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”. [1: No. 33.] When human beings, “with the aid of technology”, endeavour to make “the earth a dwelling worthy of the whole human family”, [2: Ibid., 57.] 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. [3: Cf. Encyclical Letter Laudato Si’ (24 May 2015), 104.]

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”, [4: Cf. ibid., 114.] 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”. [5: Address to Participants in the “Minerva Dialogues” (27 March 2023).]

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. [6: Cf. ibid.]

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. [7: Cf. Message to the Executive Chairman of the “World Economic Forum” meeting in Davos (12 January 2018).]

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. [8: Cf. Encyclical Letter Laudato Si’ (24 May 2015), 194; Address to Participants in the Seminar “The Common Good in the Digital Age” (27 September 2019).]

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”. [9: Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), 233.] 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. [10: Cf. Encyclical Letter Laudato Si’ (24 May 2015), 54.]

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. [11: Cf. Meeting with Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life (28 February 2020).]

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. [12: Cf. ibid.] 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”. [13: Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), 27.] 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”, [14: Ibid.] 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. [15: Cf. ibid, 170-175.] 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. [16: Cf. Encyclical Letter Laudato Si’ (24 May 2015), 177.]

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

COMECE, 12 september 2023

COMECE and Katholisches Büro express concerns over EP SoHO Regulation Draft

The Commission of the Bishops’ Conferences of the European Union (COMECE) and the Katholisches Büro in Berlin are jointly releasing a statement on Tuesday, September 12, 2023, expressing their deep concerns about the draft of the European Parliament’s position on the SoHO Regulation. This regulation will set the fundamental curse for future handling of prenatal human life in European transplantation and pharmaceutical legislation. 

The members of the European Parliament are called to vote on the draft and tabled amendments prepared by the ENVI Committee concerning the future Regulation on “Quality and safety standards for substances of human origin intended for human use” – also known as SoHO Regulation.

The Secretariat of COMECE, in collaboration with the Katholisches Büro in Berlin, expresses profound concerns about the potential consequences of the broad definition of ‘human substance’ outlined in the draft, which could include human embryos and foetuses.

“The danger lies in the possibility that such a definition may degrade the dignity and value of human life, creating an unacceptable equivalence between embryos and foetuses and simple skin cells or blood plasma”, Fr. Manuel Barrios Prieto, Secretary General of COMECE, explains.

Furthermore, the joint statement raises questions about Article 58 of the draft. If approved, this article would permit and mandate preliminary genetic testing on embryos and foetuses, potentially paving the way for life selection and raising concerns about compatibility with the right of self-determination for both donors and recipients.

Lastly, COMECE and the Katholisches Büro in Berlin underscore the need for greater clarity in the draft concerning the rights of individual EU Member States to regulate this highly ethical field. The statement emphasises that “it must remain possible for each Member State to refuse the authorisation of a SoHO preparation [and also] its recognition“.

Once approved by the European Parliament, the text will serve as the institution’s position in preparation for upcoming trialogue negotiations with the European Commission and the Council of the European Union.

In the context of the public debate on including a supposed right to abortion in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, COMECE publishes the statement ‘The Ethical Indefensibility of an EU Fundamental Right to Abortion’ elaborated by its Commission on Ethics.

The document argues that the respect for the inalienable dignity of every human being in every stage of life – especially in situations of complete vulnerability – is a fundamental principle in our democratic societies.

H.E. Mgr. Anton Jamnik, President of the COMECE Commission on Ethics, states that “EU Member States have very different constitutional traditions with regard to the legal regulation of abortion, therefore, constituting a fundamental right to abortion would go against the general principles of the Union law”. The document also reiterates that “there is no recognised right to abortion in European or International law”.

At the beginning of 2022, COMECE expressed its deep concern over President Emmanuel Macron’s proposal of including a supposed right to abortion in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

In July 2022, reacting to a resolution of the European Parliament, COMECE released a statement encouraging political leaders “to work for more unity among Europeans, not to create higher ideological barriers and polarization”.

Message for the launch of the Family Global Compact

30 May 2023
Pope Francis

Dear brothers and sisters!

In the Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia, I expressed my conviction that “the welfare of the family is decisive for the future of the world and that of the Church” (No. 31). With this in mind, I wish to support the Family Global Compact, a collaborative plan aimed at bringing the pastoral care of families into dialogue with centres of study and research on the family located in Catholic universities around the world. An initiative of the Dicastery for the Laity, Family and Life and the Pontifical Academy for Social Sciences, the Compact is inspired by studies and research on the cultural and anthropological relevance of the family and the new challenges it faces.

