnerabilities. Indeed, these concerns form a particular aspect of that protection which we always need to ensure, in all aspects of our life together, for the people in our societies who are most at risk. On the international level, we are witnessing many injustices that push poor countries into a disadvantaged position, in terms of access to and use of available resources, leaving them at the mercy of wealthier countries and industrial entities that appear insensitive to those who cannot assert themselves in economic terms, even when fundamental needs and rights are at stake. These are issues that likewise concern technologies such as artificial intelligence (cf. Message for the 2024 World Day of Peace). It is very important to prevent inequalities from occurring also in the field of healthcare and clinical research. We cannot subordinate care, which represents the essential attitude that allows human life to progress through the entrusting of one person to another, to the reductive mentalities of the market and of technology.

I am happy, then, that you are considering these questions, seeking not only to engage their implications on the theoretical level, but also to find concrete solutions. For we need to balance research opportunities and the welfare of patients, so that the expenses incurred by research and access to the resulting benefits are equitably distributed.

Here, I also want to draw your attention to the fact that respecting the freedom of the different communities involved means appreciating as well their diverse cultural sensitivities, which should not be harmed by patterns of knowledge and social practices that they do not recognize as their own. We are faced, then, with challenges that give rise to questions of global justice concerning healthcare. In this area, after the experience of the pandemic, we have seen how important it is to provide forms of governance that go beyond those available to individual nations. In this regard, we need to foster a way of thinking about the international community that effectively serves the human family, turning to a perspective of social friendship and universal fraternity (cf. Fratelli Tutti, 173).

With these sentiments, I offer my prayerful good wishes for your deliberations and your work. Upon all taking part in this conference, I willingly invoke the abundant blessings of Almighty God.

From the Vatican, 16 January 2024

FRANCIS


Verslaving en verslavingszorg

Het Netwerk Katholieke Zorgprofessionals Nederland organiseert in de eerste helft van 2024 drie online bijeenkomsten rond actuele thema’s. De derde bijeenkomst is gewijd aan verslaving en verslavingszorg. Het thema zal worden ingeleid door Marjolein Bechtold, verslavingsarts. In deze bijeenkomst zal ook de katholieke visie op verslaving aan de orde komen. De bijeenkomsten kunnen los van elkaar worden bijgewoond.

Nadere informatie over het thema, de spreker en de inschrijving volgen zeer binnenkort.


To eat or not to eat: that’s the question

Ethische reflectie op bewust stoppen met eten en drinken om het levenseinde te bespoedigen.

Op 23 januari jl. publiceerde de KNMG een handreiking voor patiënten die door het stoppen van eten en drinken hun leven willen bekorten. In deze tweede online bijeenkomst van een serie van drie zal drs. Lotte Voets, specialist ouderengeneeskunde, allereerst ingaan op de inhoud van deze richtlijn en vervolgens de ethische kanttekeningen hiervan bespreken vanuit katholiek perspectief. Van harte welkom aan allen die in de palliatieve zorg werken, maar zeker ook aan allen die geïnteresseerd zijn.

De drie online bijeenkomsten kunnen los van elkaar worden bijgewoond.

Aanmelden voor deze online bijeenkomst


Leve de supermens! Adam en Eva 2.0

Zou je ook twee keer zo hard willen fietsen als Demi Vollering of Mathieu van der Poel of je auto willen besturen door alleen maar te denken welke kant je op wilt? Het Netwerk Katholieke Zorgprofessionals organiseert een online workshop over transhumanisme op 11 maart. Transhumanisten denken dat we de mens kunnen door ontwikkelen en bovengenoemde karakteristieken voor mensen beschikbaar kunnen maken. Neurolink, het bedrijf van Elon Musk, trok eind januari al de aandacht met de implantatie van een chip in de hersenen van een mens. Wat de bedoeling hiervan is, maakte het bedrijf niet bekend.

Deze en andere ontwikkelingen roepen de vraag op of ze gewenst zijn, in andere woorden of we als mensen deze technische mogelijkheden moeten gaan toepassen op onze eigen soort. In de online bijeenkomst willen we hierover nadenken, met name vanuit het christelijke mensbeeld. Er wordt aandacht besteed aan wat globaal de mogelijkheden zijn, wie de mens vanuit hedendaags en christelijk perspectief is en hoe zich dat vertaalt in het toevoegen van deze mogelijkheden aan individuele mensen.

De online workshop wordt gehouden op 11 maart 2024, 20.00 u. tot 21.30 u. Prof.dr. Frans J. van Ittersum, internist-nefroloog, voorzitter van het Netwerk Katholieke Zorgprofessionals Nederland en mede-auteur van het Handboek Katholieke Medische ethiek, zal het onderwerp inleiden, waarna er een mogelijkheid is tot discussie in kleine groepjes. De workshop is de eerste van drie online workshops: de volgende zullen worden gehouden op 16 april en 22 mei 2024.

Deelname is mogelijk na aanmelding via de website. Voor deelname worden geen inschrijvingskosten berekend. Omdat we wel kosten maken, kunt u een vrijwillige bijdrage, bijvoorbeeld via onderstaande QR-code te scannen vanuit een bank-app, over maken aan de Katholieke Stichting Medische Ethiek, ING NL40INGB0007322218 te Kerkrade. De geschatte kosten voor deelname zijn ongeveer € 5-10,– per persoon.




“Het is niet goed dat de mens alleen is”

Boodschap voor de XXXII Werelddag van de zieken, 11 februari 2024

10 januari 2024
Paus Franciscus

“Het is niet goed voor de mens om alleen te zijn”. Zorgen voor de zieken door te zorgen voor relaties

“Het is niet goed dat de mens alleen blijft” (Gen 2,18). Vanaf het begin heeft God, die liefde is, de mens geschapen voor gemeenschap, door in zijn wezen de dimensie van relaties te leggen. Zo is ons leven, gevormd naar het beeld van de Drie-eenheid, bedoeld om zich volledig te realiseren in de dynamiek van relaties, vriendschap en wederzijdse liefde. We zijn geschapen om samen te zijn, niet alleen. En juist omdat dit doel van gemeenschap zo diep in het menselijk hart is gegrift, beangstigt de ervaring van verlatenheid en eenzaamheid ons en is die pijnlijk voor ons en zelfs onmenselijk. Dit wordt nog erger in tijden van kwetsbaarheid, onzekerheid en onzeker zijn, vaak veroorzaakt door het begin van een ernstige ziekte.

