Leo XIV: How to respond to the civilization of death?

One theme lingers in the background of all the major debates surrounding the Catholic Church: Life.

Some say talking about life and family is outdated, that we should focus more on social issues than on principles, and that the Catholic Church should focus less on principles and more on helping people.

The question of life is so powerful and compelling, however, that it cannot be ignored, and certainly will not be ignored by Leo XIV.

The Pope is traveling to France at the end of September. France is a place experiencing, in an interesting way, a Christian rebirth. The Paris-Chartres pilgrimage, an initiative revived about forty years ago by an association of tradition-loving Catholics, has considerable numbers and is constantly growing.

The number of adult baptisms on Easter night is constantly growing, so much so that the Île de France, the ecclesiastical region that includes the Archdiocese of Paris, has convened a special council to understand the cause of this rebirth of faith.

However, Leo XIV will arrive on French soil after receiving a “gift” on the eve of his visit: A new euthanasia law. Strongly supported by the Macron government, the euthanasia law overcame every obstacle, and the French bishops were at the forefront of its opposition.

It is a law that even ignores conscientious objection for nurses, and thus effectively forces even those who feel morally obligated not to assist patients in dying, instead to comply with the law over and against their conscientious objections.

This isn’t the only step.

France had already incorporated the right to abortion into its constitution, with a formulation that didn’t directly refer to the “right to abortion,” but emphasized that the law determines the conditions under which a woman exercises her freedom to abort.

This step was followed by a European Union resolution, one of those “non-binding” practices that nevertheless constitute a sort of “soft law .”

In England, there is no law on end-of-life care, but the debate continues to be relaunched, with unprecedented pressure.

And then there’s Italy, where there’s no end-of-life law, but Veneto, one of its regions, passed it autonomously.

The law has sparked harsh reactions from the Patriarch of Venice, Archbishop Francesco Moraglia, as well as from other members of the Italian Episcopal Conference, such as the Archbishop of Modena, Giacomo Morandi.

But what is striking is that, in Italy, there has not yet been a strong movement of opinion on the issue; the bishops’ conference has left everything to the initiatives of individual ordinaries and pastors, and it is interesting that this is happening in a traditionally Catholic country.

In France, however, the bishops have taken to the front lines, without any ifs or buts, facing a political will that was difficult to dismantle.

This is where the Pope’s trip to France begins to take on a specific significance.

What will the Pope say on the subject of life? How will he address the care of the sick and the dignity of human life in his speeches?

The Pope could address the topic in his usual meeting with the diplomatic corps at the beginning of his trip, in his meeting with the sick in Lourdes, and in his speeches in Metz, where Leo XIV is expected to finally outline his policy for Europe.

The question, however, is how Leo XIV intends to combat this increasingly widespread culture of death, and not only in Europe.

In the pope’s native United States, for example, the Carmelite Sisters for the Aged and the Infirm have sued the state of Illinois to block an end-of-life law before it takes effect, since it would violate their freedom of conscience and oblige them to assist patients in taking their own lives if requested.

So far, Leo XIV has been very clear on the issue, but also very cautious.

Responding to a question about an award given by Cardinal Blase Cupich, Archbishop of Chicago, to pro-abortion Senator Dick Durbin, the Pope emphasized that human life must be defended at all times, and that those who were against abortion but ultimately rejected migrants (this is a paraphrase of the Pope’s words) were also against life.

It’s a logical position, but paradoxically it seems far weaker than Pope Francis’s.

During his pontificate, Pope Francis favored an application of social doctrine that was less focused on life issues, and more oriented toward caring for the poor and migrants. With Pope Francis, the era of fighting non-negotiable values was over.

Pope Francis, however, was also the one who argued, without half measures, that abortion was like hiring a hitman to solve a problem.

These issues will likely test the stability of the new Leonine pontificate.

It is true that Leo XIV defended human life on every possible occasion. For instance, in the speech he delivered to the Spanish Parliament in June, and in several audiences and speeches.

However, Leo appears to have a measured, prudent, and reasoned approach to the Church’s social doctrine. When he speaks, he generally seeks to hold the faithful accountable first. The Church provides the principles; the faithful must apply them, according to the logic of the separation of Church and State.

But cultural impact must also be considered, and this impact must be built upon.

The texts produced in the Vatican likely still reflect a “soft” approach. The latest document published by the International Theological Commission, entirely dedicated to responsible care for the created order, emphasizes that life must always be protected, at all costs and in every way. The same document, however, dwells on ecological sins, indulges in technical and scientific data, and reflects an approach that, in effect, speaks of non-negotiable values, yet somehow sidelines the concept.

The still-new Leonine pontificate needs a cultural framework, in other words, and that framework must be built almost entirely from scratch.

The encyclical Magnifica Humanitas is a starting point, but it probably cannot be a point of arrival: The encyclical is too long, too diluted in many concepts, and, at times, too unbalanced towards the present to represent the foundations of a new political discourse.

Thus, to the great themes of the pontificate—from the new art of diplomacy to dialogue with the traditionalist world—is added the fight against the culture of death.

It was thought that this era had ended with John Paul II and then with Benedict XVI and his fight against cultural relativism.

We were wrong. And today, when even parties with values considered Christian have lost sight of the core of social doctrine, while Christians themselves are incapable of forcefully addressing the issues, it is necessary to start again with a new leap in quality.

This is probably the great, unrecognized challenge of this pontificate.