The goal is synergetic: to enable the pastoral care of families in the particular Churches to benefit from the research and the educational and training programmes in Catholic universities. Together, the universities and programmes of pastoral ministry can more effectively promote a culture of family and life in this time of uncertainty and a certain shortage of hope. Solidly grounded in present realities, such a culture would help new generations to appreciate marriage and family life with its resources and challenges and the beauty of generating and nurturing human life. What is urgently needed, in a word, is “a more responsible and generous effort to present the… motivations for choosing marriage and the family and in this way, to help men and women better respond to the grace that God offers them” (Amoris Laetitia, 35).

Catholic universities have the task of developing in-depth theological, philosophical, legal, sociological and economic analyses of marriage and the family, in order to uphold their importance within contemporary systems of thought and action. Studies have revealed a crisis in family relationships, fueled by both contingent and structural problems, which, in the absence of adequate means of support from society, make it more difficult to create a serene family life. This is one reason why many young people are choosing unstable and informal types of emotional relationships over marriage. At the same time, surveys make it clear that the family continues to be the primary source of social life, and point to the existence of good practices that deserve to be shared and promoted globally. Families themselves can and should be witnesses and leaders in this process.

The Family Global Compact is not meant to be a static programme aimed at crystallizing a few ideas, but a process structured in view of four goals, namely:

1. Initiating a process of dialogue and greater collaboration among university study and research centres dealing with family issues, in order to make their activities more productive, particularly by creating or reviving networks of university institutes inspired by the social doctrine of the Church.
2. creating greater synergy of content and goals between Christian communities and Catholic universities.
3. promoting the culture of family and life in society, so that helpful public policy resolutions and objectives can emerge.
4. harmonizing and advancing proposals that result from this, so that service to the family can be enhanced and sustained in spiritual, pastoral, cultural, legal, political, economic and social terms.

It is in the family that many of God’s dreams for the human community are realized. Hence, we cannot resign ourselves to the decline of the family in the name of uncertainty, individualism and consumerism, which envision a future of individuals who think only of themselves. We cannot be indifferent to the future of the family as a community of life and love, a unique and indissoluble covenant between a man and a woman, a place where generations meet, a source of hope for society. The family, it should be recalled, has a positive effect on everyone, since it is a generator of common good. Healthy family relationships represent a unique source of enrichment, not only for spouses and children but for the entire ecclesial and civil community.

I thank all those who have joined the Family Global Compact and those who will do so in the future, and I invite them to devote themselves with creativity and confidence to every initiative that can help put the family once more at the heart of our pastoral and social commitment.

Rome, Saint John Lateran, 13 May 2023

Message to participants in the WOOMB international congress on “the ‘Billings revolution’ 70 years later: from fertility knowledge to personalized medicine”, Rome, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, 28-29 April 2023

24 April 2023
Pope Francis

Dear brothers and sisters!

I offer a warm greeting to the organizers and participants of the WOOMB International Congress entitled The “Billings Revolution” 70 years Later: From Fertility Knowledge to Personalized Medicine. I very much appreciate this initiative, which once again reminds us of the beauty and dignity of human sexuality.

In the second half of the last century, as pharmacological research for fertility control expanded and the contraceptive culture was on the rise, John and Evelyn Billings conducted careful scientific research and developed a simple method, accessible to women and couples, for natural knowledge of fertility, offering them a valuable tool for the responsible management of procreative choices. In those years, their approach might have appeared outdated and less reliable in comparison with the purported immediacy and security of pharmacological interventions. Yet in fact, their method has continued to prove timely and challenging, since it has led to serious reflection on a number of essential areas. These include the need for education in the value of the human body, an integrated and integral vision of human sexuality, an ability to cherish the fruitfulness of love even when not fertile, the building up of a culture that welcomes life and ways to confront the problem of demographic collapse. In this respect, the original momentum of what has been called the “Billings revolution” has not diminished, but continues to contribute to the understanding of human sexuality and a fuller appreciation of the relational and procreative dimensions of the couple.

In a world dominated by a relativistic and trivialized view of human sexuality, serious education in this area appears increasingly necessary, requiring an anthropological and ethical approach in which doctrinal issues are explored without undue simplifications or inflexible conclusions. In particular, there is a need always to keep in mind the inseparable connection between the unitive and procreative meanings of the conjugal act (cf. PAUL VI, Humanae Vitae, 12). The former expresses the desire of the spouses to be one, a single life; the latter expresses the shared desire to generate life, which endures even at times of infertility and in old age. When these two meanings are consciously affirmed, the generosity of love is born and strengthened in the hearts of the spouses, disposing them to welcome new life. Lacking this, the experience of sexuality is impoverished, reduced to sensations that soon become self-referential, and its dimensions of humanity and responsibility are lost. The tragedy of violence between sexual partners – including the murder of women – here finds one of its main causes.

