[DE
-
EN
-
ES
-
FR
-
IT
-
PL
-
PT]
DICASTERY FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH
DECLARATION “DIGNITAS INFINITA”
ON HUMAN DIGNITY
Presentation
During the Congresso of 15 March 2019, the then-Congregation for the
Doctrine of the Faith decided to commence “the drafting of a text highlighting
the indispensable nature of the dignity of the human person in Christian
anthropology and illustrating the significance and beneficial implications of
the concept in the social, political, and economic realms—while also taking into
account the latest developments on the subject in academia and the ambivalent
ways in which the concept is understood today.” An initial draft of the text was
prepared with the help of some experts in 2019 but a Consulta Ristretta
of the Congregation, convened on 8 October of the same year, found it to be
unsatisfactory.
The Doctrinal Office then prepared another draft ex novo, based on the
contribution of various experts, which was presented and discussed in a
Consulta Ristretta held on 4 October 2021. In January 2022, the new draft
was presented during the Plenary Session of the Congregation, during which the
Members took steps to shorten and simplify the text.
Following this, on 6 February 2023, the amended version of the new draft was
reviewed by a Consulta Ristretta, which proposed some additional
modifications. An updated version was then submitted for the Members’
consideration during the Ordinary Session of the Dicastery (Feria IV) on
3 May 2023, where Members agreed that the document, with some adjustments, could
be published. Subsequently, Pope Francis approved the deliberations of that
session during the Audience granted to me on 13 November 2023. On this occasion,
he also asked that the document highlight topics closely connected to the theme
of dignity, such as poverty, the situation of migrants, violence against women,
human trafficking, war, and other themes. To honor the Holy Father’s directions,
the Doctrinal Section of the Dicastery dedicated a Congresso to an
in-depth study of the Encyclical
Fratelli Tutti, which offers an original
analysis and further consideration of the theme of human dignity “beyond all
circumstances.”
On 2 February 2024, a new and significantly modified version of this text was
sent to the Members of the Dicastery ahead of the Ordinary Session (Feria IV)
on 28 February 2024. The letter accompanying the draft included the following
clarification: “This additional drafting was necessary to meet a specific
request of the Holy Father: namely, he explicitly urged that more attention be
given to the grave violations of human dignity in our time, particularly in
light of the Encyclical Fratelli Tutti. With this, the Doctrinal Office
took steps to reduce the initial part […] and to develop in greater detail what
the Holy Father indicated.” The text of the current Declaration was finally
approved during the above-mentioned Feria IV of 28 February 2024. Then,
in the Audience granted to me and to Monsignor Armando Matteo, Secretary of the
Doctrinal Section, on 25 March 2024, the Holy Father approved this Declaration
and ordered its publication.
The five-year course of the text’s preparation helps us to understand that the
document before us reflects the gravity and centrality of the theme of dignity
in Christian thought. The text required a considerable process of maturation to
arrive at the final version that we have published today.
In its initial three sections, the Declaration recalls fundamental principles
and theoretical premises, with the goal of offering important clarifications
that can help avoid frequent confusion that surrounds the use of the term
“dignity.” The fourth section presents some current and problematic situations
in which the immense and inalienable dignity due to every human being is not
sufficiently recognized. The Church sees the condemnation of these grave and
current violations of human dignity as a necessary measure, for she sustains the
deep conviction that we cannot separate faith from the defense of human dignity,
evangelization from the promotion of a dignified life, and spirituality from a
commitment to the dignity of every human being.
This dignity of every human being can be understood as “infinite” (dignitas
infinita), as Pope St. John Paul II affirmed in a meeting for people living
with various limitations or disabilities.[1] He said this to show how human dignity transcends all outward appearances
and specific aspects of people’s lives.
In
Fratelli Tutti, Pope Francis wanted to underscore that this dignity
exists “beyond all circumstances.” With this, he summoned all people to defend
human dignity in every cultural context and every moment of human existence,
regardless of physical, psychological, social, or even moral deficiencies. The
Declaration strives to show that this is a universal truth that we are all
called to recognize as a fundamental condition for our societies to be truly
just, peaceful, healthy, and authentically human.
Although not comprehensive, the topics discussed in this Declaration are
selected to illuminate different facets of human dignity that might be obscured
in many people’s consciousness. Some topics may resonate more with some sectors
of society than others. Nevertheless, all of them strike us as being necessary
because, taken together, they help us recognize the harmony and richness of the
thought about human dignity that flows from the Gospel.
This Declaration does not set out to exhaust such a rich and crucial subject.
Instead, its aim is to offer some points for reflection that can help us
maintain an awareness of human dignity amid the complex historical moment in
which we are living. This is so that we may not lose our way and open ourselves
up to more wounds and profound sufferings amid the numerous concerns and
anxieties of our time.
Víctor Manuel Card. Fernández
Prefect
Introduction
1. (Dignitas infinita) Every human person possesses an infinite
dignity, inalienably grounded in his or her very being, which prevails in and
beyond every circumstance, state, or situation the person may ever encounter.
This principle, which is fully recognizable even by reason alone, underlies the
primacy of the human person and the protection of human rights. In the light of
Revelation, the Church resolutely reiterates and confirms the ontological
dignity of the human person, created in the image and likeness of God and
redeemed in Jesus Christ. From this truth, the Church draws the reasons for her
commitment to the weak and those less endowed with power, always insisting on
“the primacy of the human person and the defense of his or her dignity beyond
every circumstance.”[2]
2. This ontological dignity and the unique and eminent value of every man
and woman in the world was reaffirmed authoritatively in the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, issued by the United Nations General Assembly
on 10 December 1948.[3] As we
commemorate the 75th anniversary of that document, the Church sees an
opportunity to proclaim anew its conviction that all human beings—created by God
and redeemed by Christ—must be recognized and treated with respect and love due
to their inalienable dignity. The anniversary also provides an occasion for the
Church to clarify some frequent misconceptions concerning human dignity and to
address some serious and urgent related issues.
3. From the start of her mission and propelled by the Gospel, the Church
has striven to affirm human freedom and promote the rights of all people.[4]
In recent times, thanks to the voices of the Pontiffs, the Church has made a
deliberate effort to formulate this commitment in more explicit terms through a
renewed call to acknowledge the fundamental dignity inherent in every person. On
this point, Pope St. Paul VI affirmed that “no anthropology equals that of the
Church regarding the human person—particularly concerning the person’s
originality, dignity, the intangibility and richness of the person’s fundamental
rights, sacredness, capacity for education, aspiration to a complete
development, and immortality.”[5]
4. Pope St. John Paul II, during the Third General Conference of Latin
American and Caribbean Bishops in Puebla in 1979, affirmed that human dignity is
“a Gospel value that cannot be despised without greatly offending the Creator.
This dignity is infringed on the individual level when due regard is not had for
values such as freedom, the right to profess one’s religion, physical and mental
integrity, the right to essential goods, to life. It is infringed on the social
and political level when man cannot exercise his right of participation, or when
he is subjected to unjust and unlawful coercion, or submitted to physical or
mental torture, etc. […] If the Church makes herself present in the defense of,
or in the advancement of human dignity, she does so in line with her mission,
which, although it is religious and not social or political, cannot fail to
consider man in the entirety of his being.”[6]
5. Then, in 2010, addressing the Pontifical Academy for Life, Pope Benedict
XVI declared that human dignity is “a fundamental principle which faith in the
Crucified and Risen Jesus Christ has always defended, especially when, in
respect of the simplest and most defenseless people, it is disregarded.”[7]
On another occasion, speaking to economists, he stated that “the economy and
finance do not exist for their own sake; they are only an instrument or means.
Their sole end is the human person and his or her total fulfillment in dignity.
This is the only capital, and it is right to safeguard [it].”[8]
6. From the start of his pontificate, Pope Francis has invited the Church
to “believe in a Father who loves all men and women with an infinite love,
realizing that ‘he thereby confers upon them an infinite dignity.’”[9]
He has strongly emphasized that such immense dignity is an original datum
(something given) that is to be acknowledged faithfully and welcomed with
gratitude. Based on this recognition and acceptance of human dignity, a new
coexistence among people can be established that develops social relationships
in the context of authentic fraternity. Indeed, only by “acknowledging the
dignity of each human person” can we “contribute to the rebirth of a universal
aspiration to fraternity.”[10] Pope
Francis affirms that “the wellspring of human dignity and fraternity is in the
Gospel of Jesus Christ,”[11] but
even human reason can arrive at this conviction through reflection and dialogue
since “the dignity of others is to be respected in all circumstances, not because that
dignity is something we have invented or imagined, but because human beings
possess an intrinsic worth superior to that of material objects and contingent
situations. This requires that they be treated differently. That every human being possesses an inalienable dignity is a truth that
corresponds to human nature apart from all cultural change.”[12] Pope Francis concludes, “human beings have the same inviolable dignity in
every age of history, and no one can consider himself or herself authorized by
particular situations to deny this conviction or to act against it.”[13] From this perspective, Pope
Francis’ encyclical,
Fratelli Tutti, constitutes a kind of “Magna Carta”
of our contemporary tasks to protect and promote human dignity.
A Fundamental Clarification
7. There is widespread agreement today on the importance and normative
scope of human dignity and on the unique and transcendent value of every human
being.[14]
However, the phrase “the dignity of the human person” risks lending itself to a
variety of interpretations that can yield potential ambiguities[15]
and “contradictions that lead us to wonder whether the equal dignity of all
human beings […] is truly recognized, respected, protected and promoted in every
situation.”[16]
This brings us to recognize the possibility of a fourfold distinction of the
concept of dignity: ontological dignity, moral dignity, social
dignity, and existential dignity. The most important among these is
the ontological dignity that belongs to the person as such simply because
he or she exists and is willed, created, and loved by God. Ontological dignity
is indelible and remains valid beyond any circumstances in which the person may
find themselves. When we speak of moral dignity, we refer to how people exercise their freedom. While
people are endowed with conscience, they can always act against it. However,
were they to do so, they would behave in a way that is “not dignified” with
respect to their nature as creatures who are loved by God and called to love
others. Yet, this possibility always exists for human freedom, and history
illustrates how individuals—when exercising their freedom against the law of
love revealed by the Gospel—can commit inestimably profound acts of evil against
others. Those who act this way seem to have lost any trace of humanity and
dignity. This is where the present distinction can help us discern between the
moral dignity that de facto can be “lost” and the ontological dignity
that can never be annulled. And it is precisely because of this latter point
that we must work with all our might so that all those who have done evil may
repent and convert.
