by Tom Magill

The Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF) published a document on human dignity on 8 April. It commemorates the 75th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) and offers clarification of misconceptions it detects in contemporary society.

The aim of Dignitas Infinita is to urge that ‘respect for the dignity of the human person beyond all circumstances be placed at the centre of the commitment to the common good and at the centre of every legal system’ (DI 64). In this, it is rooted in the teaching of Gaudium et Spes (GS), the Second Vatican Council’s Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, especially regarding  human dignity’s ontological, inalienable, and inviolable nature. It also reflects GS when it states that ‘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’ (DI 22).

The document is in line with John Paul II’s teaching in Evangelium Vitae to build a ‘culture of life’ for all humans, and of Veritatis Splendor on the relationship of truth and conscience. It extends Benedict XVI’s reflections on faith and reason, and finally reflects Pope Francis’ teaching, especially in Fratelli Tutti,  which aims to root human solidarity in human dignity.

The language used is often elegant, beautiful, and soaring. It offers a vision of what humanity can become and how the Church can enrich the world with its understanding of the human person in the light of Christ. It places human dignity at the centre of the Church’s conversation with the world, reflecting Pope Francis’ call in Laudate Deum for ‘multilateralism’. There is much here to ponder and savour.

It’s no surprise that there has been a widespread response to such an important exposition, both welcoming and critical.  I will outline  DI’s structure and offer some comments on its gestation as a prelude to making a methodological assessment of the document in light of Pope Francis’ teaching on theology.  As far as I can see this assessment has not figured yet in commentaries on the document.

Structure

Dignitas Infinita has four main sections. The introduction states clearly the core of what will follow – ‘Every human person possesses an infinite dignity, inalienably grounded in his or her very being’ (DI 1) – and situates this conviction within the magisterial teaching of recent Popes (DI 1-6). It makes distinctions in the concepts of dignity, similar to the distinction made in GS between ontological dignity and how it becomes manifest or obscured through human decisions or situations (DI 7-9).

Section 1 – A Growing Awareness of the Centrality of Human Dignity – offers insights from classical Antiquity (10), from biblical perspectives (11-12) from developments of Christian thought (13) and from the present era (14-16).

Section 2 -- The Church Proclaims, Promotes, and Guarantees Human Dignity – focuses on how the Church in the present day teaches that the human person has the indelible image of God (18), how Christ elevates human dignity (19), how the human person has a vocation to dignity (20-21), and how each individual has a commitment to their freedom (22).

Section 3 – Dignity, the Foundation of Human Rights and Duties – reflects on the unconditional respect for human dignity (24), the objective base for human freedom (25), the relational structure of the human person (26-28) and freeing the human person from negative influences in the moral and social spheres (29-32).

Section 4 -- Some Grave Violations of Human Dignity – bases what follows especially in the teaching of Pope Francis and the 2nd Vatican Council (33-34). It draws attention to specific violations of human dignity such as poverty (36-37), war (38-39), the travail of migrants (40), human trafficking (41-42), sexual abuse (43), violence against women (44-46), abortion (47), surrogacy (48-50), euthanasia and assisted suicide (51-52), marginalisation of people with disabilities (53-54), gender theory (55-59), sex change (60), and digital violence (61-62).

The conclusion quotes Pope Francis’ description of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as 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’ (DI 63). It commits the Church to ‘the promotion of the dignity of every human person, regardless of their physical, mental, cultural, social, and religious characteristics’ (DI 66).

Gestation

In the presentation at the beginning of DI, Cardinal Fernandez unusually outlines the gestation of the text over five years. Work on the document began in 2019. The initial draft was rejected by a sub-committee of the DDF. A new draft was presented in 2022 with additional modifications added in 2023. When the text was presented to Pope Francis in late 2023, he suggested adjustments be made to ‘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’. In response, the doctrinal section of the Dicastery dedicated a ‘Congress’ to an in-depth study of the encyclical Fratelli Tutti to help their further consideration. Having taken ‘steps to reduce the initial part […] and to develop in greater detail what the Holy Father indicated,’ the DDF approved the final text in February 2024 and presented it for his approval in March 2024.