Ik denk bijvoorbeeld aan degenen die vreselijk eenzaam waren tijdens de Covid-19 pandemie: patiënten die geen bezoek konden ontvangen, maar ook verpleegkundigen, artsen en ondersteunend personeel, allemaal overbelast en afgezonderd in isolatieafdelingen. En laten we natuurlijk niet degenen vergeten die het uur van de dood alleen moesten trotseren, bijgestaan door gezondheidspersoneel maar ver van hun familie.

Tegelijkertijd deel ik met verdriet de benarde toestand en eenzaamheid van diegenen die door oorlog en de tragische gevolgen daarvan zonder steun en hulp zitten: oorlog is de meest verschrikkelijke sociale ziekte en de meest kwetsbare mensen betalen de hoogste prijs.

Er moet echter worden benadrukt dat, zelfs in landen die vrede kennen en over meer middelen beschikken, de tijd van ouderdom en ziekte vaak in eenzaamheid wordt doorgebracht en soms zelfs in verlatenheid. Deze trieste realiteit is vooral een gevolg van de cultuur van het individualisme, die prestaties ten koste van alles ophemelt en de mythe van efficiëntie cultiveert, en onverschillig en zelfs meedogenloos wordt wanneer mensen niet langer de kracht hebben om mee te kunnen doen. Het wordt dan een cultuur van weggooien, waarin “mensen niet langer worden gezien als een primaire waarde die moet worden gerespecteerd en beschermd, vooral als ze arm of gehandicapt zijn, als ze ‘nog niet nodig’ zijn – zoals ongeborenen – of ‘niet langer nodig’ – zoals ouderen” (Fratelli tutti, 18). Helaas is deze manier van denken ook doorgedrongen in bepaalde politieke keuzes, die de waardigheid van de mens en zijn behoeften niet centraal stellen en niet altijd de strategieën en middelen begunstigen die nodig zijn om ieder mens het fundamentele recht op gezondheid en toegang tot zorg te garanderen. Tegelijkertijd worden de kwetsbaren aan hun lot overgelaten en wordt hun eenzaamheid nog groter door de zorg te beperken tot gezondheidsdiensten, zonder dat deze op een verstandige manier vergezeld gaan van een “therapeutische alliantie” tussen arts, patiënt en familielid.

Het doet ons goed om opnieuw dat Bijbelse woord te horen: het is niet goed dat de mens alleen is! God spreekt het uit aan het begin van de schepping en onthult ons zo de diepe betekenis van zijn plan voor de mensheid, maar tegelijkertijd ook de dodelijke wond van de zonde, die men binnenbrengt door het opwekken van wantrouwen, breuken, verdeeldheid en dus isolement. Het beïnvloedt de persoon in al zijn relaties: met God, met zichzelf, met anderen, met de schepping. Een dergelijk isolement doet ons de zin van het bestaan verliezen, berooft ons van de vreugde van de liefde en doet ons een drukkend gevoel van eenzaamheid ervaren in alle cruciale momenten van het leven.

Broeders en zusters, de eerste zorg die we nodig hebben bij ziekte is een nabijheid vol mededogen en tederheid. Daarom betekent zorgen voor de zieke in de eerste plaats zorgen voor diens relaties, al zijn relaties: met God, met anderen – familie, vrienden, gezondheidswerkers -, met de schepping, met zichzelf. Is dit mogelijk? Ja, het is mogelijk en we zijn allemaal geroepen om ons ervoor in te zetten. Laten we kijken naar de icoon van de barmhartige Samaritaan (vgl. Lc. 10, 25-37), naar zijn vermogen om stil te staan en naaste te worden, naar de tederheid waarmee hij de wonden van zijn lijdende broeder verzacht.

Laten we ons deze kernwaarheid van ons leven herinneren: we zijn op de wereld gekomen omdat iemand ons verwelkomde, we zijn gemaakt om lief te hebben, we zijn geroepen tot gemeenschap en broederschap. Deze dimensie van ons wezen ondersteunt ons vooral in tijden van ziekte en kwetsbaarheid, en het is de eerste therapie die we allen samen moeten volgen om de ziekten van de samenleving waarin we leven te genezen.

Tegen jullie, die een ziekte doormaken, tijdelijk of chronisch, wil ik zeggen: schaam je niet voor je verlangen naar nabijheid en tederheid! Verberg het niet en denk nooit dat je anderen tot last bent. De toestand van de zieken nodigt ons allen uit om de opgejaagde ritmes waarin we ondergedompeld zijn af te remmen en onszelf te herontdekken.

In deze veranderende tijd waarin we leven, zijn wij christenen in het bijzonder geroepen om de barmhartige blik van Jezus aan te nemen. Laten we zorgen voor hen die lijden en alleen zijn, misschien gemarginaliseerd en afgedankt. Met wederzijdse liefde, die Christus de Heer ons geeft in gebed, vooral in de Eucharistie, helen we de wonden van eenzaamheid en isolement. En zo werken we samen om de cultuur van individualisme, onverschilligheid en afwijzing tegen te gaan en de cultuur van tederheid en mededogen te laten groeien.

De zieken, de zwakken, de armen vormen het hart van de Kerk en moeten ook het middelpunt zijn van onze menselijke aandacht en pastorale zorg. Laten we dit niet vergeten! En laten we ons toevertrouwen aan de Allerheiligste Maria, Heil van de Zieken, opdat zij voor ons ten beste spreekt en ons helpt om bewerkers van nabijheid en broederlijke relaties te zijn.


Draagmoederschap is schending waardigheid moeder en kind

Toespraak tot leden van het corps diplomatique geaccrediteerd bij de Heilige Stoel

Puas Franciscus
8 januari 2024

Your Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,

I am pleased to welcome you this morning and to extend my personal greetings and good wishes for the New Year. In a special way, I thank His Excellency Ambassador George Poulides, Dean of the Diplomatic Corps, for his kind words, which eloquently expressed the concerns of the international community at the beginning of a year that we hope to be one of peace, but has instead dawned amid conflicts and divisions.