8. There are still two other possible aspects of dignity to consider:
social and existential. When we speak of social dignity, we refer to the
quality of a person’s living conditions. For example, in cases of extreme
poverty, where individuals do not even have what is minimally necessary to live
according to their ontological dignity, it is said that those poor people are
living in an “undignified” manner. This expression does not imply a judgment on
those individuals but highlights how the situation in which they are forced to
live contradicts their inalienable dignity. The last meaning is that of
existential dignity, which is the type of dignity implied in the
ever-increasing discussion about a “dignified” life and one that is “not
dignified.” For instance, while some people may appear to lack nothing essential
for life, for various reasons, they may still struggle to live with peace, joy,
and hope. In other situations, the presence of serious illnesses, violent family
environments, pathological addictions, and other hardships may drive people to
experience their life conditions as “undignified” vis-à-vis their perception of
that ontological dignity that can never be obscured. These distinctions remind
us of the inalienable value of the ontological dignity that is rooted in the
very being of the human person in all circumstances.
9. Finally, it is worth mentioning that the classical definition of a
person as an “individual substance of a rational nature”[17]
clarifies the foundation of human dignity. As an “individual substance,” the
person possesses ontological dignity (that is, at the metaphysical level of
being itself). Having received existence from God, humans are subjects who
“subsist”—that is, they exercise their existence autonomously. The term
“rational” encompasses all the capacities of the human person, including the
capacities of knowing and understanding, as well as those of wanting, loving,
choosing, and desiring; it also includes all corporeal functions closely related
to these abilities. “Nature” refers to the conditions particular to us as human
beings, which enable our various operations and the experiences that
characterize them; in this sense, nature is the “principle of action.” We do not
create our nature; we hold it as a gift and we can nurture, develop, and enhance
our abilities. By exercising the freedom to cultivate the riches of our nature,
we grow over time. Even if a person is unable to exercise these capabilities due
to various limitations or conditions, nevertheless the person always subsists as
an “individual substance” with a complete and inalienable dignity. This applies,
for instance, to an unborn child, an unconscious person, or an older person in
distress.
1. A Growing Awareness of the Centrality of Human Dignity
10. Already in classical antiquity,[18] an intuition about human dignity emerged from a social perspective that
viewed each person as invested with a particular dignity based on their rank and
status within an established order. From its origins in the social sphere, the
word “dignity” then was used to describe the differentiated dignity of beings in
the cosmos. In this view, all beings possess their own “dignity” according to
their place within the harmony of the whole. Some high points of ancient thought
did begin to acknowledge a unique place for humans as beings endowed with
reason, able to take responsibility for themselves and others in the world.[19] Nevertheless, a way of thinking that would be able to ground our respect
for the dignity of every human person in every circumstance was still a long way
away.
Biblical Perspectives
11. Biblical Revelation teaches that all human beings possess inherent
dignity because they are created in the image and likeness of God: “God said,
‘Let us make man in our image, after our likeness’ […] So God created man in his
own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them”
(Gen. 1:26-27). With this, humanity has a specific quality that means it is not
reducible to purely material elements. Moreover, the “image” does not define the
soul or its intellectual abilities but the dignity of man and woman. In their
relationship of equality and mutual love, both the man and the woman represent
God in the world and are also called to cherish and nurture the world. Because
of this, to be created in the image of God means to possess a sacred value that
transcends every distinction of a sexual, social, political, cultural, and
religious nature. Our dignity is bestowed upon us by God; it is neither claimed
nor deserved. Every human being is loved and willed by God and, thus, has an
inviolable dignity. In Exodus, at the heart of the Old Testament, God shows
himself to be the one who hears the cry of the poor, sees the misery of his
people, and cares for those who are least and for the oppressed (cf. Ex. 3:7;
22:20-26). The same teaching can be found in the Deuteronomic Code (cf. Dt.
12-26); here, the teaching on rights is transformed into a manifesto of human
dignity, particularly in favor of the threefold category of the orphan, the
widow, and the stranger (cf. Dt. 24:17). The ancient precepts of Exodus are
recalled and applied to the moment in the preaching of the prophets, who
represent the critical conscience of Israel. The prophets Amos, Hosea, Isaiah,
Micah, and Jeremiah have entire chapters denouncing injustice. Amos bitterly
decries the oppression of the poor and his listeners’ failure to recognize any
fundamental human dignity in the destitute (cf. Am. 2:6-7; 4:1; 5:11-12). Isaiah
pronounces a curse against those who trample on the rights of the poor, denying
them all justice: “Woe to those who decree iniquitous decrees, and the writers
who keep writing oppression, to turn aside the needy from justice” (Is. 10:1-2).
This prophetic teaching is echoed in Wisdom Literature. For example, Sirach
equates the oppression of the poor with murder: “To take away a neighbor’s
living is to murder him; to deprive an employee of his wages is to shed blood”
(Sir. 34:22). In the Psalms, the religious relationship with God comes through
the defense of the weak and needy: “Do justice for the weak and the orphan; give
justice to the poor and afflicted. Rescue the weak and the needy; set them free
from the hand of the wicked” (Ps. 82:3-4).
12. Born and raised in humble conditions, Jesus reveals the dignity of the
needy and those who labor.[20]
Then, throughout his public ministry, he affirms the value and dignity of all
who bear the image of God, regardless of their social status and external
circumstances. Jesus broke down cultural and cultic barriers, restoring dignity
to those who were “rejected” or were considered to be on the margins of society,
such as tax collectors (cf. Mt. 9:10-11), women (cf. Jn. 4:1-42), children (cf.
Mk. 10:14-15), lepers (cf. Mt. 8:2-3), the sick (cf. Mk. 1:29-34), strangers
(cf. Mt. 25:35), and widows (cf. Lk. 7:11-15). He heals, feeds, defends,
liberates, and saves. He is described as a shepherd who is concerned about the
one sheep that was lost (cf. Mt. 18:12-14). He identifies with the least of his
brethren: “As you did it to one of the least of these my brethren, you did it to
me” (Mt. 25:40). In biblical language, the “little ones” are not only the
children, but are also the vulnerable, the most insignificant, the outcast, the
oppressed, the discarded, the poor, the marginalized, the unlearned, the sick,
and those who are downtrodden by the powerful. The glorious Christ will judge by
the love of neighbor that consists in ministering to the hungry, the thirsty,
the stranger, the naked, the sick, and the imprisoned, with whom he identifies
(cf. Mt. 25:34-36). For Jesus, the good done to every human being, regardless of
the ties of blood or religion, is the single criterion of judgment.
The apostle Paul affirms that every Christian must live according to the
requirements of dignity and respect for the rights of all people (cf. Rom.
13:8-10) according to the new commandment of love (cf. 1 Cor. 13:1-13).
Developments in Christian Thought
13. As Christian thought developed, it also prompted and accompanied the
progress of humanity’s reflection on the concept of dignity. Drawing from the
rich tradition of the Church Fathers, classical Christian anthropology
emphasized the doctrine of the human being as created in the image and likeness
of God and the unique role of the human person in creation.[21]
By critically sifting through the inheritance it had received from ancient
philosophy, Medieval Christian thought arrived at a synthesis of the notion of
the “person” that recognized the metaphysical foundation of human dignity. St.
Thomas Aquinas attested to this when he affirmed that “‘person’ signifies what
is most perfect in all nature—that is, a subsistent individual of a rational
nature.”[22] The Christian humanism of the Renaissance later emphasized this
ontological dignity and its preeminent manifestation in free human action.[23]
Even in the writings of such modern thinkers as Descartes and Kant, who
challenged some of the foundations of traditional Christian anthropology, one
can still strongly perceive echoes of Revelation. Building upon some recent
philosophical reflections about the status of theoretical and practical
subjectivity, Christian reflection then came to emphasize even more the depths
of the concept of dignity. In the twentieth century, this reached an original
perspective (as seen in Personalism) that reconsidered the question of
subjectivity and expanded it to encompass intersubjectivity and the
relationships that bind people together.[24]
The thinking flowing from this view has enriched contemporary Christian
anthropology.[25]
The Present Era
14. Today, the term “dignity” is mainly used to emphasize the uniqueness of
the human person, incomparable to all other entities in the universe. From this
perspective, we can understand how the word “dignity” was used in the 1948
United Nations Declaration, which speaks about “the inherent
dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human
family.” Only this inalienable character of human dignity makes it possible to
speak about human rights.[26]
15. To clarify the concept of dignity even further, it is essential to point
out that dignity is not something granted to the person by others based on their
gifts or qualities, such that it could be withdrawn. Were it so bestowed, it
would be given in a conditional and alienable way, and then the very meaning of
dignity (however worthy of great respect) would remain exposed to the risk of
being abolished. Instead, dignity is intrinsic to the person: it is not
conferred subsequently (a posteriori), it is prior to any recognition,
and it cannot be lost. All human beings possess this same intrinsic dignity,
regardless of whether or not they can express it in a suitable manner.
16. For this reason, the Second Vatican Council speaks of the “sublime
dignity of the human person, who stands above all things and whose rights and
duties are universal and inviolable.”[27]
As the opening line of the conciliar Declaration
Dignitatis Humanae recalls, “contemporary man is becoming increasingly
conscious of the dignity of the human person; more and more people are demanding
that men should exercise fully their own judgment and a responsible freedom in
their actions and should not be subject to the pressure of coercion but be
inspired by a sense of duty.”[28]
Such freedom of thought and conscience, both individual and communal, is based
on the recognition of human dignity “as known through the revealed Word of God
and by reason itself.”[29] The
Church’s Magisterium progressively developed an ever-greater understanding of
the meaning of human dignity, along with its demands and consequences, until it
arrived at the recognition that the dignity of every human being prevails beyond
all circumstances.