This information reveals some quite surprising details. Firstly, it’s extraordinary that the DDF between 2019 and 2023 never thought to reference Fratelli Tutti. Even though the encyclical was published in 2020 after the Dicastery had begun its deliberations, there remained ample time throughout the remaining four years to incorporate the teaching of such an important document.

Secondly, the specific topics Pope Francis suggested are already mentioned in Gaudium et Spes. It’s worthwhile citing the conciliar teaching:

‘Furthermore, whatever is opposed to life itself, such as any type of murder, genocide, abortion, euthanasia or wilful self-destruction, whatever violates the integrity of the human person, such as mutilation, torments inflicted on body or mind, attempts to coerce the will itself; whatever insults human dignity, such as subhuman living conditions, arbitrary imprisonment, deportation, slavery, prostitution, the selling of women and children; as well as disgraceful working conditions, where men are treated as mere tools for profit, rather than as free and responsible persons; all these things and others of their like are infamies indeed. They poison human society, but they do more harm to those who practice them than those who suffer from the injury. Moreover, they are supreme dishonour to the Creator’ (GS 27).

This clearly shows how deeply Pope Francis’ teaching is grounded in the Council, but also that the Dicastery had not considered GS as a foundational document for their consideration. The final document refers to it only four times.

Thirdly, in light of the Pope’s intervention, it’s possible to do a basic source analysis of the text. His desired adjustments appear in nos 33-46, 48-50, 53. These sections, then, can be considered later additions to the document which was finalised by the Dicastery in 2023. The topics dealt with in this version were limited to a reaffirmation of the Church’s teaching on abortion, surrogacy, and assisted suicide. What was new in this iteration were the sections on ‘gender theory’ and sex change.

All this suggests that from the inception the dicastery was focussed on these topics and failed to integrate them into what Pope Francis calls an ‘integral human ecology’ and the ‘seamless garment’ (Cardinal Bernadin) of the Church’s pro-life stance. Given that the writing of the document began under the prefecture of Cardinal Ladaria, it is possible to imagine that the original aim was more to warn and condemn rather than to shepherd and pastor.

The number of paragraphs dedicated to discussing ‘gender theory’ and sex change (55-60), compared with the other topics, suggests that it is here the Dicastery had much of its focus. It is certainly the focus of how the document has been received within the Church and beyond. Much of the response has been centred on these paragraphs. A look at the theological method employed is revealing.

Theological method

Pope Francis published Ad Theologiam Promovendam (ATP) at the beginning of November 2023 just after the conclusion of the first session of the Synod on Synodality. In it, he urged that there be a ‘paradigm shift’ in theology (ATP 4) so that we no longer ‘limit ourselves to abstractly re-proposing formulas and schemes from the past,’ ‘be obsessed with the transmission of a disjointed multitude of doctrines to be imposed insistently’ but to understand that ‘God has revealed himself as history, not as a compendium of abstract truths’ (ATP 1). This paradigm shift, he writes, demands a move to a theology which is contextual, inductive, and multidisciplinary. In what follows, I will assess the documents teaching on ‘gender theory’ in light of these three aspects.

Contextual

A contextual theology takes seriously the actual and various living conditions of contemporary man and woman, developing a culture of dialogue and encounter with believers and non-believers alike (ATP 4). This is a theology which is pastoral rather than abstract, emerging from a deep listening to and conversation with the People of God and everyone of good will.

In its discussion of ‘gender theory’ and sex change, the authors of Dignitas Infinita show no sign of any encounter with or listening to transgender men and women to whom in particular this teaching is directed. Nowhere are their stories referenced – the mental health issues, the misunderstanding, the rejections and dangers they have gone through, and the healing they have received. Rather, by focusing on the ‘theory’, the document argues that ‘gender theory’ ‘amounts to a concession to the age-old temptation to make oneself God’ (DI 57), something which might cause both surprise and dismay to transgender Roman Catholics. Pope Francis meets with and welcomes transgender people. He has said that they must be accepted and integrated into society. But this is a two-way street – the teaching and learning Church belongs to us all. There must be listening and discerning on both sides. The vulnerability that true encounter demands must be mutual.