Our meeting is a fitting occasion for me to thank you for your efforts to foster good relations between the Holy See and your respective countries. Last year, our “diplomatic family” became even larger, thanks to the establishment of diplomatic relations with the Sultanate of Oman and the appointment of its first Ambassador, here present.

Here I would note that the Holy See has now appointed a resident Papal Representative in Hanoi, following last July’s conclusion of the relative agreement on the status of the Papal Representative. This is a sign of the intent to pursue the process already initiated in a spirit of reciprocal respect and trust, thanks also to frequent contacts on the institutional level and to cooperation with the local Church.

2023 also saw the ratification of the Supplementary Agreement to the 24 September 1998 Agreement between the Holy See and Kazakhstan on mutual relations, which facilitated the presence and work of pastoral agents in that country. The past year also marked the celebration of significant anniversaries: the hundredth anniversary of diplomatic relations with the Republic of Panama, the seventieth anniversary of those with the Islamic Republic of Iran, the sixtieth of those with the Republic of Korea, and the fiftieth of those with Australia.

Dear Ambassadors,

One word in particular resounds in the two principal Christian feasts. We hear it in the song of the angels who proclaimed in the night of the birth of the Saviour, and we hear it again in the greeting of the risen Jesus. That word is “peace”. Peace is primarily a gift of God, for it is he who has left us his peace (cf. Jn 14:27). Yet it is also a responsibility incumbent upon all of us: “Blessed are the peacemakers” (Mt 5:9). To strive for peace. A word so simple, yet so demanding and rich in meaning. Today I would like to concentrate our reflections on peace, at a moment in history when it is increasingly threatened, weakened and in part lost. For that matter, it is the responsibility of the Holy See within the international community to be a prophetic voice and to appeal to consciences.

On Christmas Eve 1944, Pope Pius XII delivered a memorable Radio Message to the peoples of the world. The Second World War was drawing to a close after more than five years of conflict and humanity sensed – in the Pope’s words – “an ever more clear and firm will: to make of this world war, this universal upheaval, the starting point for a new era marked by profound renewal”. Some eighty years later, the impetus for that “profound renewal”, appears to have receded, and our world is witnessing a growing number of conflicts that are slowly turning what I have often called “a third world war fought piecemeal” into a genuine global conflict.

Here, in your presence, I cannot fail to reiterate my deep concern regarding the events taking place in Palestine and Israel. All of us remain shocked by the October 7 attack on the Israeli people, in which great numbers of innocent persons were horribly wounded, tortured, and murdered, and many taken hostage. I renew my condemnation of this act and of every instance of terrorism and extremism. This is not the way to resolve disputes between peoples; those disputes are only aggravated and cause suffering for everyone. Indeed, the attack provoked a strong Israeli military response in Gaza that has led to the death of tens of thousands of Palestinians, mainly civilians, including many young people and children, and has caused an exceptionally grave humanitarian crisis and inconceivable suffering.

To all the parties involved I renew my appeal for a cease-fire on every front, including Lebanon, and the immediate liberation of all the hostages held in Gaza. I ask that the Palestinian people receive humanitarian aid, and that hospitals, schools and places of worship receive all necessary protection.

It is my hope that the international community will pursue with determination the solution of two states, one Israeli and one Palestinian, as well as an internationally guaranteed special status for the City of Jerusalem, so that Israelis and Palestinians may finally live in peace and security.

The present conflict in Gaza further destabilizes a fragile and tension-filled region. In particular, we cannot forget the Syrian people, living in a situation of economic and political instability aggravated by last February’s earthquake. May the international community encourage the parties involved to undertake a constructive and serious dialogue and to seek new solutions, so that the Syrian people need no longer suffer as a result of international sanctions. In addition, I express my profound distress for the millions of Syrian refugees still present in neighbouring countries like Jordan and Lebanon.

I think in a special way of the beloved Lebanese people, and I express my concern for the social and economic situation that they are experiencing. It is my hope that the institutional stalemate that has even further burdened them will be resolved and that the Land of Cedars will soon have a President.

Remaining on the Asian continent, I would also call the attention of the international community to Myanmar, and plead that every effort be made to offer hope to that land and a dignified future to its young, while at the same time not neglecting the humanitarian emergency that the Rohingya continue to experience.

Alongside these complex situations, there are also signs of hope, as I was able to experience in the course of my Journey to Mongolia, to whose authorities I once more express my gratitude for their welcome. I also wish to thank the Hungarian authorities for the hospitality I received during my visit to that country last April. It was a journey into the heart of Europe, rich in history and culture, where I felt the affection of many people, yet sensed the proximity of a conflict that we would have considered unimaginable in the Europe of the twenty-first century.

Sadly, after nearly two years of large-scale war waged by the Russian Federation against Ukraine, the greatly desired peace has not yet managed to take root in minds and hearts, despite the great numbers of victims and the massive destruction. One cannot allow the persistence of a conflict that continues to metastasize, to the detriment of millions of persons; it is necessary to put an end to the present tragedy through negotiations, in respect for international law.

I also express my concern for the tense situation in the South Caucasus between Armenia and Azerbaijan, and I urge the parties to arrive at the signing of a peace treaty. It is urgent that a solution be found to the dramatic humanitarian situation of those living in that region, while favouring the return of refugees to their own homes in legality and security and with respect for the places of worship of the different religious confessions present there. These steps will help contribute to the building of a climate of trust between the two countries, in view of the greatly desired peace.

Turning our gaze to Africa, we are witnessing the suffering of millions of persons as a result of the numerous humanitarian crises that various sub-Saharan countries experience due to international terrorism, complex social political problems, and the devastating effects caused by climate change. Added to these are the effects of the military coups d’état that have occurred in several countries and certain electoral processes marked by corruption, intimidation and violence.

At the same time, I renew my appeal for serious efforts on the part of all engaged in the application of the November 2022 Pretoria Agreement, which put an end to the hostilities in Tigray. Likewise, for the pursuit of specific solutions to the tensions and violence that assail Ethiopia, and for dialogue, peace and stability among the countries of the Horn of Africa.