2. The Church Proclaims, Promotes, and Guarantees Human Dignity
17. The Church proclaims the equal dignity of all people, regardless of their
living conditions or qualities. This proclamation rests on a threefold
conviction, which—in the light of Christian faith—gives human dignity an
immeasurable value and reinforces its intrinsic demands.
The Indelible Image of God
18. The first conviction, drawn from Revelation, holds that the dignity of
the human person comes from the love of the Creator, who has imprinted the
indelible features of his image on every person (cf. Gen. 1:26). The
Creator calls each person to know him, to love him, and to live in a covenantal
relationship with him, while calling the person also to live in fraternity,
justice, and peace with all others. In this perspective, dignity refers not only
to the soul but also to the person as an inseparable unity of body and soul.
Accordingly, dignity is also inherent in each person’s body, which participates
in its own way in being in imago Dei (in the image of God) and is also
called to share in the soul’s glory in the divine beatitude.
Christ Elevates Human Dignity
19. The second conviction follows from the fact that the dignity of the human
person was revealed in its fullness when the Father sent his Son, who assumed
human existence to the full: “In the mystery of the Incarnation, the Son of God
confirmed the dignity of the body and soul which constitute the human being.”[30]
By uniting himself with every human being through his Incarnation, Jesus Christ
confirmed that each person possesses an immeasurable dignity simply by belonging
to the human community; moreover, he affirmed that this dignity can never be
lost.[31] By proclaiming that the
Kingdom of God belongs to the poor, the humble, the despised, and those who
suffer in body and spirit; by healing all sorts of illnesses and infirmities,
even the most dramatic ones, such as leprosy; by affirming that whatever is done
to these individuals is also done to him because he is present in them: in all
these ways, Jesus brought the great novelty of recognizing the dignity of every
person, especially those who were considered “unworthy.” This new principle in
human history—which emphasizes that individuals are even more “worthy” of our
respect and love when they are weak, scorned, or suffering, even to the point of
losing the human “figure”—has changed the face of the world. It has given life
to institutions that take care of those who find themselves in disadvantaged
conditions, such as abandoned infants, orphans, the elderly who are left without
assistance, the mentally ill, people with incurable diseases or severe
deformities, and those living on the streets.
A Vocation to the Fullness of Dignity
20. The third conviction concerns the ultimate destiny of human beings. After
the Creation and the Incarnation, Christ’s Resurrection reveals a further aspect
of human dignity. Indeed, “the dignity of man rests above all on the fact that
he is called to communion with God,”[32]
destined to last forever. Thus, “the dignity of this life is linked not only to
its beginning, to the fact that it comes from God, but also to its final end, to
its destiny of fellowship with God in knowledge and love of him. In the light of
this truth, Saint Irenaeus qualifies and completes his praise of man: ‘the glory
of God’ is indeed, ‘man, living man,’ but ‘the life of man consists in the
vision of God.’”[33]
21. Consequently, the Church believes and affirms that all human
beings—created in the image and likeness of God and recreated[34]
in the Son, who became man, was crucified, and rose again—are called to grow
under the action of the Holy Spirit to reflect the glory of the Father in that
same image and to share in eternal life (cf. Jn. 10:15-16, 17:22-24; 2 Cor.
3:18; Eph. 1:3-14). Indeed, “Revelation […] shows forth the dignity of
the human person in all its fullness.”[35]
A Commitment to One’s Own Freedom
22. Every individual possesses an inalienable and intrinsic dignity from the
beginning of his or her existence as an irrevocable gift. However, the choice to
express that dignity and manifest it to the full or to obscure it depends on
each person’s free and responsible decision. Some Church Fathers, such as St.
Irenaeus and St. John Damascene, distinguished between the “image” and
“likeness” mentioned in Genesis (cf. 1:26). This allowed for a dynamic
perspective on human dignity that understands that the image of God is entrusted
to human freedom so that—under the guidance and action of the Spirit—the
person’s likeness to God may grow and each person may attain their highest
dignity.[36] All people are called to manifest the ontological scope of their dignity
on an existential and moral level as they, by their freedom, orient themselves
toward the true good in response to God’s love. Thus, as one who is created in
the image of God, the human person never loses his or her dignity and never
ceases to be called to embrace the good freely. At the same time, to the
extent that the person responds to the good, the individual’s
dignity can manifest itself freely, dynamically, and progressively; with that,
it can also grow and mature. Consequently, each person must also strive to live
up to the full measure of their dignity. In light of this, one can understand
how sin can wound and obscure human dignity, as it is an act contrary to that
dignity; yet, sin can never cancel the fact that the human being is
created in the image and likeness of God. In this way, faith plays a decisive
role in helping reason perceive human dignity and in accepting, consolidating,
and clarifying its essential features, as Benedict XVI pointed out: “Without the
corrective supplied by religion, though, reason too can fall prey to
distortions, as when it is manipulated by ideology, or applied in a partial way
that fails to take full account of the dignity of the human person. Such misuse
of reason, after all, was what gave rise to the slave trade in the first place
and to many other social evils, not least the totalitarian ideologies of the
twentieth century.”[37]
3. Dignity, the Foundation of Human Rights and Duties
23. As Pope Francis has recalled, “In modern culture, the closest reference
to the principle of the inalienable dignity of the person is the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, which Saint John Paul II defined as a
‘milestone on the long and difficult path of the human race,’ and as ‘one of the
highest expressions of the human conscience.’”[38] To resist attempts to alter or annul the profound meaning of that
Declaration, it is worth recalling some essential principles that must
always be honored.
Unconditional Respect for Human Dignity
24. First, while there has been a growing awareness of human dignity, many
misunderstandings of the concept still distort its meaning. Some people propose
that it is better to use the expression “personal dignity” (and the rights “of
the person”) instead of “human dignity” (and the rights “of man”) since they
understand a “person” to be only “one who is capable of reasoning.” They then
argue that dignity and rights are deduced from the individual’s capacity for
knowledge and freedom, which not all humans possess. Thus, according to them,
the unborn child would not have personal dignity, nor would the older person who
is dependent upon others, nor would an individual with mental disabilities.[39] On the contrary, the Church insists that the dignity of every human
person, precisely because it is intrinsic, remains “in all circumstances.” The
recognition of this dignity cannot be contingent upon a judgment about the
person’s ability to understand and act freely; otherwise, it would not be
inherent in the person, independent of the individual’s situation, and thus
deserving unconditional respect. Only by recognizing an intrinsic and
inalienable dignity in every human being can we guarantee a secure and
inviolable foundation for that quality. Without any ontological grounding, the
recognition of human dignity would vacillate at the mercy of varying and
arbitrary judgments. The only prerequisite for speaking about the dignity
inherent in the person is their membership in the human species, whereby “the
rights of the person are the rights of man.”[40]
An Objective Basis for Human Freedom
25. Second, the concept of human dignity is also occasionally misused to
justify an arbitrary proliferation of new rights, many of which are at odds with
those originally defined and often are set in opposition to the fundamental
right to life.[41] It is as if the ability to express and realize every individual preference
or subjective desire should be guaranteed. This perspective identifies dignity
with an isolated and individualistic freedom that claims to impose particular
subjective desires and propensities as “rights” to be guaranteed and funded by
the community. However, human dignity cannot be based on merely individualistic
standards, nor can it be identified with the psychophysical well-being of
the individual. Rather, the defense of human dignity is based on the
constitutive demands of human nature, which do not depend on individual
arbitrariness or social recognition. Therefore, the duties that stem from
recognizing the dignity of the other and the corresponding rights that flow from
it have a concrete and objective content based on our shared human nature.
Without such an objective basis, the concept of dignity becomes de facto
subject to the most diverse forms of arbitrariness and power interests.
The Relational Structure of the Human Person
26. Viewed through the lens of the relational character of the person,
human dignity helps to overcome the narrow perspective of a self-referential and
individualistic freedom that claims to create its own values regardless of the
objective norms of the good and of our relationship with other living beings.
Indeed, there is an ever-growing risk of reducing human dignity to the ability
to determine one’s identity and future independently of others, without regard
for one’s membership in the human community. In this flawed understanding of
freedom, the mutual recognition of duties and rights that enable us to care for
each other becomes impossible. In fact, as Pope St. John Paul II recalled,
freedom is placed “at the service of the person and of his fulfillment through
the gift of self and openness to others; but when freedom is made absolute in an
individualistic way, it is emptied of its original content, and its very meaning
and dignity are contradicted.”[42]
27. Human dignity also encompasses the capacity, inherent in human nature, to
assume obligations vis-à-vis others.
28. The difference between humans and all other living beings, which stands
out thanks to the concept of dignity, should not lead us to forget the goodness
of other creatures. Those beings exist not only for human utility but also
possess a value of their own; they are like gifts entrusted to humanity to be
cherished and cultivated. Thus, while the concept of dignity is reserved for the
human being, at the same time, the creaturely goodness of the rest of the cosmos
must be affirmed. As Pope Francis points out, “By virtue of our unique dignity
and our gift of intelligence, we are called to respect creation and its inherent
laws […], ‘Each creature possesses its own particular goodness and
perfection…Each of the various creatures, willed in its own being, reflects in
its own way a ray of God’s infinite wisdom and goodness. Man must therefore
respect the particular goodness of every creature, to avoid any disordered use
of things.’”[43] Furthermore, “today we see ourselves forced to realize that it is only
possible to sustain a ‘situated anthropocentrism.’ To recognize, in other words,
that human life is incomprehensible and unsustainable without other creatures.”[44] In this perspective, “it is not a matter of indifference to us that so
many species are disappearing and that the climate crisis endangers the life of
many other beings.”[45] Indeed, it belongs to human beings’ dignity to care for the environment,
taking particular account of the human ecology that preserves their very
existence.
Freeing the Human Person from Negative Influences in the Moral and Social
Spheres
29. These fundamental prerequisites, however necessary, are not enough to
guarantee a person’s growth consistent with his or her dignity. While “God
created man a rational being, conferring on him the dignity of a person who can
initiate and control his own actions,”[46] with a view to the good, our free will often prefers evil over good. Thus,
human freedom, in its turn, needs to be freed. In his letter to the Galatians,
St. Paul affirms that “for freedom, Christ has set us free” (Gal. 5:1),
recalling the task proper to each Christian, on whose shoulders rests a
responsibility for liberation that extends to the whole world (cf. Rom.