Indeed, we are tending to lose sight of the connection between sexuality and the fundamental vocation of each person, the gift of self, which finds particular fulfilment in conjugal and family love. This truth, while present in the heart of each human being, requires education in order to achieve full expression. This is urgently needed, and it represents a challenge for the Church and all those who have the good of the person and society at heart. As I pointed out in Amoris Laetitia, it demands concrete, creative and courageous responses in the area of sexual education: “The language of the body calls for a patient apprenticeship in learning to interpret and channel desires in view of authentic self-giving. When we presume to give everything all at once, it may well be that we give nothing. It is one thing to understand how fragile and bewildered young people can be, but another thing entirely to encourage them to prolong their immaturity in the way they show love. But who speaks of these things today? Who is capable of taking young people seriously? Who helps them to prepare seriously for a great and generous love?” (No. 284). In the aftermath of the so-called sexual revolution and the breakdown of taboos, we need a new revolution in our way of thinking. We need to discover the beauty of human sexuality by once again turning to the great book of nature, learning to respect the value of the body and the generation of life, with a view to authentic experiences of conjugal love.

Another dimension of sexuality, no less challenging in our time, is precisely its relationship with procreation. Knowledge of fertility, while having a general importance for education, becomes all the more important when a couple chooses to be open to accepting children. The Billings Method, together with others like it, represents one of the most suitable means for realizing responsibly the desire to be parents. Today the ideological and practical separation of the sexual relationship from its generative potential has resulted in the quest for alternative forms of having a child, no longer through marital relations but through the use of artificial processes. However, while it is appropriate to assist and support a legitimate desire to conceive with the most advanced scientific knowledge and technologies that can enhance fertility, it is wrong to create test tube embryos and then suppress them, to trade in gametes and to resort to the practice of surrogate parenthood. At the root of the current demographic crisis is, along with various social and cultural factors, an imbalance in the view of sexuality. Hence, the Billings Method also serves as a resource for dealing naturally with infertility problems and for helping spouses become parents by identifying the most fertile periods. In this field, a greater understanding of the processes of procreation, using modern scientific findings, could help many couples make informed and ethically sound decisions that are more respectful of the person and his or her dignity.

This is a task for Catholic universities, and Faculties of Medicine in particular, to take up with renewed commitment. It was essential that John and Evelyn Billings were able to work in the School of Medicine of the University of Melbourne. It is likewise important that the Study and Research Centre for the Natural Regulation of Fertility, present since 1976 in the Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, be part of one of the most prestigious Italian academic institutions and thus benefit from the most advanced scientific knowledge as it carries out its mission of research and training.

The scientific approach of this International Congress is coupled with a recognition of the importance of paying attention to the uniqueness of each couple and each person, and women in particular. A “personalized medicine” reminds us precisely that each person is unique and unrepeatable and that, prior to being the object of treatment for dysfunctions and diseases, he or she must be helped to express his or her potential in the best way possible, with a view to that well-being which is above all the fruit of a harmonious life.

Finally, promoting knowledge of fertility and natural methods also has great pastoral value, since it helps couples to be more conscious of their marital vocation and to bear witness to the Gospel values of human sexuality. The importance of this is seen in the large number of participants at this Congress, with people from many countries and every continent gathered in Rome or joining by video. The positive feedback that has emerged from your various experiences, often the fruit of your work in very difficult social and cultural settings, confirms the importance of your efforts to work with perseverance and commitment in this field, not least to promote the dignity of women and a culture marked by the acceptance of life. These, in fact, are values that we share with other religions.

Your work also contributed to a primary aspect of the Church’s ministry to families, as my Predecessors have taught and I too noted in Amoris Laetitia: “In this sense, the teaching of the Encyclical Humanae Vitae (cf. 10-14) and the Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris Consortio (cf. 14; 28-35) ought to be taken up anew” (No. 222). The use of methods based on the natural rhythms of fertility should be encouraged, emphasizing the fact that they “respect the bodies of the spouses, encourage tenderness between them, and favour the education of an authentic freedom” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2370).

Dear friends, I offer you my best wishes for the fruitfulness of your work and I thank you for all that you do. Carry on with passion and generosity in your valuable service to the ecclesial community and to all those who seek to cultivate the human values of sexuality. May we always keep in mind that God’s original blessing is reflected with particular splendour in this area of life (cf. Gen 1:26-30), and that we are called to honour him in this area as well, as Saint Paul exhorts us: “Therefore glorify God in your body” (1 Cor 6:20). I bless all of you from my heart and I ask you, please, to remember me in your prayers.