I would also like to bring up the tragic events in Sudan where sadly after months of civil war no way out is in sight, and the plight of the refugees in Cameroon, Mozambique, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and South Sudan. I had the joy of visiting the latter two countries at the beginning of last year, as a sign of my closeness to their people who are suffering, albeit in different contexts and situations. I express my heartfelt gratitude to the authorities of both countries for their efforts in organizing these visits and for their hospitality. My Journey to South Sudan also had an ecumenical flavour, since I was joined by the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, as a sign of the shared commitment of our ecclesial communities to peace and reconciliation.

Although there are no open wars in the Americas, serious tensions exist between several countries, for example Venezuela and Guyana, while in others, such as Peru, we see signs of a polarization that compromises social harmony and weakens democratic institutions.

The situation in Nicaragua remains troubling: a protracted crisis with painful consequences for Nicaraguan society as a whole, and in particular for the Catholic Church. The Holy See continues to encourage a respectful diplomatic dialogue for the benefit of Catholics and the entire population.

Your Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,

Against this backdrop that I have sketched without any pretension to completeness, we find an increasingly lacerated world, but even more, millions of persons – men, women, fathers, mothers, children – whose faces are for the most part unknown to us, and frequently overlooked.

Moreover, modern wars no longer take place only on clearly defined battlefields, nor do they involve soldiers alone. In a context where it appears that the distinction between military and civil targets is no longer respected, there is no conflict that does not end up in some way indiscriminately striking the civilian population. The events in Ukraine and Gaza are clear proof of this. We must not forget that grave violations of international humanitarian law are war crimes, and that it is not sufficient to point them out, but also necessary to prevent them. Consequently, there is a need for greater effort on the part of the international community to defend and implement humanitarian law, which seems to be the only way to ensure the defence of human dignity in situations of warfare.

At the beginning of this year, the exhortation of the Second Vatican Council in Gaudium et Spes seems especially timely: “On the question of warfare, there are various international conventions, signed by many countries, aimed at rendering military action and its consequences less inhuman… These agreements must be honoured; indeed public authorities and specialists in these matters must do all in their power to improve these conventions and thus bring about a better and more effective curbing of the savagery of war”. Even when exercising the right of legitimate defence, it is essential to adhere to a proportionate use of force.

Perhaps we need to realize more clearly that civilian victims are not “collateral damage”, but men and woman, with names and surnames, who lose their lives. They are children who are orphaned and deprived of their future. They are individuals who suffer from hunger, thirst and cold, or are mutilated as an effect of the power of modern explosives. Were we to be able to look each of them in the eye, call them by name, and learn something of their personal history, we would see war for what it is: nothing other than an immense tragedy, a “useless slaughter”, one that offends the dignity of every person on this earth.

Wars, nonetheless, are able to continue thanks to the enormous stock of available weapons. There is need to pursue a policy of disarmament, since it is illusory to think that weapons have deterrent value. The contrary is true: the availability of weapons encourages their use and increases their production. Weapons create mistrust and divert resources. How many lives could be saved with the resources that today are misdirected to weaponry? Would it not be better to invest those resources in the pursuit of genuine global security? The challenges of our time transcend borders, as we see from the variety of crises – of food, the environment, the economy and health care – that have marked the beginning of the century. Here I reiterate my proposal that a global fund be established to finally eliminate hunger and to promote a sustainable development of the entire planet.

Among the threats caused by these instruments of death, I cannot fail to mention those produced by nuclear arsenals and the development of increasingly sophisticated and destructive weapons. Here, I once more affirm the immorality of manufacturing and possessing nuclear weapons. In this regard, I express my hope for the resumption, at the earliest date possible, of negotiations for the restart of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, better known as the “Iran Nuclear Deal,” to ensure a safer future for all.

To pursue peace, however, it is not enough simply to eliminate the implements of war; its root causes must be eradicated. Foremost among these is hunger, a scourge that continues to afflict entire areas of our world while others are marked by massive waste of food. Then there is the exploitation of natural resources, which enriches a few while leaving entire populations, the natural beneficiaries of these resources, in a state of destitution and poverty. Connected to this is the exploitation of people forced to work for low wages and lacking real prospects for professional growth.

The causes of conflict also include natural and environmental disasters. To be sure, there are disasters that human beings cannot control. I think of the recent earthquakes in Morocco and China that resulted in hundreds of victims, as well as the severe earthquake that struck Türkiye and part of Syria, and took a terrible toll of death and destruction. I think too of the flood that struck Derna in Libya, effectively destroying the city, not least because of the simultaneous collapse of two dams.

Yet there are also disasters that are attributable to human activity or neglect and contribute seriously to the current climate crisis, such as the deforestation of the Amazon, the “green lung” of the earth.

The climate and environmental crisis was the topic of the 28th Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP28) held last month in Dubai. I regret that I was unable to participate personally. The Conference began in conjunction with the World Meteorological Organization’s announcement that 2023 was the warmest year on record in comparison with the 174 years previous. The climate crisis demands an increasingly urgent response and full involvement on the part of all, including the international community as a whole.

The adoption of the final document at COP28 represents an encouraging step forward; it shows that, in the face of today’s many crises, multilateralism can be renewed through the management of the global climate issue in a world where environmental, social and political problems are closely connected. At COP28, it became clear that the present decade is critical for dealing with climate change. Care for creation and peace “are the most urgent issues and they are closely linked”. For this reason, I express my hope that what was adopted in Dubai will lead to “a decisive acceleration of the ecological transition, through means… [to be] achieved in four sectors: energy efficiency; renewable sources; the elimination of fossil fuels; and education in lifestyles that are less dependent on the latter”.

Wars, poverty, the mistreatment of our common home and the ongoing exploitation of its resources, which lead to natural disasters, also drive thousands of people to leave their homelands in search of a future of peace and security. In journeying, they risk their lives along dangerous routes, like those through the Sahara desert, in the Darién forest on the border between Colombia and Panama in Central America, in the north of Mexico at the border with the United States, and above all on the Mediterranean Sea. Sadly, in the last ten years the Mediterranean has turned into a great cemetery, as tragedies continue to unfold, due also to unscrupulous human traffickers. Let us not forget that the great number of victims include many unaccompanied minors.