8:19ff). This is a liberation that, starting from the hearts of individual
people, is called to spread and manifest its humanizing power across all
relationships.
30. Freedom is a marvelous gift from God. Even when God draws us to him with
his grace, he does so in a way that never violates our freedom. Thus, it would
be a grave error to think that by distancing ourselves from God and his
assistance, we could somehow be freer and thus feel more dignified. Instead,
detached from the Creator, our freedom can only weaken and become obscured. The
same happens if freedom imagines itself to be independent of any external
reference and perceives any relationship with a prior truth as a threat; as a
result, respect for the freedom and dignity of others would also diminish. As
Pope Benedict XVI explained, “A will which believes itself radically incapable
of seeking truth and goodness has no objective reasons or motives for acting
save those imposed by its fleeting and contingent interests; it does not have an
‘identity’ to safeguard and build up through truly free and conscious decisions.
As a result, it cannot demand respect from other ‘wills,’ which are themselves
detached from their own deepest being and thus capable of imposing other
‘reasons’ or, for that matter, no ‘reason’ at all. The illusion that moral
relativism provides the key for peaceful coexistence is actually the origin of
divisions and the denial of the dignity of human beings.”[47]
31. Moreover, it would be unrealistic to posit an abstract freedom devoid of
any influence, context, or limitation. Instead, “the proper exercise of personal
freedom requires specific conditions of an economic, social, juridic, political
and cultural order,”[48] which often remain unfulfilled. In this sense, we can say that some
individuals enjoy more “freedom” than others. Pope Francis has given special
attention to this point: “Some people are born into economically stable
families, receive a fine education, grow up well nourished, or naturally possess
great talent. They will certainly not need a proactive state; they need only
claim their freedom. Yet, the same rule clearly does not apply to a disabled
person, to someone born in dire poverty, to those lacking a good education and
with little access to adequate health care. If a society is governed primarily
by the criteria of market freedom and efficiency, there is no place for such
persons, and fraternity will remain just another vague ideal.”[49] Therefore, it is crucial to understand that “removing injustices promotes
human freedom and dignity”[50] at every level of human endeavor. To enable authentic freedom, “we must
put human dignity back at the center and, on that pillar, build the alternative
social structures we need.”[51] Similarly, freedom is frequently obscured by a variety of psychological,
historical, social, educational, and cultural influences. Real and historical
freedom always needs to be “liberated.” One must, moreover, reaffirm the
fundamental right to religious freedom.
32. At the same time, human history shows clear progress in understanding
human dignity and freedom, albeit not without shadows and risks of regression.
Such advancement in understanding human dignity is demonstrated by the fact that
there is an increasing desire to eradicate racism, slavery, and the
marginalization of women, children, the sick, and people with disabilities. This
aspiration has been bolstered under the influence of the Christian faith, which
continues to be a ferment, even in increasingly secularized societies. However,
the arduous journey of advancing human dignity remains far from completion.
4. Some Grave Violations of Human Dignity
33. In light of the previous reflections on the centrality of human dignity,
the final section of this Declaration addresses some specific and grave
violations of that dignity. It does so in the spirit proper to the Church’s
magisterium, which has found full expression in the teaching of the recent
Pontiffs, as mentioned previously. For example, Pope Francis, on the one hand,
tirelessly reminds us of the need to respect human dignity: “Every human being
has the right to live with dignity and to develop integrally; this fundamental
right cannot be denied by any country. People have this right even if they are
unproductive or were born with or developed limitations. This does not detract
from their great dignity as human persons, a dignity based not on circumstances
but on the intrinsic worth of their being. Unless this basic principle is
upheld, there will be no future either for fraternity or for the survival of
humanity.”[52] On the other hand, he never ceases to point out the concrete violations of
human dignity in our time, calling us each to awaken to our responsibility and
the need to engage in a concrete commitment in this regard.
34. In addressing some of the many grave violations of human dignity today,
we can draw upon the teachings of the Second Vatican Council, which emphasized
that “all offenses against life itself, such as murder, genocide, abortion,
euthanasia, and willful suicide” must be recognized as contrary to human
dignity.[53] Furthermore, the Council affirmed that “all violations of the integrity of
the human person, such as mutilation, physical and mental torture, undue
psychological pressures,” also infringe upon our dignity.[54] Finally, it denounced “all offenses against human dignity, such as
subhuman living conditions, arbitrary imprisonment, deportation, slavery,
prostitution, the selling of women and children, degrading working conditions
where individuals are treated as mere tools for profit rather than free and
responsible persons.”[55] Here, one should also mention the death penalty, for this also violates
the inalienable dignity of every person, regardless of the circumstances.[56] In this regard, we must recognize that “the firm rejection of the death penalty shows to what extent it is possible to
recognize the inalienable dignity of every human being and to accept that he or
she has a place in this universe. If I do not deny that dignity to the worst of
criminals, I will not deny it to anyone. I will give everyone the possibility of
sharing this planet with me, despite all our differences.”[57] It is also fitting to reaffirm the dignity of those who are incarcerated,
who often must live in undignified conditions. Finally, it should be stated
that—even if someone has been guilty of serious crimes—the practice of torture
completely contradicts the dignity that is proper to every human being.
35. While not claiming to be exhaustive, the following paragraphs draw
attention to some grave violations of human dignity that are particularly
relevant.
The Drama of Poverty
36. One of the phenomena that contributes significantly to denying the
dignity of so many human beings is extreme poverty, linked as it is to the
unequal distribution of wealth. As Pope St. John Paul II emphasized, “One of the
greatest injustices in the contemporary world consists precisely in this: that
the ones who possess much are relatively few and those who possess almost
nothing are many. It is the injustice of the poor distribution of the goods and
services originally intended for all.”[58] Moreover, it would be misleading to make a cursory distinction between
“rich” and “poor” countries, for Benedict XVI recognized that “the world’s
wealth is growing in absolute terms, but inequalities are on the increase.
In rich countries, new sectors of society are succumbing to poverty and new
forms of poverty are emerging. In poorer areas, some groups enjoy a sort of
‘super-development’ of a wasteful and consumerist kind, which forms an
unacceptable contrast with the ongoing situations of dehumanizing deprivation.”
The “‘scandal of glaring inequalities’ continues,”[59] where the dignity of the poor is doubly denied because of the lack of
resources available to meet their basic needs and the indifference shown toward
them by their neighbors.
37. With Pope Francis, therefore, one must conclude that “wealth has
increased, but together with inequality, with the result that ‘new forms of
poverty are emerging.’ The claim that the modern world has reduced poverty is
made by measuring poverty with criteria from the past that do not correspond to
present-day realities.”[60] As a result, poverty “can take a variety of forms, such as an obsession
with reducing labor costs with no concern for its grave consequences, since the
unemployment that it directly generates leads to the expansion of poverty.”[61] Among these “destructive effects of the empire of money,”[62] it must be recognized that “there is no poverty worse than that which
takes away work and the dignity of work.”[63] Moreover, if some people are born into a country or family where they have
fewer opportunities to develop, we should acknowledge that this is contrary to
their dignity, which is the same dignity as that of those born into a wealthy
family or country. We are all responsible for this stark inequality, albeit to
varying degrees.
War
38. Another tragedy that denies human dignity, both in the past and today, is
war: “War, terrorist attacks, racial or religious persecution, and many other
affronts to human dignity […] ‘have become so common as to constitute a real
‘third world war’ fought piecemeal.’”[64] With its trail of destruction and suffering, war attacks human dignity in
both the short and long term: “While reaffirming the inalienable right to
self-defense and the responsibility to protect those whose lives are threatened,
we must acknowledge that war is always a ‘defeat of humanity.’ No war is worth
the tears of a mother who has seen her child mutilated or killed; no war is
worth the loss of the life of even one human being, a sacred being created in
the image and likeness of the Creator; no war is worth the poisoning of our
common home; and no war is worth the despair of those who are forced to leave
their homeland and are deprived, from one moment to the next, of their home and
all the family, friendship, social and cultural ties that have been built up,
sometimes over generations.”[65] All wars, by the mere fact that they contradict human dignity, are
“conflicts that will not solve problems but only increase them.”[66] This point is even more critical in our time when it has become
commonplace for so many innocent civilians to perish beyond the confines of a
battlefield.
39. Therefore, even today, the Church cannot but make her own the words of
the Pontiffs, repeating with Pope St. Paul VI: “jamais plus la guerre, jamais
plus la guerre!” [“never again war, never again war!”].[67] Moreover, together with Pope St. John Paul II, the Church pleas “in the
name of God and in the name of man: Do not kill! Do not prepare destruction and
extermination for people! Think of your brothers and sisters who are suffering
hunger and misery! Respect each one’s dignity and freedom!”[68] As much now as ever, this is the cry of the Church and of all humanity.