Rome, Saint John Lateran, 24 April 2023

Francis

Verklaring van de bisschoppen van België: ‘Verregaande verruiming toegang tot abortus’.

Kerknet.be, 26 april 2023

In het federale parlement wordt voorgesteld de termijn voor abortus op te trekken van twaalf tot minstens achttien weken na de conceptie. Ook wordt geadviseerd niet alleen ernstige medische aandoeningen als reden te kunnen inroepen, maar ook mentale problemen. Eveneens wordt gepleit voor de afschaffing van de zesdaagse wachttermijn en voor de schrapping van de informatieplicht over alternatieven.

Wat met ‘mentale problemen’ wordt bedoeld, wordt niet omschreven. Die kunnen van gelijk welke aard zijn. Het leven van een levensvatbaar kind kan dan beëindigd worden, ook als het geen acute bedreiging is voor het leven of de gezondheid van de moeder. Kan het dat daarbij geen verdere vragen worden gesteld?

Bovendien is de zwangerschapsonderbreking na twaalf weken een veel zwaardere en veel ingrijpendere handeling. Het is belangrijk dat we dit terdege beseffen. Voor velen die ze zullen moeten uitvoeren, zal dat niet evident zijn. Ook voor de moeder zelf roept de psychische verwerking ervan vele vragen op.

Niet verwonderlijk dat velen over de ideologische grenzen heen verwachten dat hier grote voorzichtigheid aan de dag wordt gelegd. Al in 2019 hebben artsen, vroedkundigen, verpleegkundigen en andere zorgverleners openlijk hun bezorgdheid geuit bij het voorstel van een verlenging van de termijn. Het raakt hen in hun professionele roeping en taak. Te meer omdat ook wordt geadviseerd om abortus, nu al uit het strafrecht verwijderd, expliciet onder de wetgeving inzake gezondheidszorg te situeren. En dus zonder meer te beschouwen als een medische handeling.

Zeker, omstandigheden kunnen mensen radeloos en uitzichtloos maken. Maar dan stellen dat het om een medische ingreep gaat, doet geen recht aan wat de betrokkenen zelf ervaren en beleven. Waarom dan nog raad en hulp vragen? Te meer omdat zelfs mogelijke alternatieven beter niet ter sprake komen, zoals eveneens wordt voorgesteld. Een luisterend oor en begeleiding zijn toch kostbaar?

Tot hiertoe was de wetgever bekommerd om een juiste balans te vinden tussen de bescherming van het ongeboren leven en de zelfbeschikking van de zwangere vrouw. Dat is in de nieuwe voorstellen niet meer het geval. Nochtans is de bescherming van het ongeboren leven, ook en in het bijzonder in een rechtsstaat, op zich al uiterst belangrijk. Ze is dat des te meer wanneer vandaag verder onderzoek wordt gedaan naar de pijnperceptie van foetussen.

Onze samenleving heeft het steeds moeilijker met alles wat onze plannen doorkruist en onze levenswijze verstoort. Het geldt voor wie oud of ziek is, voor armen en vreemdelingen, voor mensen op de vlucht. Dat geldt ook voor het ongeboren leven. Dat is het wat paus Franciscus in zijn encycliek Laudato Sí schrijft: Wanneer de persoonlijke en maatschappelijke gevoeligheid voor het erkennen van nieuw leven verloren gaat, verdwijnen ook andere vormen van openheid die waardevol zijn voor de samenleving.

Kardinaal Jozef De Kesel en de bisschoppen van België

IPID – Brussel, woensdag 26 april 2023

Address to the members of the Pontifical Academy for Life

Pope Francis
20 February 2023

Distinguished Ladies and Gentlemen,
Dear brothers and sisters,
Mr. Cardinal, dear Bishops,

I welcome you warmly! I thank Archbishop Paglia for the words he addressed to me, and all of you for the commitment you dedicate to the promotion of human life. Thank you! In these days you will reflect on the relationship between the person, emerging technologies and the common good: it is a delicate frontier, where progress, ethics and society meet, and where faith, in its perennial relevance, can make a valuable contribution. In this sense, the Church never ceases to encourage the progress of science and technology at the service of the dignity of the person and for an “integral and integrating” human development. In the letter I addressed to you on the occasion of the twenty-fifth year of the founding of the Academy, I invited you to explore this very theme; now I would like to reflect with you on three challenges that I consider important in this regard: the changing conditions of human life in the technological world; the impact of the new technologies on the very definition of “man” and “relationship”, with particular reference to the condition of the most vulnerable; and the concept of “knowledge” and the consequences that derive from it.