The Mediterranean should instead be a laboratory of peace, “a place where different countries and realities can encounter each other on the basis of the humanity we all share”. I wished to emphasize this in Marseille, during my Apostolic Journey for the Rencontres Méditerranéennes, and I am grateful to the organizers and the French authorities for having made that Journey possible. Faced with such an immense tragedy, we can easily end up closing our hearts, entrenching ourselves behind fears of an “invasion.” We are quick to forget that we are dealing with people with faces and names, and we overlook the specific vocation of this, “our sea” ( mare nostrum), to be not a tomb but a place of encounter and mutual enrichment between individuals, peoples and cultures. This does not detract from the fact that migration should be regulated, in order to accept, promote, accompany and integrate migrants, while at the same time respecting the culture, sensitivities and security of the peoples that accept responsibility for such acceptance and integration. We need likewise to insist on the right of people to remain in their homeland and the corresponding need to create the conditions for the effective exercise of this right.

In confronting this challenge, no country should be left alone, nor can any country think of addressing the issue in isolation, through more restrictive and repressive legislation adopted at times under pressure of fear or in pursuit of electoral consensus. In this regard, I welcome the commitment of the European Union to seek a common solution through the adoption of the new Pact on Migration and Asylum, while at the same time noting some of its limitations, especially concerning the recognition of the right to asylum and the danger of arbitrary detention.

Dear Ambassadors,

The path to peace calls for respect for life, for every human life, starting with the life of the unborn child in the mother’s womb, which cannot be suppressed or turned into an object of trafficking. In this regard, I deem deplorable the practice of so-called surrogate motherhood, which represents a grave violation of the dignity of the woman and the child, based on the exploitation of situations of the mother’s material needs. A child is always a gift and never the basis of a commercial contract. Consequently, I express my hope for an effort by the international community to prohibit this practice universally. At every moment of its existence, human life must be preserved and defended; yet I note with regret, especially in the West, the continued spread of a culture of death, which in the name of a false compassion discards children, the elderly and the sick.

The path to peace calls for respect for human rights, in accordance with the simple yet clear formulation contained in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, whose seventy-fifth anniversary we recently celebrated. These principles are self-evident and commonly accepted. Regrettably, in recent decades attempts have been made to introduce new rights that are neither fully consistent with those originally defined nor always acceptable. They have led to instances of ideological colonization, in which gender theory plays a central role; the latter is extremely dangerous since it cancels differences in its claim to make everyone equal. These instances of ideological colonization prove injurious and create divisions between states, rather than fostering peace.

Dialogue, on the other hand, must be the soul of the international community. The current situation is also the result of the weakening of structures of multilateral diplomacy that arose after the Second World War. Organizations established to foster security, peace and cooperation are no longer capable of uniting all their members around one table. There is the risk of a “monadology” and of splitting into “clubs” that only admit states deemed ideologically compatible. Even agencies devoted to the common good and to technical questions, which have thus far proved effective, risk paralysis due to ideological polarization and exploitation by individual states.

In order to relaunch a shared commitment to the service of peace, there is a need to recover the roots, the spirit and the values that gave rise to those organizations, while at the same time taking into account the changed context and showing regard for those who do not feel adequately represented by the structures of international organizations.

To be sure, dialogue requires patience, perseverance and an ability to listen, yet when sincere attempts are made to put an end to disagreements, significant results can be achieved. One example that comes to mind is the Belfast Agreement, also known as the Good Friday Agreement, signed by the British and Irish governments, whose twenty-fifth anniversary was commemorated last year. Putting an end to thirty years of violent conflict, it can serve as an example to motivate and encourage authorities to trust in peace processes, whatever the hardships and sacrifices they entail.

The way to peace is through political and social dialogue, since it is the basis for civil coexistence in a modern political community. 2024 will witness elections being held in many nations. Elections are an essential moment in the life of any country, since they allow all citizens responsibly to choose their leaders. The words of Pope Pius XII remain as timely as ever: “To express one’s own view of the duties and sacrifices imposed on him or her; not to be compelled to obey without first being heard – these are two rights of the citizen which find expression in democracy, as its very name implies. From the stability, harmony and good fruits produced by this contact between the citizens and the government of the state, one may recognize whether a democracy is truly sound and well balanced, and perceive the vigour of its life and development”.

It is important, then, that citizens, especially young people who will be voting for the first time, consider it one of their primary duties to contribute to the advancement of the common good through a free and informed participation in elections. Politics, for its part, should always be understood not as an appropriation of power, but as the “highest form of charity”, and thus of service to one’s neighbour within a local or national community.

The path to peace also passes through interreligious dialogue, which before all else requires the protection of religious freedom and respect for minorities. It is painful to note, for example, that an increasing number of countries are adopting models of centralized control over religious freedom, especially by the massive use of technology. In other places, minority religious communities often find themselves in increasingly precarious situations. In some cases, they risk extinction due to a combination of terrorism, attacks on their cultural heritage and more subtle measures such as the proliferation of anti-conversion laws, the manipulation of electoral rules and financial restrictions.

Of particular concern is the rise in acts of anti-Semitism in recent months. Once again, I would reiterate that this scourge must be eliminated from society, especially through education in fraternity and acceptance of others.

Equally troubling is the increase in persecution and discrimination against Christians, especially over the last ten years. At times, this involves nonviolent but socially significant cases of gradual marginalization and exclusion from political and social life and from the exercise of certain professions, even in traditionally Christian lands. Altogether, more than 360 million Christians around the world are experiencing a high level of discrimination and persecution because of their faith, with more and more of them being forced to flee their homelands.

Finally, the path to peace passes through education, which is the principal means of investing in the future and in young people. I have vivid memories of the celebration of World Youth Day in Portugal last August. As I renew my gratitude to the Portuguese authorities, civil and religious, for their hard work in organizing the event, I continue to treasure that encounter with more than a million young people from all over the world, brimming with enthusiasm and zest for life. Their presence was a great hymn to peace and a testimony to the fact that “unity is greater than conflict” and that it is “possible to build communion amid disagreement”.