Pope Francis underscores this by stating, “We can no longer think of war as a
solution because its risks will probably always be greater than its supposed
benefits. In view of this, it is very difficult nowadays to invoke the rational
criteria elaborated in earlier centuries to speak of the possibility of a ‘just
war.’ Never again war!”[69] Since humanity often falls back into the same mistakes of the past, “in
order to make peace a reality, we must move away from the logic of the
legitimacy of war.”[70] The intimate relationship between faith and human dignity means it would
be contradictory for war to be based on religious convictions: “The one who
calls upon God’s name to justify terrorism, violence, and war does not follow
God’s path. War in the name of religion becomes a war against religion itself.”[71]
The Travail of Migrants
40. Migrants are among the first victims of multiple forms of poverty. Not
only is their dignity denied in their home countries,[72] but also their lives are put at risk because they no longer have the means
to start a family, to work, or to feed themselves.[73] Once they have arrived in countries that should be able to accept them,
“migrants are not seen as entitled like others to participate in the life of
society, and it is forgotten that they possess the same intrinsic dignity as any
person. […] No one will ever openly deny that they are human beings; yet in
practice, by our decisions and the way we treat them, we can show that we
consider them less worthy, less important, less human.”[74] Therefore, it is urgent to remember that “every migrant is a human person
who, as such, possesses fundamental, inalienable rights that must be respected
by everyone and in every circumstance.”[75] Receiving migrants is an important and meaningful way of defending “the
inalienable dignity of each human person regardless of origin, race or
religion.”[76]
Human Trafficking
41. Human trafficking must also be counted among the grave violations of
human dignity.[77] While it is not a new phenomenon, it has taken on tragic dimensions before
our eyes, which is why Pope Francis has denounced it in particularly emphatic
terms: “I reaffirm here that the ‘trade in people’ is a vile activity, a
disgrace to our societies that claim to be civilized! Exploiters and clients at
all levels should make a serious examination of conscience both in the first
person and before God! Today the Church is renewing her urgent appeal that the
dignity and centrality of every individual always be safeguarded, with respect
for fundamental rights, as her social teaching emphasizes. She asks that these
rights really be extended for millions of men and women on every continent,
wherever they are not recognized. In a world in which a lot is said about
rights, how often is human dignity actually trampled upon! In a world in which
so much is said about rights, it seems that the only thing that has any rights
is money.”[78]
42. For these reasons, the Church and humanity must not cease fighting
against such phenomena as “the marketing of human organs and tissues, the sexual
exploitation of boys and girls, slave labor, including prostitution, the drug
and weapons trade, terrorism, and international organized crime. Such is the
magnitude of these situations, and their toll in innocent lives, that we must
avoid every temptation to fall into a declarationist nominalism that would
assuage our consciences. We need to ensure that our institutions are truly
effective in the struggle against all these scourges.”[79] Confronted with these varied and brutal denials of human dignity, we need
to be increasingly aware that “human trafficking is a crime against humanity.”[80] It essentially denies human dignity in at least two ways: “Trafficking
profoundly disfigures the humanity of the victim, offending his or her freedom
and dignity. Yet, at the same time, it dehumanizes those who carry it out.”[81]
Sexual Abuse
43. The profound dignity inherent in human beings in their entirety of mind
and body also allows us to understand why all sexual abuse leaves deep scars in
the hearts of those who suffer it. Indeed, those who suffer sexual abuse
experience real wounds in their human dignity. These are “sufferings that can
last a lifetime and that no repentance can remedy. This phenomenon is widespread
in society and it also affects the Church and represents a serious obstacle to
her mission.”[82] From this stems the Church’s ceaseless efforts to put an end to all kinds
of abuse, starting from within.
Violence Against Women
44. Violence against women is a global scandal that is gaining increasing
recognition. While the equal dignity of women may be recognized in words, the
inequalities between women and men in some countries remain very serious. Even
in the most developed and democratic countries, the concrete social reality
testifies to the fact that women are often not accorded the same dignity as men.
Pope Francis highlighted this when he affirmed that “the organization of
societies worldwide is still far from reflecting clearly that women possess the
same dignity and identical rights as men. We say one thing with words, but our
decisions and reality tell another story. Indeed, ‘doubly poor are those women
who endure situations of exclusion, mistreatment, and violence, since they are
frequently less able to defend their rights.’”[83]
45. Pope St. John Paul II recognized that “much remains to be done to prevent
discrimination against those who have chosen to be wives and mothers. […]
[T]here is an urgent need to achieve real equality in every area: equal
pay for equal work, protection for working mothers, fairness in career
advancements, equality of spouses with regard to family rights and the
recognition of everything that is part of the rights and duties of citizens in a
democratic State.”[84] Indeed, inequalities in these areas are also various forms of violence. He
also recalled that “the time has come to condemn vigorously the types of sexual violence
which frequently have women for their object and to pass laws which effectively
defend them from such violence. Nor can we fail, in the name of the respect due
to the human person, to condemn the widespread hedonistic and commercial culture
which encourages the systematic exploitation of sexuality and corrupts even very
young girls into letting their bodies be used for profit.”[85] Among the forms of violence carried out on women, how can we not mention
coercive abortions, which affect both mother and child, often to satisfy the
selfishness of males? And how can we not also mention the practice of polygamy?
As the Catechism of the Catholic Church reminds us, polygamy is contrary
to the equal dignity of women and men; it is also “contrary to conjugal love
which is undivided and exclusive.”[86]
46. In this consideration of violence against women, one cannot condemn
enough the phenomenon of femicide. On this front, the entire international
community must have a coordinated and concrete commitment, as Pope Francis
reiterated, “Our love for Mary must help us to feel appreciation and gratitude
for women, for our mothers and grandmothers, who are a bastion in the life in
our cities. Almost always in silence, they carry life forward. It is the silence
and strength of hope. Thank you for your witness. […] But in thinking of our
mothers and grandmothers, I want to invite you to combat a scourge that affects
our American continent: the numerous cases where women are killed. And the many
situations of violence that are kept quiet behind so many walls. I ask you to
fight against this source of suffering by calling for legislation and a culture
that repudiates every form of violence.”[87]
Abortion
47. The Church consistently reminds us that “the dignity of every human being
has an intrinsic character and is valid from the moment of conception until
natural death. It is precisely the affirmation of such dignity that is the
inalienable prerequisite for the protection of a personal and social existence,
and also the necessary condition for fraternity and social friendship to be
realized among all the peoples of the earth.”[88] On account of the intangible value of human life, the Church’s magisterium
has always spoken out against abortion. In this regard, Pope St. John Paul II
writes: “Among all the crimes which can be committed against life, procured
abortion has characteristics making it particularly serious and deplorable. […]
But today, in many people’s consciences, the perception of its gravity has
become progressively obscured. The acceptance of abortion in the popular mind,
in behavior, and even in law itself is a telling sign of an extremely dangerous
crisis of the moral sense, which is becoming more and more incapable of
distinguishing between good and evil, even when the fundamental right to life is
at stake. Given such a grave situation, we need now more than ever to have the
courage to look the truth in the eye and to call things by their proper name,
without yielding to convenient compromises or to the temptation of
self-deception. In this regard, the reproach of the Prophet is extremely
straightforward: ‘Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put
darkness for light and light for darkness’ (Is. 5:20). Especially in the case of
abortion, there is a widespread use of ambiguous terminology, such as
‘interruption of pregnancy,’ which tends to hide abortion’s true nature and to
attenuate its seriousness in public opinion. Perhaps this linguistic phenomenon
is itself a symptom of an uneasiness of conscience. But no word has the power to
change the reality of things: procured abortion is the deliberate and direct
killing, by whatever means it is carried out, of a human being in the initial
phase of his or her existence, extending from conception to birth.”[89]Unborn children are, thus, “the most defenseless and innocent among us.
Nowadays, efforts are made to deny them their human dignity and to do with them
whatever one pleases, taking their lives and passing laws preventing anyone from
standing in the way of this.”[90] It must, therefore, be stated with all force and clarity, even in our
time, that “this defense of unborn life is closely linked to the defense of each
and every other human right. It involves the conviction that a human being is
always sacred and inviolable, in any situation and at every stage of
development. Human beings are ends in themselves and never a means of resolving
other problems. Once this conviction disappears, so do solid and lasting
foundations for the defense of human rights, which would always be subject to
the passing whims of the powers that be. Reason alone is sufficient to recognize
the inviolable value of each single human life, but if we also look at the issue
from the standpoint of faith, ‘every violation of the personal dignity of the
human being cries out in vengeance to God and is an offense against the Creator
of the individual.’”[91] In this context, it is worth recalling St. Teresa of Calcutta’s generous
and courageous commitment to the defense of every person conceived.
Surrogacy
48. The Church also takes a stand against the practice of surrogacy, through
which the immensely worthy child becomes a mere object. On this point, Pope
Francis’s words have a singular clarity: “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.”[92]
49. First and foremost, the practice of surrogacy violates the dignity of the
child. Indeed, every child possesses an intangible dignity that is clearly
expressed—albeit in a unique and differentiated way—at every stage of his or her
life: from the moment of conception, at birth, growing up as a boy or girl, and
becoming an adult. Because of this unalienable dignity, the child has the right
to have a fully human (and not artificially induced) origin and to receive the
gift of a life that manifests both the dignity of the giver and that of the
receiver. Moreover, acknowledging the dignity of the human person also entails
recognizing every dimension of the dignity of the conjugal union and of human
procreation. Considering this, the legitimate desire to have a child cannot be
transformed into a “right to a child” that fails to respect the dignity of that
child as the recipient of the gift of life.[93]
50. Surrogacy also violates the dignity of the woman, whether she is coerced
into it or chooses to subject herself to it freely. For, in this practice, the
woman is detached from the child growing in her and becomes a mere means
subservient to the arbitrary gain or desire of others. This contrasts in every
way with the fundamental dignity of every human being and with each person’s
right to be recognized always individually and never as an instrument for
another.
Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide
51. There is a special case of human dignity violation that is quieter but is
swiftly gaining ground. It is unique in how it utilizes a mistaken understanding
of human dignity to turn the concept of dignity against life itself. This
confusion is particularly evident today in discussions surrounding euthanasia.
For example, laws permitting euthanasia or assisted suicide are sometimes called
“death with dignity acts.” With this, there is a widespread notion that
euthanasia or assisted suicide is somehow consistent with respect for the
dignity of the human person. However, in response to this, it must be strongly
reiterated that suffering does not cause the sick to lose their dignity, which
is intrinsically and inalienably their own. Instead, suffering can become an
opportunity to strengthen the bonds of mutual belonging and gain greater
awareness of the precious value of each person to the whole human family.
52. Certainly, the dignity of those who are critically or terminally ill
calls for all suitable and necessary efforts to alleviate their suffering
through appropriate palliative care and by avoiding aggressive treatments or
disproportionate medical procedures. This approach corresponds with the
“enduring responsibility to appreciate the needs of the sick person: care needs,
pain relief, and affective and spiritual needs.”[94] However, an effort of this nature is entirely different from—and is indeed
contrary to—a decision to end one’s own life or that of another person who is
burdened by suffering. Even in its sorrowful state, human life carries a dignity
that must always be upheld, that can never be lost, and that calls for
unconditional respect. Indeed, there are no circumstances under which human life
would cease from being dignified and could, as a result, be put to an end: “Each
life has the same value and dignity for everyone: the respect of the life of
another is the same as the respect owed to one’s own life.”[95] Therefore, helping the suicidal person to take his or her own life is an
objective offense against the dignity of the person asking for it, even if one
would be thereby fulfilling the person’s wish: “We must accompany people towards
death, but not provoke death or facilitate any form of suicide. Remember that
the right to care and treatment for all must always be prioritized so that the
weakest, particularly the elderly and the sick, are never rejected. Life is a
right, not death, which must be welcomed, not administered. And this ethical
principle concerns everyone, not just Christians or believers.”[96] As mentioned above, the dignity of each person, no matter how weak or
burdened by suffering, implies the dignity of us all.