The first challenge: the change in the conditions of life of humanity in the world of technology. We know that it is proper for humanity to act in the world in a technological way, transforming the environment and improving the conditions of life. Benedict XVI recalled this, affirming that technology “touches the heart of the vocation of human labour” and that “in technology, seen as the project of his genius, man recognizes himself and forges his own humanity”. It therefore helps us to understand ever better the value and the potential of human intelligence, and at the same time it speaks to us of the great responsibility we have towards creation.

In the past, the connection between cultures, social activities and the environment, thanks to less dense interactions with slower effects, was less impactful. Today, instead, the rapid development of technical means makes the interdependence between man and the “common home” more intense and evident, as Saint Paul VI already recognized in Populorum Progressio. On the contrary, the force and acceleration of interventions is such as to produce significant mutations – because there is a geometric acceleration, not a mathematical one -, both in the environment and in human living conditions, with effects and developments that are not always clear and predictable. This is being demonstrated by various crises, from the pandemic to the energy crisis, from the climate crisis to the migratory crisis, the consequences of which affect one another, amplifying each other. Sound technological development cannot fail to take into account these complex intersections.

Second challenge: the impact of the new technologies on the definition of “man” and “relationship”, especially with regard to the condition of the most vulnerable people. It is clear that the technological form of human experience is becoming more pervasive every day: in the distinctions between “natural” and “artificial”, “biological” and “technological”, the criteria for discerning what is proper to the human and the technological are becoming increasingly difficult. In particular, the importance of the concept of personal consciousness as relational experience, which cannot be separated from corporeality or culture, must be decisively reaffirmed. In other words, in the network of relationships, both subjective and community, technology cannot supplant human contact, the virtual cannot substitute the real, and the social networks cannot replace the social environment. And we are tempted to let the virtual prevail over the real: this is an ugly temptation.

Even within processes of scientific research, the relationship between the person and the community indicates increasingly complex ethical turning implications. For example, in the field of healthcare, where the quality of information and the assistance of the individual depends largely on the collection and study of available data. Here the problem of reconciling the confidentiality of personal data with the sharing of information that affects the interest of all must be addressed. Indeed, it would be selfish to ask to be treated with the best resources and skills available to society without contributing to increasing them. More generally, I think that the urgency that the distribution of resources and access to treatment should be to the benefit of all, so that inequalities are reduced and the necessary support is guaranteed to the most fragile, such as the disabled, the sick and the poor.

It is therefore necessary to be vigilant about the speed of transformations, the interaction between changes and the possibility of guaranteeing an overall balance. Moreover, this balance is not necessarily the same in different cultures, as instead the technological view would appear to presume when it imposes itself as a universal and homogeneous language and culture – this is a mistake. Instead, efforts must be made to ensure that each one “be helped to grow in its own distinct way and to develop its capacity for innovation while respecting the values of its proper culture”.

Third challenge: the definition of the concept of knowledge and the consequences that derive from this. All the elements considered so far lead us to ask ourselves about our ways of knowing, aware that the fact that the type of knowledge we implement already has moral implications in itself. For example, it is reductive to look for the explanation of phenomena only in the characteristics of the individual elements that compose it. There is a need for more structured models, that take into account the interplay of relationships of which single events are woven. For instance, it is paradoxical when referring to technologies for enhancing a subject’s biological functions, to speak of an “augmented” person if one forgets that the human body refers to the integral good of the person and therefore cannot be identified with the biological organism alone. A wrong approach in this field actually ends up not by “augmenting”, but by “compressing” man.

In Evangelii Gaudium and especially in Laudato si’, I emphasized the importance of knowledge on a human, organic scale, for example highlighting that “the whole is greater than its parts” and that “everything in the world is connected”. I believe that such insights can foster a renewed way of thinking also in the theological sphere; indeed, it is good for theology to move beyond eminently apologetic approaches, to contribute to the definition of a new humanism and to foster reciprocal listening and mutual comprehension between science, technology and society. Indeed, the lack of constructive dialogue between these realities impoverishes the reciprocal trust that underlies all human coexistence and every form of “social friendship”. I would also like to mention the importance of the contribution of dialogue between the great religious traditions to this end. They possess secular wisdom, which can help in these processes. You have shown that you know how to grasp its value, for example by promoting, even in recent times, interreligious meetings on the topics of the “end of life” and artificial intelligence.

Dear brothers and sisters, faced with such complex current challenges, the task before you is enormous. It is a matter of starting from the experiences we all share as human beings and studying them, taking on the perspectives of complexity, trans-disciplinary dialogue and collaboration between different subjects. But we must never be discouraged: we know that the Lord does not abandon us and that what we accomplish is rooted in the trust we place in Him, “who lovest the living” ( Wis 11:26). You have committed yourselves in recent years so that scientific and technological growth be increasingly reconciled with a parallel “development in human responsibility, values and conscience” : I invite you to continue along this path, while I bless you and ask you, please, to pray for me. Thank you.