In recent times, the challenges faced by educators have come to include the ethical use of new technologies. The latter can easily become a means of spreading division or lies, “fake news”, yet they also serve as a source of encounter and mutual exchange, and an important vehicle for peace. “The remarkable advances in new information technologies, particularly in the digital sphere, thus offer exciting opportunities and grave risks, with serious implications for the pursuit of justice and harmony among peoples”. For this reason, I thought it important to devote this year’s Message for the World Day of Peace to the subject of artificial intelligence, one of the most significant challenges for the years to come.

It is essential that technological development take place in an ethical and responsible way, respecting the centrality of the human person, whose place can never be taken by an algorithm or a machine. “The inherent dignity of each human being and the fraternity that binds us together as members of the one human family must undergird the development of new technologies and serve as indisputable criteria for evaluating them before they are employed, so that digital progress can occur with due respect for justice and contribute to the cause of peace”.

Consequently, careful reflection is required at every level, national and international, political and social, to ensure that the development of artificial intelligence remains at the service of men and women, fostering and not obstructing – especially in the case of young people – interpersonal relations, a healthy spirit of fraternity, critical thinking and a capacity for discernment.

In this regard, the two Diplomatic Conferences of the World Intellectual Property Organization, which will take place in 2024 with the participation of the Holy See as a Member State, will prove particularly important. In the view of the Holy See, intellectual property is essentially directed to the promotion of the common good and cannot be detached from ethical requirements, lest situations of injustice and undue exploitation arise. Special concern must also be shown for the protection of the human genetic patrimony, by prohibiting practices contrary to human dignity, such as the patenting of human biological material and the cloning of human beings.

Your Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,

This year the Church is preparing for the Holy Year that will begin next Christmas. In a particular way, I express my gratitude to the Italian authorities, national and local, for their efforts in preparing the City of Rome to welcome great numbers of pilgrims and to enable them to draw spiritual fruit from their experience of the Jubilee.

Today, perhaps more than ever, we need a Holy Year. Amid many causes of suffering that lead to a sense of hopelessness not only in those directly affected but throughout our societies; amid the difficulties experienced by our young people, who instead of dreaming of a better future often feel helpless and frustrated; and amid the gloom of this world that seems to be spreading rather than receding, the Jubilee is a proclamation that God never abandons his people and constantly keeps open the doors to his Kingdom. In the Judeo-Christian tradition, the Jubilee is a season of grace that enables us to experience God’s mercy and the gift of his peace. It is also a season of righteousness, in which sins are forgiven, reconciliation prevails over injustice, and the earth can be at rest. For everyone – Christians and non-Christians – the Jubilee can be a time when swords are beaten into ploughshares, a time when one nation will no longer lift up sword against another, nor learn war any more (cf. Is 2:4).

Dear brothers and sisters, this is my heartfelt wish for each of you, dear Ambassadors, for your families and colleagues, and for the peoples you represent.

Thank you and a Happy New Year to all of you!


Artificiële intelligentie en vrede

Message for the 57th World Day of Peace

1 January 2024
Pope Francis

At the beginning of the New Year, a time of grace which the Lord gives to each one of us, I would like to address God’s People, the various nations, heads of state and government, the leaders of the different religions and civil society, and all the men and women of our time, in order to offer my fervent good wishes for peace.

1. The progress of science and technology as a path to peace

Sacred Scripture attests that God bestowed his Spirit upon human beings so that they might have “skill and understanding and knowledge in every craft” (Ex 35:31). Human intelligence is an expression of the dignity with which we have been endowed by the Creator, who made us in his own image and likeness (cf. Gen 1:26), and enabled us to respond consciously and freely to his love. In a particular way, science and technology manifest this fundamentally relational quality of human intelligence; they are brilliant products of its creative potential.

In its Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes, the Second Vatican Council restated this truth, declaring that “through its labours and its native endowments, humanity has ceaselessly sought to better its life”. When human beings, “with the aid of technology”, endeavour to make “the earth a dwelling worthy of the whole human family”, they carry out God’s plan and cooperate with his will to perfect creation and bring about peace among peoples. Progress in science and technology, insofar as it contributes to greater order in human society and greater fraternal communion and freedom, thus leads to the betterment of humanity and the transformation of the world.

We rightly rejoice and give thanks for the impressive achievements of science and technology, as a result of which countless ills that formerly plagued human life and caused great suffering have been remedied. At the same time, techno-scientific advances, by making it possible to exercise hitherto unprecedented control over reality, are placing in human hands a vast array of options, including some that may pose a risk to our survival and endanger our common home.

The remarkable advances in new information technologies, particularly in the digital sphere, thus offer exciting opportunities and grave risks, with serious implications for the pursuit of justice and harmony among peoples. Any number of urgent questions need to be asked. What will be the consequences, in the medium and long term, of these new digital technologies? And what impact will they have on individual lives and on societies, on international stability and peace?

2. The future of artificial intelligence: between promise and risk

Progress in information technology and the development of digital technologies in recent decades have already begun to effect profound transformations in global society and its various dynamics. New digital tools are even now changing the face of communications, public administration, education, consumption, personal interactions and countless other aspects of our daily lives.

Moreover, from the digital footprints spread throughout the Internet, technologies employing a variety of algorithms can extract data that enable them to control mental and relational habits for commercial or political purposes, often without our knowledge, thus limiting our conscious exercise of freedom of choice. In a space like the Web, marked by information overload, they can structure the flow of data according to criteria of selection that are not always perceived by the user.

We need to remember that scientific research and technological innovations are not disembodied and “neutral”, but subject to cultural influences. As fully human activities, the directions they take reflect choices conditioned by personal, social and cultural values in any given age. The same must be said of the results they produce: precisely as the fruit of specifically human ways of approaching the world around us, the latter always have an ethical dimension, closely linked to decisions made by those who design their experimentation and direct their production towards particular objectives.

