Since the election of Pope Leo XIV in May, there has been no shortage of speculation about what the priorities of the new pope will be.
To Cardinal Michael Czerny, SJ, it is clear that social issues including migration, world peace, and the environment are close to the heart of Pope Leo.
Czerny is prefect of the Dicastery for Promoting Integral Human Development. In this role, he helps lead the Vatican’s response to migration, ecology, and other social matters.
Czerny spoke to The Pillar about the work of his dicastery, his impressions of the new papacy, and the Church’s approach to the issues of migration and the environment.
The interview has been edited for length and clarity.
For me, the most important feature of these first months is his patient preparation, that he’s taking the time to get to know both the curia and the issues that he needs to deal with. I admire, respect, and support this calm approach.
For me this was better highlighted when the first hundred days were over and everybody wanted to do a hundred days article, and I realized that [thinking in terms of] a hundred days is really contrary to the mission of the Holy Father.
It’s not a question of establishing priorities or having achievements in the first hundred days. It’s, quite on the contrary, entering into the mystery of mission in Christ’s name to guide the Church. So hats off to Pope Leo for taking the time and trusting in the Holy Spirit to see that he didn’t have to attempt to do everything at once.
I don’t. I would say no. Both of them have equally intense Christological understandings of the mission of the Church.
But there are different ways of expressing this, and I think Pope Francis’ attitude was more like “If I’ve said it once, I don’t have to say it again,” whereas Pope Leo is comfortable with another approach, which is that if something is worth saying, it’s worth repeating.
I think both are valid, and this might look like a difference, but not much. Maybe there is a difference along the lines of implicit and explicit. Maybe there’s a difference also in vocabulary, in the precise words used, but if you look for the same idea in Francis, you’d find it right away.
You have to ask yourself: who’s responsible? The Church is not responsible for housing. The Church is not responsible for crime. Governments are responsible for housing, for crime. If a government cannot manage housing or crime sufficiently to be able to welcome migrants, it’s a government problem.
We are exploring Mars and we’re going to the edges of the universe, and we have artificial intelligence outstripping us, and we can’t manage housing. Just think about it. Governments in the developed world having to admit, “We are unable to manage housing.”
Let’s have the state deal with housing and the migration crisis. But I wouldn’t use the word “crisis.” It’s mismanagement.
The Church’s call is for people to be welcoming, as Francis said. To welcome, to protect, to promote, and to integrate. That’s our task, our mission. And that’s what we say to society, that’s what we believe society should do. It’s because we’re humans and because we’re Christians.
Absolutely.
That’s always been the case. Our principal concerns are human dignity, human rights, subsidiarity, solidarity, and the common good.
No. At the practical level, the Church is doing its best to welcome, to protect, to promote and to integrate. That’s what the Church is trying to do. The Church is trying to respond to each vulnerable migrant, each refugee, each asylum seeker, each victim of human trafficking with the Gospel. That’s what the Church is doing.
There’s no theoretical answer because it’s not a theoretical problem. Jesus said: welcome the stranger. You welcome the stranger, you welcome me. That’s what we understand.
The parish is an extraordinary place of welcome. Secondly, and this is increasingly the case, the parish is a place of protection. This is where people find protection. The parish is a place of promotion. This is where people are helped to get on with their lives, to make a new start, to learn the challenges, and, finally, the parish becomes a place of tradition.
The same way as all of us: by living our faith. The most important thing we can do to share the Good News is to live our faith and to do so in all dimensions of our life. Not just privately, not just in family, not just in the community of our own people, our own kind, but in every corner of reality, in every corner of society.
When you visit a parish where migrants, refugees have joined the faithful, you can see with your own eyes and hear with your own ears the gift of the Gospel, the gift of Christ’s presence that they bring. I experience this everywhere I go because they often invite me to celebrate Mass for them and it’s a joy.
The Church needs to reflect on what are the important features of Church life for someone whose family has been in the United States for 3, 4, 5, 7, 10 generations. Then, ask yourselves: are those the same opportunities and services available for Hispanics? And I think you’ll find that they’re not, that the Church maybe still needs to develop a truly Hispanic presence in the United States for the many Hispanic Catholics coming and who won’t be well served if it’s just American-styled ministry translated into Spanish.
It’s not just about having Mass in Spanish. The big challenge for the Church in the United States is how to really be a Church for Hispanics. But it’s a good question to ask.
The short answer is with patience. The dimensions you mentioned are not instantly integrated in the life of the Church. We have a difficult time integrating these aspects of Church life, of our ministry, and our witness in society.
So, patience. We are learning. We’re learning practically. We’re learning spiritually. And I’m happy to say, we’re also learning liturgically. We have a new Mass for the care of creation. We now have a specific Mass for this aspect of the Church’s mission. That’s a good example of a small, but very important contribution to integral ecology.
I have no idea. I have no idea. I think we have to see as we keep going: What are the questions? What are the obstacles? What are the tensions and difficulties that need to be addressed? Maybe there’s something doctrinal. Maybe there’s something more in terms of pastoral practice. Maybe there’s something even in financial management.
But for the moment, let’s just see from the ground up, see from the practice in so many parishes, religious communities, schools, clinics, universities. There’s all sorts of stuff going on. The Church, if you want to use the expression, is much, much greener than it was before.
The Church must accompany people in taking responsibility for our common home. We can no longer live as if the planet was just unchangeable and given an infinite bounty of resources, we have to take responsibility.
It would be a bit like a family realizing that they’re on the verge of bankruptcy. We’ve got to change our way of life if we’re going to survive as a family, otherwise we lose the house, we lose everything.
And the Church is encouraging people to [take action], not only because it makes human sense, but also because it’s part of our faith, because God gave us this gift and it’s not very respectful or grateful to abuse and destroy a gift that you receive from God. You have to thank the person who gave it to you.
Because the dicastery was created out of four different pontifical councils, it takes some time to work out a common mission. We take a lot of guidance from Praedicate evangelium, which says that our task as a dicastery is to help the Holy Father and the local churches, to promote integral human development. So we don’t do it ourselves, we don’t do it alone. We are here to help the Holy Father and the churches carrying out this mission.
I do think many bishops will tell you that we are really helping them, and they’re grateful for the work we do with them.