Address to a delegation from the Italian Federation for Rare Diseases (UNIAMO)

Pope Francis
13 February 2023

Dear brothers and sisters, good morning and welcome!

I thank the President for her kind words, and I greet you all, who form part of the Italian Federation for Rare Diseases. I have had the opportunity to greet you other times after the Angelus, on the occasion of the World Day for Rare Diseases, which is held on 28 February. Instead, today we can get to know each other better and share your hopes and your sufferings. To share, as your motto says, which is summarized in the word “Uniamo”, let us unite. Let us unite our experiences, let us unite our strengths, let us unite our hopes. This key word of yours is fundamental and merits reflection.

The first value of your organization is that of sharing. At the beginning it is a necessity, then it becomes a choice. When a father and a mother discover that their child has a rare disease, they need to meet other parents who have lived and are living the same experience. It is a need. And since the disease is rare, it becomes essential to refer to an association that brings together people who deal with that disease every day: they know the symptoms, the therapies, the treatment centres and so on. At the beginning this is an obligatory route: a way out of the anguish of finding oneself alone and unarmed in front of an enemy. Gradually, though, the way of sharing becomes a choice, sustained by two motivations. The first is realizing that it is necessary, it helps, it offers solutions, at least temporarily, it enables us to orient ourselves a little in the fog of the situation. And the second motivation comes from the pleasure of human relationships, from the good of friendship with people who until yesterday we did not even know, and who now confide their experiences to us to help us bear a very burdensome situation together. This is the first great value that I see in you, in your association.

There is then another value, equally important but different, both on a social and also political level. It is the potential that an association such as yours has to make a decisive contribution to the common good. In this case, to improve the quality of the health service of a country, a region, an area. Indeed, good politics depends also on the contribution of associations, which, in specific matters, have the necessary knowledge and attention towards people who risk being neglected. Here is the decisive point: it is not a matter of claiming favours for one’s own category, this is not good politics; but rather it is a question of fighting so that no one is excluded from the health service, no one is discriminated against, no one is penalized. And this, starting from an experience like yours that is strongly at risk of marginalization. Let me give you an example: entities like yours can apply pressure to overcome national and commercial barriers to the sharing of results of scientific research, so that we can achieve objectives that today seem very distant.

Certainly, it is difficult to commit on behalf of everyone when you are already struggling to face your own problem. But precisely here lies the strength of the association, and even more so the federation: the capacity to give a voice to the many who, alone, would not be able to make themselves heard, and thus represent a need. In this regard, it would be important to involve and listen to patient representatives from the very first phases of decision-making processes. Indeed, associations not only ask, but also give. In your relations with institutions at various levels, you not only ask, but also give: knowledge, contacts, and above all people, people who can lend a hand for the common good, if they work with a spirit of service and civic sense.

Dear friends, thank you for this very welcome visit. I encourage you to go forward in your commitment. I ask Our Lady to accompany every person and every family who faces a rare disease. I wholeheartedly bless you and all your community. And I ask you, please, to pray for me. Thank you!

---

Words of the Holy Father

During the audience, the Holy Father gathered some children around him, handing them rosary chaplets, and addressed the following words to them:

At times, we prepare things to say, all the ideas… But reality speaks better than ideas. The real speech was made by them today, gathering round spontaneously, giving the best of themselves, a smile, a curiosity, reaching out their hand to take the rosary – there are no fools here, none! They know how to do it well. And this was the sermon today, for us. Therefore, I thought that to continue to speak, after this living sermon, would not make sense. I will give the text to the President, and in this way she can make it known to you. And after the blessing, I will greet you all. This is the text I wanted to say. But the true sermon was what they did, with their limitations, their illnesses, but they made us understand that there is always the possibility to grow and to go forward.

And to you, thank you, thank you for this. This is the prize for you: seeing how these children have done. Thank you.

Address to representatives of the National Federation of the Associations of Medical Radiology Health Technicians and Technical, Rehabilitation and Prevention Health Professions

Pope Francis
16 January 2023

Dear brothers and sisters, good morning and welcome!

I thank the president for her words of greeting. You represent thousands of healthcare professionals: so this meeting gives me the opportunity to reiterate my closeness and gratitude for what you do every day. I would like to thank you for your commitment and dedication, especially when they are hidden. Health professionals, over the past three years, have had a very special experience, one that is difficult to imagine, that of the pandemic. It has been said before, but it must not be forgotten: without your commitment and labours, many sick people would not have been cured. Your sense of duty inspired by the power of love has enabled you to serve your neighbour, even putting your own health at risk. And with you, I thank all the other healthcare workers.