The Marginalization of People with Disabilities
53. One criterion for verifying whether real attention is given to the
dignity of every individual in society is the help given to the most
disadvantaged. Regrettably, our time is not known for such care; rather, a
“throwaway culture” is increasingly imposing itself.[97] To counter this trend, the condition of those experiencing physical or
mental limitations warrants special attention and concern. Such conditions of
acute vulnerability[98]—which feature prominently in the Gospels—prompt universal questions about what
it means to be a human person, especially starting from the condition of
impairment or disability. The question of human imperfection also carries clear
socio-cultural implications since some cultures tend to marginalize or even
oppress individuals with disabilities, treating them as “rejects.” However, the
truth is that each human being, regardless of their vulnerabilities, receives
his or her dignity from the sole fact of being willed and loved by God. Thus,
every effort should be made to encourage the inclusion and active participation
of those who are affected by frailty or disability in the life of society and of
the Church.[99]
54. In a broader perspective, it must be remembered that “this charity, which
is the spiritual heart of politics, is always a preferential love shown to those
in greatest need; it undergirds everything we do on their behalf. […] ‘To tend
those in need takes strength and tenderness, effort, and generosity in the midst
of a functionalistic and privatized mindset that inexorably leads to a
‘throwaway culture’ […]. It involves taking responsibility for the present with
its situations of utter marginalization and anguish, and being capable of
bestowing dignity upon it.’ It will likewise inspire intense efforts to ensure
that ‘everything be done to protect the status and dignity of the human
person.’”[100]
Gender Theory
55. The Church wishes, first of all, “to reaffirm that every person,
regardless of sexual orientation, ought to be respected in his or her dignity
and treated with consideration, while ‘every sign of unjust discrimination’ is
to be carefully avoided, particularly any form of aggression and violence.”[101] For this reason, it should be denounced as contrary to human dignity the
fact that, in some places, not a few people are imprisoned, tortured, and even
deprived of the good of life solely because of their sexual orientation.
56. At the same time, the Church highlights the definite critical issues
present in gender theory. On this point, Pope Francis has reminded us
that “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.”[102]
57. Regarding gender theory, whose scientific coherence is the subject of
considerable debate among experts, the Church recalls that human life in all its
dimensions, both physical and spiritual, is a gift from God. This gift is to be
accepted with gratitude and placed at the service of the good. Desiring a
personal self-determination, as gender theory prescribes, apart from this
fundamental truth that human life is a gift, amounts to a concession to the
age-old temptation to make oneself God, entering into competition with the true
God of love revealed to us in the Gospel.
58. Another prominent aspect of gender theory is that it intends to deny the
greatest possible difference that exists between living beings: sexual
difference. This foundational difference is not only the greatest imaginable
difference but is also the most beautiful and most powerful of them. In the
male-female couple, this difference achieves the most marvelous of
reciprocities. It thus becomes the source of that miracle that never ceases to
surprise us: the arrival of new human beings in the world.
59. In this sense, respect for both one’s own body and that of others is
crucial in light of the proliferation of claims to new rights advanced by gender
theory. This ideology “envisages a society without sexual differences, thereby
eliminating the anthropological basis of the family.”[103] It thus becomes unacceptable that “some ideologies of this sort, which
seek to respond to what are at times understandable aspirations, manage to
assert themselves as absolute and unquestionable, even dictating how children
should be raised. It needs to be emphasized that ‘biological sex and the
socio-cultural role of sex (gender) can be distinguished but not separated.’”[104] Therefore, all attempts to obscure reference to the ineliminable sexual
difference between man and woman are to be rejected: “We cannot separate the
masculine and the feminine from God’s work of creation, which is prior to all
our decisions and experiences, and where biological elements exist which are
impossible to ignore.”[105] Only by acknowledging and accepting this difference in reciprocity can
each person fully discover themselves, their dignity, and their identity.
Sex Change
60. The dignity of the body cannot be considered inferior to that of the
person as such. The Catechism of the Catholic Church expressly invites us
to recognize that “the human body shares in the dignity of ‘the image of God.’”[106] Such a truth deserves to be remembered, especially when it comes to sex
change, for humans are inseparably composed of both body and soul. In this, the
body serves as the living context in which the interiority of the soul unfolds
and manifests itself, as it does also through the network of human
relationships. Constituting the person’s being, the soul and the body both
participate in the dignity that characterizes every human.[107] Moreover, the body participates in that dignity as it is endowed with
personal meanings, particularly in its sexed condition.[108] It is in the body that each person recognizes himself or herself as
generated by others, and it is through their bodies that men and women can
establish a loving relationship capable of generating other persons. Teaching
about the need to respect the natural order of the human person, Pope Francis
affirmed that “creation is prior to us and must be received as a gift. At the
same time, we are called to protect our humanity, and this means, in the first
place, accepting it and respecting it as it was created.”[109] It follows that any sex-change intervention, as a rule, risks threatening
the unique dignity the person has received from the moment of conception. This
is not to exclude the possibility that a person with genital abnormalities that
are already evident at birth or that develop later may choose to receive the
assistance of healthcare professionals to resolve these abnormalities. However,
in this case, such a medical procedure would not constitute a sex change in the
sense intended here.
Digital Violence
61. Although the advancement of digital technologies may offer many
possibilities for promoting human dignity, it also increasingly tends toward the
creation of a world in which exploitation, exclusion, and violence grow,
extending even to the point of harming the dignity of the human person.
Consider, for example, how easy it is through these means to endanger a person’s
good name with fake news and slander. On this point, Pope Francis stresses that
“it is not healthy to confuse communication with mere virtual contact. Indeed,
‘the digital environment is also one of loneliness, manipulation, exploitation,
and violence, even to the extreme case of the ‘dark web.’ Digital media can
expose people to the risk of addiction, isolation, and gradual loss of contact
with concrete reality, blocking the development of authentic interpersonal
relationships. New forms of violence are spreading through social media, for
example, cyberbullying. The internet is also a channel for spreading pornography
and the exploitation of persons for sexual purposes or through gambling.’”[110] In this way, paradoxically, the more that opportunities for making
connections grow in this realm, the more people find themselves isolated and
impoverished in interpersonal relationships: “Digital communication wants to
bring everything out into the open; people’s lives are combed over, laid bare
and bandied about, often anonymously. Respect for others disintegrates, and even
as we dismiss, ignore, or keep others distant, we can shamelessly peer into
every detail of their lives.”[111] Such tendencies represent a dark side of digital progress.
62. In this perspective, if technology is to serve human dignity and not harm
it, and if it is to promote peace rather than violence, then the human community
must be proactive in addressing these trends with respect to human dignity and
the promotion of the good: “In today’s globalized world, ‘the media can help us
to feel closer to one another, creating a sense of the unity of the human family
which in turn can inspire solidarity and serious efforts to ensure a more
dignified life for all. […] The media can help us greatly in this, especially
nowadays, when the networks of human communication have made unprecedented
advances. The internet, in particular, offers immense possibilities for
encounter and solidarity. This is something truly good, a gift from God.’ We
need constantly to ensure that present-day forms of communication are in fact
guiding us to generous encounter with others, to honest pursuit of the whole
truth, to service, to closeness to the underprivileged and to the promotion of
the common good.”[112]
Conclusion
63. On the 75th anniversary of the promulgation of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights (1948), Pope Francis reaffirmed that this
document “is like a master plan, from which many steps have been taken, but many
still need to be made, and unfortunately, at times, steps backward have been
taken. The commitment to human rights is never finished! In this regard, I am
near to all those who, without fanfare, in concrete daily life, fight and
personally pay the price for defending the rights of those who do not count.”[113]
64. In this spirit, the Church, with the present Declaration, ardently urges
that respect for the dignity of the human person beyond all circumstances
be placed at the center of the commitment to the common good and at the center
of every legal system. Indeed, respect for the dignity of each person is the
indispensable basis for the existence of any society that claims to be founded
on just law and not on the force of power. Acknowledging human dignity forms the
basis for upholding fundamental human rights, which precede and ground all civic
coexistence.[114]
65. Each individual and also every human community is responsible for the
concrete and actual realization of human dignity. Meanwhile, it is incumbent on
States not only to protect human dignity but also to guarantee the conditions
necessary for it to flourish in the integral promotion of the human person: “In
political activity, we should remember that ‘appearances notwithstanding, every
person is immensely holy and deserves our love and dedication.’”[115]
66. Even today, in the face of so many violations of human dignity that
seriously threaten the future of the human family, the Church encourages the
promotion of the dignity of every human person, regardless of their physical,
mental, cultural, social, and religious characteristics. The Church does this
with hope, confident of the power that flows from the Risen Christ, who has
fully revealed the integral dignity of every man and woman. This certainty
becomes an appeal in Pope Francis’ words directed to each of us: “I appeal to
everyone throughout the world not to forget this dignity which is ours. No one
has the right to take it from us.”[116]
The Supreme Pontiff, Francis, at the Audience granted to the undersigned Prefect
of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, with the Secretary for the
Doctrinal Section of the Dicastery, on 25 March 2024, approved this Declaration,
which was decided at the Ordinary Session of this Dicastery on 28 February 2024,
and he ordered its publication.
Given in Rome, at the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, on 2 April 2024,
the nineteenth anniversary of the death of Pope St. John Paul II.
Víctor Manuel Card. Fernández
Prefect
Msgr. Armando Matteo Secretary for the Doctrinal Section
Ex Audientia Die 25.03.2024
FRANCISCUS
[1] John Paul II , Angelus in the Cathedral of Osnabrück (16 November
1980): Insegnamenti III/2 (1980), 1232.