This is also the case with forms of artificial intelligence. To date, there is no single definition of artificial intelligence in the world of science and technology. The term itself, which by now has entered into everyday parlance, embraces a variety of sciences, theories and techniques aimed at making machines reproduce or imitate in their functioning the cognitive abilities of human beings. To speak in the plural of “forms of intelligence” can help to emphasize above all the unbridgeable gap between such systems, however amazing and powerful, and the human person: in the end, they are merely “fragmentary”, in the sense that they can only imitate or reproduce certain functions of human intelligence. The use of the plural likewise brings out the fact that these devices greatly differ among themselves and that they should always be regarded as “socio-technical systems”. For the impact of any artificial intelligence device – regardless of its underlying technology – depends not only on its technical design, but also on the aims and interests of its owners and developers, and on the situations in which it will be employed.

Artificial intelligence, then, ought to be understood as a galaxy of different realities. We cannot presume a priori that its development will make a beneficial contribution to the future of humanity and to peace among peoples. That positive outcome will only be achieved if we show ourselves capable of acting responsibly and respect such fundamental human values as “inclusion, transparency, security, equity, privacy and reliability”.

Nor is it sufficient simply to presume a commitment on the part of those who design algorithms and digital technologies to act ethically and responsibly. There is a need to strengthen or, if necessary, to establish bodies charged with examining the ethical issues arising in this field and protecting the rights of those who employ forms of artificial intelligence or are affected by them.

The immense expansion of technology thus needs to be accompanied by an appropriate formation in responsibility for its future development. Freedom and peaceful coexistence are threatened whenever human beings yield to the temptation to selfishness, self-interest, the desire for profit and the thirst for power. We thus have a duty to broaden our gaze and to direct techno-scientific research towards the pursuit of peace and the common good, in the service of the integral development of individuals and communities.

The inherent dignity of each human being and the fraternity that binds us together as members of the one human family must undergird the development of new technologies and serve as indisputable criteria for evaluating them before they are employed, so that digital progress can occur with due respect for justice and contribute to the cause of peace. Technological developments that do not lead to an improvement in the quality of life of all humanity, but on the contrary aggravate inequalities and conflicts, can never count as true progress.

Artificial intelligence will become increasingly important. The challenges it poses are technical, but also anthropological, educational, social and political. It promises, for instance, liberation from drudgery, more efficient manufacturing, easier transport and more ready markets, as well as a revolution in processes of accumulating, organizing and confirming data. We need to be aware of the rapid transformations now taking place and to manage them in ways that safeguard fundamental human rights and respect the institutions and laws that promote integral human development. Artificial intelligence ought to serve our best human potential and our highest aspirations, not compete with them.

3. The technology of the future: machines that “learn” by themselves

In its multiple forms, artificial intelligence based on machine learning techniques, while still in its pioneering phases, is already introducing considerable changes to the fabric of societies and exerting a profound influence on cultures, societal behaviours and peacebuilding.

Developments such as machine learning or deep learning, raise questions that transcend the realms of technology and engineering, and have to do with the deeper understanding of the meaning of human life, the construction of knowledge, and the capacity of the mind to attain truth.

The ability of certain devices to produce syntactically and semantically coherent texts, for example, is no guarantee of their reliability. They are said to “hallucinate”, that is, to create statements that at first glance appear plausible but are unfounded or betray biases. This poses a serious problem when artificial intelligence is deployed in campaigns of disinformation that spread false news and lead to a growing distrust of the communications media. Privacy, data ownership and intellectual property are other areas where these technologies engender grave risks. To which we can add other negative consequences of the misuse of these technologies, such as discrimination, interference in elections, the rise of a surveillance society, digital exclusion and the exacerbation of an individualism increasingly disconnected from society. All these factors risk fueling conflicts and hindering peace.

4. The sense of limit in the technocratic paradigm

Our world is too vast, varied and complex ever to be fully known and categorized. The human mind can never exhaust its richness, even with the aid of the most advanced algorithms. Such algorithms do not offer guaranteed predictions of the future, but only statistical approximations. Not everything can be predicted, not everything can be calculated; in the end, “realities are greater than ideas”. No matter how prodigious our calculating power may be, there will always be an inaccessible residue that evades any attempt at quantification.

In addition, the vast amount of data analyzed by artificial intelligences is in itself no guarantee of impartiality. When algorithms extrapolate information, they always run the risk of distortion, replicating the injustices and prejudices of the environments where they originate. The faster and more complex they become, the more difficult it proves to understand why they produced a particular result.

“Intelligent” machines may perform the tasks assigned to them with ever greater efficiency, but the purpose and the meaning of their operations will continue to be determined or enabled by human beings possessed of their own universe of values. There is a risk that the criteria behind certain decisions will become less clear, responsibility for those decisions concealed, and producers enabled to evade their obligation to act for the benefit of the community. In some sense, this is favoured by the technocratic system, which allies the economy with technology and privileges the criterion of efficiency, tending to ignore anything unrelated to its immediate interests.

This should lead us to reflect on something frequently overlooked in our current technocratic and efficiency-oriented mentality, as it is decisive for personal and social development: the “sense of limit”. Human beings are, by definition, mortal; by proposing to overcome every limit through technology, in an obsessive desire to control everything, we risk losing control over ourselves; in the quest for an absolute freedom, we risk falling into the spiral of a “technological dictatorship”. Recognizing and accepting our limits as creatures is an indispensable condition for reaching, or better, welcoming fulfilment as a gift. In the ideological context of a technocratic paradigm inspired by a Promethean presumption of self-sufficiency, inequalities could grow out of proportion, knowledge and wealth accumulate in the hands of a few, and grave risks ensue for democratic societies and peaceful coexistence.

5. Burning issues for ethics

In the future, the reliability of an applicant for a mortgage, the suitability of an individual for a job, the possibility of recidivism on the part of a convicted person, or the right to receive political asylum or social assistance could be determined by artificial intelligence systems. The lack of different levels of mediation that these systems introduce is particularly exposed to forms of bias and discrimination: systemic errors can easily multiply, producing not only injustices in individual cases but also, due to the domino effect, real forms of social inequality.

At times too, forms of artificial intelligence seem capable of influencing individuals’ decisions by operating through pre-determined options associated with stimuli and dissuasions, or by operating through a system of regulating people’s choices based on information design. These forms of manipulation or social control require careful attention and oversight, and imply a clear legal responsibility on the part of their producers, their deployers, and government authorities.