By not including a deep listening to transgender men and women in their reflection, the authors of the document have missed a wonderful opportunity. Had they done so, they would have become more fully informed and so made able to present Church teaching in a more embodied and incarnational way that is credible and pastoral.

Inductive

An inductive theology moves from the specific to the general rather than from first principles so that classic theology should be ‘seriously challenged by reality’ (ATP 8). This reflects the ‘signs of the times’ theological method proposed by Gaudium et Spes. This new method in theology takes seriously the lived experience of contemporary men and women. We meet the Gospel not just in the Scriptures, liturgy, and sacraments but also by listening to the world. Concrete human history is a constitutive part of Revelation, and equally of theology.

Gaudium et Spes presents a vision of an outward and inclusive Church in which all have a place, and rejects a Church which is self-serving, self-referential, and introspective. This signals not just the importance of being aware of events and conversations in the world but of recognising that a persuasive presentation of the faith cannot dismiss or ignore what is happening in the world without losing credibility. This is seeing the signs of the times as particular insights into humanity that could provide the material needed for the Church’s dialogue with the modern world. The Church must always be placed squarely in the world and in solidarity with it, not apart from it or above it, or only in judgement of it. Certainly, these signs must always be read in the light of the Gospel. That the document uses the term ‘gender theory’ seven times but never talks of ‘transgender people’ perhaps indicates that its authors are moving in a direction opposite to inductive theology.

Multidisciplinary

A theology which is transdisciplinary is embedded ’in a web of relationships, first and foremost with other disciplines and other knowledge’ (ATP 5). Pope Francis sees this as a form of interdisciplinarity which ‘makes use of new categories developed by other knowledge, to penetrate and communicate the truths of faith and transmit the teaching of Jesus in today’s languages, with originality and critical awareness’ (ATP 5). This demands a ‘transdisciplinary dialogue with other scientific, philosophical, humanistic and artistic knowledge, with believers and non-believers, with men and women of different Christian denominations and different religions’ (ATP 9).

Unfortunately, the present document shows no sign of this approach. It does state laconically that ‘gender theory’ ‘is the subject of considerable debate among experts’ (DI 57) while neither citing them nor showing any evidence of dialogue with them. Further, it ignores the insight in the Synthesis Report of the Synod, A Synodal Church in Mission, that ‘sometimes the anthropological categories we have developed are not able to grasp the complexity of the elements emerging from experience or knowledge in the sciences and require greater precision and further study’(15g).

This lack of transdisciplinarity makes the document highly self-referential, something the Pope never fails to warn us against. Its citations and references are to documents from Popes, Council documents, Vatican commissions, Catholic theologians both ancient and modern. No-one is cited outside of this narrow circle. Moreover, it should be noted that not one woman scholar is referred to. It is an extremely male document and by its nature undermines the ‘most marvellous of reciprocities’ (DI 58) between male and female it seeks to promote.

Conclusion

A contextual, inductive, and transdisciplinary theology is part of Pope Francis’ dream of a synodal Church. Dignitas Infinita makes neither reference to the ongoing synodal process nor sensitivity to a synodal mindset. In its structure, gestation, and method, it shows itself to be a classic DDF document, especially in its desire to be comprehensive. Many of the topics in section 4, not least regarding ‘gender theory’ and sex change, deserve separate studies which engage critically with scholars both within and beyond the Church. Sections 1-3 reveal the beauty and the power of Catholic thought and teaching, something that is being enriched by the present synodal process. The document in many ways is a powerful presentation of what the Church has to offer the world. Unfortunately, it is likely that only the ‘hot button’ issues will be remembered.

Perhaps if the DDF had waited until the conclusion of the present Synod and given itself time to digest its conclusions, the document would not appear to be, in the words of St Paul, ‘untimely born.’ (I Cor 15.8)

Tom Magill is a retired priest of the Motherwell Diocese.

Photo by Alexander Grey on Unsplash.