[2] Francis, Apostolic Exhortation
Laudate Deum (4 October 2023), no. 39: L’Osservatore Romano
(4 October 2023), III.
[3] In 1948, the United Nations adopted the
Universal Declaration of Human
Rights, which consists of thirty articles. The word “dignity” appears there
five times, in strategic places: in the first words of the Preamble and
in the first sentence of Article One. This dignity is declared to be
“inherent in all members of the human family” (Preamble) and “all human
beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights” (Article 1).
[4] Paying attention only to the modern era, we see how the Church has
progressively accentuated the importance of human dignity. The theme was
particularly developed in Pope Leo XIII’s Encyclical
Rerum Novarum (1891), Pope Pius XI’s Encyclical
Quadragesimo Anno (1931) and Pope Pius
XII’s Address to the Congress of the Italian Catholic Union of Midwives (1951). The
Second Vatican Council, then, developed this issue, devoting an
entire document to the subject with the Declaration
Dignitatis Humanae (1965) and discussing human freedom in the Pastoral Constitution
Gaudium et Spes (1965).
[5] Paul VI, General Audience
(4 September 1968): Insegnamenti VI (1968), 886.
[6] John Paul II,
Address to the Third General Conference of the Latin American Episcopate
(28 January 1979), III.1-2: Insegnamenti II/1 (1979), 202-203.
[7] Benedict XVI,
Address to Participants in the General Assembly of the Pontifical Academy for Life
(13 February 2010):
Insegnamenti VI/1 (2011), 218.
[8] Benedict XVI,
Address to Participants in the Meeting of the Development Bank of the
Council of Europe (12 June 2010): Insegnamenti VI/1 (2011), 912-913.
[9] Francis, Apostolic Exhortation
Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), no. 178: AAS 105 (2013), 1094; quoting John Paul II, Angelus in the Cathedral of
Osnabrück (16 November 1980): Insegnamenti III/2 (1980), 1232.
[10] Francis, Encyclical Letter
Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), no. 8: AAS 112 (2020), 971.
[11] Ibid., no. 277:
AAS 112 (2020), 1069.
[12] Ibid., no. 213:
AAS 112 (2020), 1045.
[13] Ibid., no. 213:
AAS 112 (2020), 1045; quoting Id.,
Message to
Participants in the International Conference “Human Rights in the Contemporary
World: Achievements, Omissions, Negations” (10 December 2018): L’Osservatore Romano, (10-11 December 2018), 8.
[14] The 1948 UN Declaration
was followed and further elaborated
by the 1966 UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and
the 1975 Helsinki Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in
Europe.
[15] Cf. International Theological Commission,
Dignity and Rights of the
Human Person (1983), Introduction, 3. A compendium of Catholic teaching on
human dignity can be found in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, in
the chapter entitled, “The Dignity of the Human Person,” nos. 1700-1876.
[16] Francis, Encyclical Letter
Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), no. 22: AAS 112 (2020), 976.
[17] Boethius, Contra Eutychen et Nestorium,
c. 3: PL 64, 1344: “persona est
rationalis naturae individua substantia.” Cf. Bonaventure, In I Sent.,
d. 25, a. 1, q. 2; Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae I, q. 29, a. 1, resp.
[18] Since it is not the purpose of this Declaration
to draw up
an exhaustive treatise on the notion of dignity, for the sake of brevity, only
the so-called classical Greek and Roman culture is mentioned here as an example,
as the point of reference for early Christian philosophical and theological
reflection.
[19] For example, see Cicero,
De Officiis I, 105-106: “Sed pertinet ad omnem officii quaestionem semper in promptu habere, quantum
natura hominis pecudibus reliquisque beluis antecedat […] Atque etiam si considerare volumus, quae sit in natura excellentia et
dignitas, intellegemus, quam sit turpe diffluere luxuria et delicate ac molliter
vivere quamque honestum parce, continenter, severe, sobrie” (Id., Scriptorum Latinorum Bibliotheca Oxoniensis, ed. M. Winterbottom,
Oxford 1994, 43). In English translation: “But it is essential to every inquiry
about duty that we keep before our eyes how far superior man is by nature to
cattle and other beasts […] And if we will only bear in mind the superiority and
dignity of our nature, we shall realize how wrong it is to abandon ourselves to
excess and to live in luxury and voluptuousness, and how right it is to live in
thrift, self-denial, simplicity, and sobriety” (Id., On Duties, tr. W. Miller,
Loeb Classical Library 30, Harvard University Press, Cambridge 1913, 107-109).
[20] Cf. Paul VI,
Address to the Pilgrimage to the Holy Land: Visit to the
Basilica of the Annunciation in Nazareth (5 January 1964): AAS 56
(1964), 166-170.
[21] For example, see Clement of Rome, 1 Clem. 33, 4f: PG 1, 273; Theophilus of Antioch, Ad Aut. I, 4: PG 6, 1029; Clement of Alexandria,
Strom. III, 42, 5-6: PG 8, 1145;
Ibid., VI, 72, 2: PG 9, 293; Irenaeus of Lyons, Adv. Haer. V, 6, 1: PG 7,
1137-1138; Origen, De princ. III, 6, 1: PG 11,
333; Augustine, De Gen. ad litt. VI, 12: PL 34, 348; De Trinitate
XIV, 8, 11: PL 42, 1044-1045.
[22] Thomas Aquinas,
Summa Theologiae, I, q. 29, a. 3, resp.: «persona significat
id, quod est perfectissimum in tota natura, scilicet subsistens in rationali
natura».
[23] Cf. Giovanni Pico della Mirandola and his well-known text,
Orartio de
Hominis Dignitate (1486).
[24] For a Jewish thinker, such as E. Levinas (1906-1995), the human being is
qualified by his freedom insofar as he discovers himself as infinitely
responsible for another human being.
[25] Some great Christian thinkers of the nineteenth and twentieth
centuries—such as St. J.H. Newman, Bl. A. Rosmini, J. Maritain, E. Mounier, K.
Rahner, H.‑U. von Balthasar, and others—have succeeded in proposing a vision of
the human person that can validly dialogue with all the currents of thought
present in the early twenty-first century, whatever their inspiration, even
Postmodernism.
[26] This is why the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights
[…]
implicitly suggests that the source of inalienable human rights is found in the
dignity of every human person” (International Theological Commission, In
Search of a Universal Ethics: A New Look at the Natural Law [2009], no.
115).
[27] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution
Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), no. 26: AAS
58 (1966), 1046. The entire first chapter of the first part of the Pastoral
Constitution (nos. 11-22) is devoted to the “Dignity of the Human Person.”
[28] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration
Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), no. 1: AAS 58 (1966), 929.
[29] Ibid., no. 2:
AAS 58 (1966), 931.
[30] Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction
Dignitas
Personae (8 September 2008), no. 7: AAS 100 (2008), 863. Cf. also Irenaeus of Lyons,
Adv. Haer. V, 16, 2: PG 7, 1167-1168.
[31] Since “by his Incarnation, the Son of God has united himself in a certain
way with every man,” the dignity of every man is revealed to us by Christ in its
fullness (Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution
Gaudium et Spes [7 December 1965], no. 22: AAS 58 [1966], 1042).
[32] Second Vatican Ecumenical Concil, Pastoral Constitution
Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), no. 19: AAS
58 (1966), 1038.
[33] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter
Evangelium Vitae (25 March 1995), no. 38: AAS
87 (1995), 443, quoting Irenaeus of Lyons, Adv. Haer. IV, 20, 7: PG
7, 1037-1038.
[34] Indeed, Christ has given the baptized a new dignity, that of being “sons
of God”: cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, nos. 1213, 1265, 1270,
1279.
[35] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Declaration
Dignitatis Humanae (7 December 1965), no. 9: AAS 58 (1966), 935.
[36] Cf. Irenaeus of Lyons,
Adv. Haer. V, 6, 1. V, 8, 1. V, 16, 2: PG 7,
1136-1138. 1141-1142. 1167-1168; John Damascene, De fide orth. 2, 12: PG
94, 917-930.
[37] Benedict XVI,
Address at Westminster Hall (17 September 2010): Insegnamenti
VI/2 (2011), 240.
[38] Francis,
General Audience
(12 August 2020): L’Osservatore Romano (13
August 2020), 8; quoting John Paul II,
Address to the United Nations General
Assembly (2 October 1979), 7 and Id.,
Address to the United Nations
General Assembly (5 October 1995), 2.
[39] Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction
Dignitas
Personae (8 September 2008), no. 8: AAS 100 (2008), 863-864.
[40] International Theological Commission,
Religious Freedom for the Good of All (2019), no. 38.
[41] Cf. Francis,
Address to Members of the Diplomatic Corps Accredited to the Holy See for
the Presentation of New Year’s Greetings (8 January 2024):
L’Osservatore Romano (8 January 2024), 3.
[42] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter
Evangelium Vitae (25 March 1995),
no. 19: AAS 87 (1995), 422.
[43] Francis, Encyclical Letter
Laudato Si’ (24 May 2015), no. 69: AAS 107 (2015), 875;
quoting Catechism of the Catholic Church, no. 339.
[44] Francis,
Apostolic Exhortation
Laudate Deum (4
October 2023), no. 67: L’Osservatore Romano (4 October 2023), IV.
[45] Ibid., no. 63:
L’Osservatore Romano (4 October 2023), IV.
[46] Catechism of the Catholic Church,
no. 1730.
[47] Benedict XVI,
Message for the Celebration of the 44th World Day of Peace
(1 January 2011), no. 3: Insegnamenti VI/2 (2011), 979.
[48] Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace,
Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, no. 137.
[49] Francis, Encyclical Letter
Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), no. 109: AAS 112 (2020), 1006.
[50] Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace,
Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, no. 137.
[51] Francis,
Address to Participants in the World Meeting of Popular Movements
(28 October 2014): AAS 106 (2014), 858.
[52] Francis, Encyclical Letter
Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), no. 107: AAS 112 (2020), 1005-1006.
[53] Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution
Gaudium et Spes (7 December 1965), no. 27: AAS
58 (1966), 1047.
[54] Ibid.
[55] Ibid.