Reliance on automatic processes that categorize individuals, for instance, by the pervasive use of surveillance or the adoption of social credit systems, could likewise have profound repercussions on the social fabric by establishing a ranking among citizens. These artificial processes of categorization could lead also to power conflicts, since they concern not only virtual users but real people. Fundamental respect for human dignity demands that we refuse to allow the uniqueness of the person to be identified with a set of data. Algorithms must not be allowed to determine how we understand human rights, to set aside the essential human values of compassion, mercy and forgiveness, or to eliminate the possibility of an individual changing and leaving his or her past behind.

Nor can we fail to consider, in this context, the impact of new technologies on the workplace. Jobs that were once the sole domain of human labour are rapidly being taken over by industrial applications of artificial intelligence. Here too, there is the substantial risk of disproportionate benefit for the few at the price of the impoverishment of many. Respect for the dignity of labourers and the importance of employment for the economic well-being of individuals, families, and societies, for job security and just wages, ought to be a high priority for the international community as these forms of technology penetrate more deeply into our workplaces.

6. Shall we turn swords into ploughshares?

In these days, as we look at the world around us, there can be no escaping serious ethical questions related to the armaments sector. The ability to conduct military operations through remote control systems has led to a lessened perception of the devastation caused by those weapon systems and the burden of responsibility for their use, resulting in an even more cold and detached approach to the immense tragedy of war. Research on emerging technologies in the area of so-called Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems, including the weaponization of artificial intelligence, is a cause for grave ethical concern. Autonomous weapon systems can never be morally responsible subjects. The unique human capacity for moral judgment and ethical decision-making is more than a complex collection of algorithms, and that capacity cannot be reduced to programming a machine, which as “intelligent” as it may be, remains a machine. For this reason, it is imperative to ensure adequate, meaningful and consistent human oversight of weapon systems.

Nor can we ignore the possibility of sophisticated weapons ending up in the wrong hands, facilitating, for instance, terrorist attacks or interventions aimed at destabilizing the institutions of legitimate systems of government. In a word, the world has no need of new technologies that contribute to the unjust development of commerce and the weapons trade and consequently end up promoting the folly of war. By so doing, not only intelligence but the human heart itself would risk becoming ever more “artificial”. The most advanced technological applications should not be employed to facilitate the violent resolution of conflicts, but rather to pave the way for peace.

On a more positive note, if artificial intelligence were used to promote integral human development, it could introduce important innovations in agriculture, education and culture, an improved level of life for entire nations and peoples, and the growth of human fraternity and social friendship. In the end, the way we use it to include the least of our brothers and sisters, the vulnerable and those most in need, will be the true measure of our humanity.

An authentically humane outlook and the desire for a better future for our world surely indicates the need for a cross-disciplinary dialogue aimed at an ethical development of algorithms – an algor-ethics – in which values will shape the directions taken by new technologies. Ethical considerations should also be taken into account from the very beginning of research, and continue through the phases of experimentation, design, production, distribution and marketing. This is the approach of ethics by design, and it is one in which educational institutions and decision-makers have an essential role to play.

7. Challenges for education

The development of a technology that respects and serves human dignity has clear ramifications for our educational institutions and the world of culture. By multiplying the possibilities of communication, digital technologies have allowed us to encounter one another in new ways. Yet there remains a need for sustained reflection on the kinds of relationships to which they are steering us. Our young people are growing up in cultural environments pervaded by technology, and this cannot but challenge our methods of teaching, education and training.

Education in the use of forms of artificial intelligence should aim above all at promoting critical thinking. Users of all ages, but especially the young, need to develop a discerning approach to the use of data and content collected on the web or produced by artificial intelligence systems. Schools, universities and scientific societies are challenged to help students and professionals to grasp the social and ethical aspects of the development and uses of technology.

Training in the use of new means of communication should also take account not only of disinformation, “fake news”, but also the disturbing recrudescence of “certain ancestral fears… that have been able to hide and spread behind new technologies”. Sadly, we once more find ourselves having to combat “the temptation to build a culture of walls, to raise walls… in order to prevent an encounter with other cultures and other peoples”, and the development of a peaceful and fraternal coexistence.

8. Challenges for the development of international law

The global scale of artificial intelligence makes it clear that, alongside the responsibility of sovereign states to regulate its use internally, international organizations can play a decisive role in reaching multilateral agreements and coordinating their application and enforcement. In this regard, I urge the global community of nations to work together in order to adopt a binding international treaty that regulates the development and use of artificial intelligence in its many forms. The goal of regulation, naturally, should not only be the prevention of harmful practices but also the encouragement of best practices, by stimulating new and creative approaches and encouraging individual or group initiatives.

In the quest for normative models that can provide ethical guidance to developers of digital technologies, it is indispensable to identify the human values that should undergird the efforts of societies to formulate, adopt and enforce much-needed regulatory frameworks. The work of drafting ethical guidelines for producing forms of artificial intelligence can hardly prescind from the consideration of deeper issues regarding the meaning of human existence, the protection of fundamental human rights and the pursuit of justice and peace. This process of ethical and juridical discernment can prove a precious opportunity for shared reflection on the role that technology should play in our individual and communal lives, and how its use can contribute to the creation of a more equitable and humane world. For this reason, in debates about the regulation of artificial intelligence, the voices of all stakeholders should be taken into account, including the poor, the powerless and others who often go unheard in global decision-making processes.

I hope that the foregoing reflection will encourage efforts to ensure that progress in developing forms of artificial intelligence will ultimately serve the cause of human fraternity and peace. It is not the responsibility of a few but of the entire human family. For peace is the fruit of relationships that recognize and welcome others in their inalienable dignity, and of cooperation and commitment in seeking the integral development of all individuals and peoples.

It is my prayer at the start of the New Year that the rapid development of forms of artificial intelligence will not increase cases of inequality and injustice all too present in today’s world, but will help put an end to wars and conflicts, and alleviate many forms of suffering that afflict our human family. May Christian believers, followers of various religions and men and women of good will work together in harmony to embrace the opportunities and confront the challenges posed by the digital revolution and thus hand on to future generations a world of greater solidarity, justice and peace.

From the Vatican, 8 December 2023