In less than a month’s time, 11 February, will mark World Day of the Sick, which also always invites reflection on the experience of illness. This is all the more appropriate today, indeed necessary, because often the culture of efficiency and rejection “pushes” us to sweep it under the carpet, leaving no room for human frailty. In this way, when evil bursts onto the scene and wounds us, we are left stunned. Moreover, others might abandon us at such times. Or, in our own moments of weakness, we may feel that we should abandon others in order to avoid becoming a burden. This is how loneliness sets in” (Message for the 31st World Day of the Sick).

The culture of care, personified by the good Samaritan (cf. Lk 10:25-37) acts in the opposite direction. He does not look away; he approaches the wounded man with compassion and takes care of that person the others had ignored. This parable shows a precise line of behaviour: it “shows us how a community can be rebuilt by men and women who identify with the vulnerability of others, who reject the creation of a society of exclusion, and act instead as neighbours, lifting up and rehabilitating the fallen for the sake of the common good” (Encyclical Fratelli tutti, 67).

Dear friends, your profession stems from a choice of values. With your service, you contribute to “lifting up and rehabilitating” your patients, remembering that first and foremost they are people. Indeed, the person should always be at the centre, with all his or her components, including the spiritual; a unified totality, in which the biological and spiritual, cultural and relational, planning and environmental dimensions of the human being are harmonized in the course of life. This principle, which is at the root of the ethical Constitution of your Federation, guides you path and makes it possible not to give in to a sterile focus on efficiency or a cold application of protocols. The sick are people who ask to be cured and to feel they are cared for, and therefore it is important to relate to them with humanity and empathy. Certainly, with a high professional level, but with humanity and empathy.

But you too, healthcare professionals, are people, and you need someone to take care of you, through the recognition of your service, the protection of adequate working conditions and the involvement of an appropriate number of carers, so that the right to healthcare for all is recognized. It is up to each country to seek “strategies and resources in order to guarantee each person’s fundamental right to basic and decent healthcare” (Message for the 31st World Day of the Sick). Health is not a luxury! A world that discards the sick, that does not assist those who cannot afford care, is a cynical world without a future. Let us always remember this: health is not a luxury, it is for all.

I urge to to look always to ethical values as an indispensable point of reference for your professions. Indeed, if assimilated well and joined with scientific knowledge and the necessary skills, values enable you to accompany the people entrusted to you in the best way.

Dear brothers and sisters, may you be accompanied by the maternal intercession of the Virgin Mary, whom the Gospel presents as a caring woman, rushing to help her relative Elizabeth. May she watch over you and your work. I bless you and your families from my heart. And I ask you, please, to pray for me. Thank you!

Message of His Holiness Pope Francis XXXI World Day of the Sick

11 February 2023

Dear brothers and sisters!

Illness is part of our human condition. Yet, if illness is experienced in isolation and abandonment, unaccompanied by care and compassion, it can become inhumane.

When we go on a journey with others, it is not unusual for someone to feel sick, to have to stop because of fatigue or of some mishap along the way. It is precisely in such moments that we see how we are walking together: whether we are truly companions on the journey, or merely individuals on the same path, looking after our own interests and leaving others to “make do”. For this reason, on the thirty-first World Day of the Sick, as the whole Church journeys along the synodal path, I invite all of us to reflect on the fact that it is especially through the experience of vulnerability and illness that we can learn to walk together according to the style of God, which is closeness, compassion, and tenderness.

In the Book of the Prophet Ezekiel, the Lord speaks these words that represent one of the high points of God’s Revelation: “I myself will be the shepherd of my sheep, and I will make them lie down,says the Lord God.. I will seek the lost, and I will bring back the strayed, and I will bind up the injured, and I will strengthen the weak […] I will feed them with justice” (34:15-16). Experiences of bewilderment, sickness, and weakness are part of the human journey. Far from excluding us from God’s people, they bring us to the centre of the Lord’s attention, for he is our Father and does not want to lose even one of his children along the way. Let us learn from him, then, how to be a community that truly walks together, capable of resisting the throwaway culture.

The Encyclical Fratelli Tutti encourages us to read anew the parable of the Good Samaritan, which I chose in order to illustrate how we can move from the “dark clouds” of a closed world to “envisaging and engendering an open world” (cf. No. 56). There is a profound link between this parable of Jesus and the many ways in which fraternity is denied in today’s world. In particular, the fact that the man, beaten and robbed, is abandoned on the side of the road represents the condition in which all too many of our brothers and sisters are left at a time when they most need help. It is no longer easy to distinguish the assaults on human life and dignity that arise from natural causes from those caused by injustice and violence. In fact, increasing levels of inequality and the prevailing interests of the few now affect every human environment to the extent that it is difficult to consider any experience as having solely “natural” causes. All suffering takes place in the context of a “culture” and its various contradictions.