[56] Cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, no. 2267, and Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith,
Letter to Bishops Regarding the New Revision of Number 2267 of the Catechism
of the Catholic Church on the Death Penalty (1 August 2018), nos. 7-8.
[57] Francis, Encyclical Letter
Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), no. 269: AAS 112 (2020), 1065.
[58] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter
Sollicitudo Rei Socialis (30 December 1987), no.
28: AAS 80 (1988), 549.
[59] Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter
Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), no. 22: AAS
101 (2009), 657, quoting Paul VI, Encyclical Letter
Populorum Progressio
(26 March
1967), no. 9: AAS 59 (1967), 261-262.
[60] Francis, Encyclical Letter
Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), no. 21: AAS 112 (2020), 976; quoting Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter
Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), no. 22: AAS 101 (2009), 657.
[61]Francis, Encyclical Letter
Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), no. 20: AAS 112 (2020), 975-976. Cf. also the “Prayer to the Creator” at the end of this
encyclical.
[62] Ibid., no. 116:
AAS 112 (2020), 1009; quoting Francis,
Address to Participants in the World Meeting of Popular Movements
(28 October 2014): AAS
106 (2014), 851-852.
[63] Francis, Encyclical Letter
Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), no. 162: AAS 112 (2020), 1025; quoting Francis,
Address to Members of the Diplomatic Corps
Accredited to the Holy See (12 January 2015): AAS 107 (2015), 165.
[64] Francis, Encyclical Letter
Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), no. 25: AAS 112 (2020), 978; quoting Francis,
Message for the 2016 World Day of Peace (1 January 2016): AAS
108 (2016), 49.
[65] Francis,
Message to Participants in the Sixth Edition of the “Forum de Paris sur la
Paix” (10 November 2023): L’Osservatore Romano (10 November 2023), 7;
quoting Id.,
General Audience (23 March 2022): L’Osservatore Romano
(23 March 2022), 3.
[66] Francis,
Address to the Conference of Parties to the United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change (COP 28) (2 December 2023): L’Osservatore
Romano (2 December 2023), 2.
[67] Cf. Paul VI,
Address to the United Nations (4 October 1965): AAS
57 (1965), 881.
[68] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter
Redemptor Hominis (4 March 1979), no. 16: AAS 71 (1979), 295.
[69] Francis, Encyclical Letter
Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), no. 258: AAS 112 (2020), 1061.
[70] Francis,
Address to the Security Council of the United Nations
(14 June 2023): L’Osservatore Romano (15 June 2023), 8.
[71] Francis,
Address on the World Day of Prayer for Peace
(20 September 2016): L’Osservatore Romano (22 September 2016), 5.
[72] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter
Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), no.
38: AAS 112 (2020), 983: “For this reason, ‘there is also a need to
reaffirm the right not to emigrate, that is, to remain in one’s homeland’”;
quoting Benedict XVI,
Message for the 99th World Day Migrants and Refugees
(12 October 2012): AAS 104 (2012), 908.
[73] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter
Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), no.
38: AAS 112 (2020), 982-983.
[74] Ibid., no. 39:
AAS 112 (2020), 983.
[75] Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter
Caritas in Veritate (29 June 2009), no. 62: AAS
101 (2009), 697.
[76] Francis, Encyclical Letter
Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), no. 39: AAS 112 (2020), 983.
[77] We might recall here Pope Paul III’s declaration on the dignity of those
people found in the lands of the “New World” in the Bull Pastorale Officium
(29 May 1537), where the Holy Father established—under penalty of
excommunication—that the inhabitants of those territories, “even if outside the
bosom of the Church, are not […] to be deprived, of their freedom or the
ownership of their goods, for they are men and, therefore, capable of faith and
salvation” («licet extra gremium Ecclesiae existant, non tamen sua libertate, aut rerum
suarum dominio […] privandos esse, et cum homines, ideoque fidei et salutis capaces sint»): DH 1495.
[78] Francis,
Address to Participants in the Plenary of the Pontifical Council for the
Pastoral Care of Migrants and Itinerant People (24 May 2013): AAS 105 (2013), 470-471.
[79] Francis,
Address to the United Nations Organization, New York
(25
September 2015): AAS 107 (2015), 1039.
[80] Francis,
Address to New Ambassadors Accredited to the Holy See on the Occasion of the
Presentation of the Letters of Credence (12 December 2013): L’Osservatore Romano
(13 December 2013), 8.
[81] Francis,
Address to Participants in the International Conference on Human Trafficking
(11 April 2019): AAS 111 (2019), 700.
[82] XV Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops,
Final Document
(27 October 2018), no. 29.
[83] Francis, Encyclical Letter
Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), no. 23: AAS 112 (2020), 977, quoting Francis, Apostolic Exhortation
Evangelii
Gaudium (24 November 2013), no. 212: AAS 105 (2013), 1108.
[84] John Paul II,
Letter to Women (29 June 1995), no. 4: Insegnamenti XVIII/1
(1997), 1874.
[85] Ibid., no. 5:
Insegnamenti XVIII/1 (1997), 1875.
[86] Catechism of the Catholic Church, no. 1645.
[87] Francis,
Address on the Occasion of the Marian Celebration – Our Lady of the Gate
(20 January 2018): AAS 110 (2018), 329.
[88] Francis,
Address to the Participants in the Plenary Assembly of the Congregation for the
Doctrine of the Faith (21 January 2022): L’Osservatore Romano (21 January 2022), 8.
[89] John Paul II, Encyclical Letter
Evangelium Vitae
(25 March 1995),
no. 58: AAS 87 (1995) 466-467. On the subject
of the respect due to human embryos, see Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith,
Instruction
Donum Vitae (22 February 1987): “The practice of keeping
alive human embryos in vivo or in vitro for experimental or
commercial purposes is totally opposed to human dignity” (I, 4): AAS 80 (1988),
82.
[90] Francis,
Apostolic Exhortation
Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), no. 213:
AAS 105 (2013), 1108.
[91] Ibid.
[92] Francis,
Address to Members of the Diplomatic Corps Accredited to the Holy See
(8 January 2024): L’Osservatore Romano (8 January 2024), 3.
[93] Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction
Dignitas
Personae (8 September 2008), no. 16: AAS 100 (2008), 868-869. All
these aspects are recalled in the then-Congregation’s Instruction
Donum Vitae (22 February 1987): AAS 80 (1988), 71-102.
[94] Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Letter
Samaritanus Bonus (14 July 2020), V, no. 4: AAS 112
(2020), 925.
[95] Cf.
Ibid., V, no. 1:
AAS 112 (2020), 919.
[96] Francis,
General Audience
(9 February 2022): L’Osservatore Romano (9
February 2022), 3.
[97] See especially Francis, Encyclical Letter
Fratelli Tutti (3 October
2020), nos. 18-21: AAS 112 (2020), 975-976: “A ‘Throwaway’ World.” No.
188 of the same Encyclical goes so far as to identify a “throwaway culture.”
[98] Cf. Francis,
Address to Participants in the Conference Organized by the
Pontifical Council for Promoting the New Evangelization (21 October 2017):
L’Osservatore Romano (22 October 2017), 8: “Vulnerability is intrinsic to
the essential nature of the human person.”
[99] Cf. Francis,
Message for the International Day of Persons with
Disabilities (3 December 2020): AAS 112
(2020), 1185-1188.
[100] Francis, Encyclical Letter
Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), nos. 187-188: AAS
112 (2020), 1035-1036; cf. Id.,
Address to the European Parliament,
Strasbourg (25 November 2014): AAS 106 (2014), 999, and Id.,
Address at the Meeting with Authorities and the Diplomatic Corps in the
Central African Republic, Bangui (29 November 2015): AAS 107
(2015), 1320.
[101] Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation
Amoris Laetitia (19 March 2016), no.
250: AAS 108 (2016), 412-413; quoting Catechism of the Catholic Church, no. 2358.
[102] Francis,
Address to Members of the Diplomatic Corps Accredited to the Holy See for
the Presentation of New Year’s Greetings (8 January 2024): L’Osservatore
Romano (8 January 2024), 3.
[103] Francis, Apostolic Exhortation
Amoris Laetitia (19 March 2016), no. 56: AAS
108 (2016), 334.
[104] Ibid.; quoting Fourteenth Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops,
Relatio Finalis (24 October 2015), 58.
[105] Ibid., no. 286:
AAS 108 (2016), 425.
[106] Catechism of the Catholic Church, no. 364.
[107] This also applies to the respect due to the bodies of the deceased; for
example, see Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction
Ad
Resurgendum cum Christo (15 August 2016), no. 3: AAS 108 (2016), 1290:
“By burying the bodies of the faithful, the Church confirms her faith in the
resurrection of the body, and intends to show the great dignity of the human
body as an integral part of the human person whose body forms part of their
identity.” More generally, see also International Theological Commission,
Current Problems of Eschatology
(1990), no. 5: “People Called to
Resurrection.”
[108] Cf. Francis, Encyclical Letter
Laudato Si’ (24 May 2015), no. 155:
AAS 107 (2015), 909.
[109] Francis, Apostolic Exhortation
Amoris Laetitia (19 March 2016), no. 56: AAS
108 (2016), 344.
[110] Francis, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation
Christus Vivit (25 March 2019), no.
88: AAS 111 (2019), 413, quoting the XV Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops,
Final Document (27 October 2018), no. 23.
[111] Francis, Encyclical Letter
Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), no. 42: AAS 112 (2020), 984.
[112] Francis, Encyclical Letter
Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), no. 205: AAS 112 (2020), 1042; quoting Id.,
Message for the 48th World
Communications Day (24 January 2014): AAS 106 (2014), 113.
[113] Francis,
Angelus
(10 December 2023): L’Osservatore Romano (11 December 2023), 12.
[114] Cf. International Theological Commission,
Propositions on the
Dignity and Rights of the
Human Person (1983), no. 2.
[115] Francis, Encyclical Letter
Fratelli Tutti (3 October 2020), no. 195: AAS 112 (2020), 1038, quoting Id., Apostolic Exhortation
Evangelii Gaudium (24 November 2013), no. 274: AAS 105 (2013), 1130.
[116] Francis, Encyclical Letter
Laudato Si’ (24 May 2015), no. 205: AAS 107 (2015), 928.
|