A world in need of Francis’s human touch

Pope Francis compared the church to a field hospital in a wide-ranging interview he gave to the Italian Jesuit journal La Civiltà Cattolica in 2013. The church, he argued, should be concerned with tending to gravely wounded patients rather than defending its own interests.

“It is useless to ask a seriously injured person if he has high cholesterol and about the level of his blood sugars,” Francis told his interviewer. “You have to heal his wounds. Then we can talk about everything else.”

These are the words of a man who was interested in humanity above everything else. A man who saw the person before seeing what they stood for. And this is what made Francis special to many Catholics and others who have no faith.

As a secular newspaper that believes in equality, justice and freedom, it is this human touch of Pope Francis that we cherish. It is a human touch that looks at people, first and foremost, not as objects requiring conversion but beings that need accompaniment in their daily and personal travails. It is a human touch that understands the importance of caring for the environment and creating a society that cares about each and every individual.

In his apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia (The Joy of Love), Francis imparted his teachings on family life. For those in the church who believe dogma should be the beginning and end all of any discussion, the exhortation was an irrelevant piece of gibberish not grounded in theological thought. But for many others it was a profound piece grounded in the humanity of everyday realities families face. It showed an understanding of the complexities that surround family life – all types of family life. More importantly, it called on church leaders not to be judgemental and instead set foot in the field, effectively becoming field doctors, and accompany people as they journey through life.

Amoris Laetitia may not have been a theological document but it certainly provided food for thought; it was a reflection worth making about the family, marriage, companionship, children and the complexities that surround these matters. It was a welcome departure from the judgemental attitude of church moralists because it shifted the language to one of compassion.

Pope Francis did not substantially change the church’s official stance on issues like abortion and gender identity, issues that resonate with a secular and progressive newspaper like ours.

But he changed the Catholic Church’s order of priorities, putting social inequality and the globalisation of indifference towards migrants and the poor at the top of his agenda, while side-lining divisive culture wars.

Once again, “healing wounds” and accompanying people who are suffering, is more important than passing moral judgement on the choices people make. Obviously, Francis framed this within the teachings of the Gospel but it provided a refreshing way of looking at things that left people listening.

In this context he was a moral compass in an increasingly hostile world and served as a reference point even for progressives, atheists and agnostics. These people felt comfortable in Pope Francis’s broad humanistic church even if they disagreed with some of its teachings.

On abortion, he changed the rules, allowing all priests, and not just bishops or their delegates, to absolve women who had committed this ‘sin’. But while he still described the act as murder, he framed it more as a symptom of a “throwaway culture” than a condemnation of women.

Despite showing openness, understanding and compassion towards members of the LGBTIQ+ community, it was a disappointment when he backtracked on a highly symbolic proposal to allow priests to officiate blessings of same-sex unions. The patriarchy in the church is still too strong a force to shift views.

But in a world where far-right ideology tries to appropriate Catholic traditional values to divide communities and stigmatise those who are different, Pope Francis was a beacon of hope. He scorned this ideology much to the chagrin of traditionalists within the church who yearn for a world painted in black and white.

The question now after Francis’s death is whether the church will relapse into traditionalism or remain steadfast in its commitment to social justice and its engagement with modernity. We only hope that the 135 cardinals gathered in conclave to choose the next pope take a cue from Francis’s message that the church should be “a field hospital” dirtying its hands by tending to the wounded rather than aim for self-preservation.