Here it is especially important to recognize the condition of loneliness and abandonment. This kind of cruelty can be overcome more easily than any other injustice, because – as the parable tells us – it only takes a moment of our attention, of being moved to compassion within us, in order to eliminate it. Two travellers, considered pious and religious, see the wounded man, yet fail to stop. The third passer-by, however, a Samaritan, a scorned foreigner, is moved with compassion and takes care of that stranger on the road, treating him as a brother. In doing so, without even thinking about it, he makes a difference, he makes the world more fraternal.

Brothers and sisters, we are rarely prepared for illness. Oftentimes, we fail even to admit that we are getting older. Our vulnerability frightens us and the pervasive culture of efficiency pushes us to sweep it under the carpet, leaving no room for our human frailty. In this way, when evil bursts onto the scene and wounds us, we are left stunned. Moreover, others might abandon us at such times. Or, in our own moments of weakness, we may feel that we should abandon others in order to avoid becoming a burden. This is how loneliness sets in, and we can become poisoned by a bitter sense of injustice, as if God himself had abandoned us. Indeed, we may find it hard to remain at peace with the Lord when our relationship with others and with ourselves is damaged. It is crucial, then, even in the midst of illness, that the whole Church measure herself against the Gospel example of the Good Samaritan, in order that she may become a true “field hospital”, for her mission is manifested in acts of care, particularly in the historical circumstances of our time. We are all fragile and vulnerable, and need that compassion which knows how to pause, approach, heal, and raise up. Thus, the plight of the sick is a call that cuts through indifference and slows the pace of those who go on their way as if they had no sisters and brothers.

The World Day of the Sick calls for prayer and closeness towards those who suffer. Yet it also aims to raise the awareness of God’s people, healthcare institutions and civil society with regard to a new way of moving forward together. The above-quoted prophecy of Ezekiel judges harshly the priorities of those who wield economic, cultural, and political power over others: “You eat the fat, you clothe yourselves with the wool, you slaughter the fatlings; but you do not feed the sheep. You have not strengthened the weak, you have not healed the sick, you have not bound up the injured, you have not brought back the strayed, you have not sought the lost, but with force and harshness you have ruled them” (34:3-4). God’s word is always illuminating and timely; not only in what it denounces, but also in what it proposes. Indeed, the conclusion of the parable of the Good Samaritan suggests how the exercise of fraternity, which began as a face-to-face encounter, can be expanded into organized care. The elements of the inn, the innkeeper, the money and the promise to remain informed of the situation (cf. Lk 10:34-35) all point to the commitment of healthcare and social workers, family members and volunteers, through whom good stands up in the face of evil every day, in every part of the world.

These past years of the pandemic have increased our sense of gratitude for those who work each day in the fields of healthcare and research. Yet it is not enough to emerge from such an immense collective tragedy simply by honouring heroes. Covid-19 has strained the great networks of expertise and solidarity, and has exposed the structural limits of existing public welfare systems. Gratitude, then, needs to be matched by actively seeking, in every country, strategies and resources in order to guarantee each person’s fundamental right to basic and decent healthcare.

The Samaritan calls the innkeeper to “take care of him” (Lk 10:35). Jesus addresses the same call to each of us. He exhorts us to “go and do likewise” (Lk 10:37). As I noted in Fratelli Tutti, “The parable shows us how a community can be rebuilt by men and women who identify with the vulnerability of others, who reject the creation of a society of exclusion, and act instead as neighbours, lifting up and rehabilitating the fallen for the sake of the common good” (No. 67). Indeed, “we were created for a fulfilment that can only be found in love. We cannot be indifferent to suffering” (No. 68).

On 11 February 2023, let us turn our thoughts to the Shrine of Lourdes, a prophetic lesson entrusted to the Church for our modern times. It is not only what functions well or those who are productive that matter. Sick people, in fact, are at the centre of God’s people, and the Church advances together with them as a sign of a humanity in which everyone is precious and no one should be discarded or left behind.

To the intercession of Mary, Health of the Sick, I entrust all of you who are ill; you who care for them in your families, or through your work, research and volunteer service; and those of you who are committed to weaving personal, ecclesial, and civic bonds of fraternity. To all, I impart my heartfelt blessing.

Rome, Saint John Lateran, 10 January 2023

Francis