Sister Helen Alford, president of the Pontifical Academy for Social Sciences, argues that the issue is not just external instability, but a deeper intellectual failure: the frameworks guiding today’s decision-makers are increasingly disconnected from the realities they are meant to address.

In this conversation, she reflects on her formation as an engineer, her path into the Dominican order, and her work at the Vatican engaging global experts across disciplines. At the center is a neglected resource: Catholic social teaching—often called the Church’s “best kept secret”—and its potential to reframe how we think about human dignity, systems, and responsibility.

In this conversation, we discuss:

• Why today’s dominant intellectual frameworks may be incapable of solving modern crises

• The principle of subsidiarity and how it restores agency in a system-driven world

• Why Catholic social teaching remains largely unknown—even within the Church

• The relationship between prayer and action in times of global instability

• Whether a new “way of thinking” is needed to address the scale and complexity of today’s problems

This is a conversation about intellectual crisis, human dignity, and whether the Church’s vision can still offer a coherent path forward in a fractured world.

Transcript

Intro: Sister Helen Alford is a Cambridge-trained engineer who has spent her life making the Catholic Church's social teaching relevant in the modern world. Appointed President of the Pontifical Academy for Social Sciences by Pope Francis in 2023, she works with top Catholic and non-Catholic thinkers across diverse fields like economics, law, and health care to address the most urgent challenges facing society. In this role, she works closely with the pope to shape the Academy’s priorities and serves as a key reference point for understanding how the Church responds to global issues. In this conversation with Catholic News Service, we discuss her recent meeting with Pope Leo, the core principles of Catholic social teaching, and the crises shaping our world. And we ask, in a world facing crisis after crisis, does the Church's voice still matter? As Pope Leo XIV writes in his book, the Church's voice still matters. Pope Leo XIV, who was a Catholic in the early 20th century, still matters. As Pope Pope Leo XIV writes in his April 2026 message to the Academy: “Your work will contribute to the building of a global culture of reconciliation and peace—a peace that is not merely the fragile absence of conflict, but the fruit of justice, born of authority placed humbly at the service of every human being and the entire human family.”

Robert Duncan: Sister Helen Alford, thank you for sitting down with Catholic News Service. I’m really excited to talk to you.

Sister Alford: Thank you. So good to be here, Robert. Thanks.

Robert Duncan: The Angelicum produced this remarkable series of videos on universal human fraternity. Right. And the trailer has been seen almost a million times in, I think it might be four months. And one word that you, in the trailer that I watched, that you repeat over and over again is crisis, crisis. And that certainly seems to characterize our age. If you go on social media, there’s one crisis after the next. I remember growing up and hearing that, well, you know, that’s just on the news. If you get out in the real world, it’s not so bad.

Sister Alford: Yeah.

Robert Duncan: And some people do say that social media amplifies crisis. How do you see the state of our world today? And to what extent are we genuinely in a state of unending crisis?

Sister Alford: Yeah, it’s a good question. And it’s difficult to answer it properly. I think the first thing I’d say is that I started to talk not that long ago with a quote about crisis. And I said, it sounds like it’s talking about today, but that was written a hundred years ago. And I think the main thing I would say is that Pope Francis used to say, we’re not in an era of change, we’re in a change of era. And I think there is something very profound happening. You know, we can look back over history and see the Roman Empire, and then that collapses and we have this long phase of history, which some people call the Dark Ages, and other people call the construction of Europe. And then we get this new kind of phase in the beginning of the second millennium. And then we get sort of a crisis around 1500s, 1600s, big wars and that, and we start to get modernity emerging. So we’ve had now about 250 years of modernity. So I think we, you know, all phases sort of have their strengths and weaknesses. In a way, we could say from an intellectual point of view, and I’m in a university, so I’m thinking about that a lot. The way we think in a particular phase of history is connected with the kind of problems we have to face. We tend to emphasize certain things and not other things. And maybe one way of looking at the crisis that we’re in now is that the big way of thinking about the world that we have, which we’ve inherited from modernity, okay, from the point of view of the Catholic Church, it’s a little bit ambiguous, modernity, but we would recognize that there have been some good things that have happened. And in the end, modernity is the child of a Christian era and in a Christian part of the world. So there’s some connection between modernity and Christianity. We might say that the questions that modernity was set up to answer are no longer the big questions. We have different questions. And if we carry on trying to answer them in the same way, we’re not going to be able to do it. And this may also be part of the reason why we see more and more polarization in society, that the people, the big educational institutions, the people who are producing the big ideas and that, they have a way of thinking which can’t answer the questions that many other people feel. And they feel alienated by it and they want to find solutions elsewhere. And it’s not the only element. It’s a big question is what you asked me, but I think it’s the element that maybe I’m thinking the most about now. So I mentioned that and I’ll say it to you.

Robert Duncan: Some people may be listening to you and may be far from the Church or don’t know much about Catholicism, spiritually seeking, and they see what they’ll call a nun, which is maybe not the right word.

Sister Alford: Well, it’s okay.

Robert Duncan: It’s okay. And say, “What is a nun doing talking about the major crises in the world?” So can you tell me just a little bit about where you come from? (That) you’re an economist and how you came to be working, let’s say, on the Pope’s commission for social problems?

Sister Alford: Okay. Yeah. Good question. Well, again, you know, you have to select. And of course, as somebody said to me recently, really autobiography is fiction. But anyway, I will tell you things that are true, but of course I’m selecting things. So I think the best way to start is with my parents because I had very interesting family background. My mother comes from Catholic family, Irish family, that immigrated to London. Well her two parents, they met in London. They immigrated at a time when you would find in the shop windows, if they’re advertising for sales assistance, they’d write underneath “Irish need not apply.” So it was that kind of situation. Anyway. So she comes from that. So a rather poor family in North London, but absolutely super Catholic. I mean, I would say for my mother, being a Catholic was like breathing. I mean, it was that level, you know, and I feel like I got a lot from it. She was really devotional. She taught me a lot of things about saints and all this sort of thing. My dad became a Catholic when he was 25 years old. At that time, he had a PhD in chemistry. He had been interested in the Anglican church when he was a kid and wanted to become an Anglican priest, but his dad who was very high up in the Freemasons said no. So anyway, later on he goes to work for what was a very big chemicals company in the UK at the time, which was called ICI in Scotland of all places, which for Catholics, we don’t think of Scotland as a place where there’s lots of Catholics. Anyway, he’s in Scotland in a place called Grangemouth. He’s working in the dye stuff division. They’re doing all kinds of experiments. And he has this lab technician who he was talking to the lab technicians, Catholic, and he was interested in religion, you know, my dad. So he says to the lab, the lab technician says to him, why don’t you come to a mission we’re going to have in our church? So he said, okay. So he said, I’ll never forget. It was a Sunday afternoon. It was four o’clock. I walked into the church. It was starting with, exposition and benediction, which he’d never seen before. He said, I walked into that church. He said, all I can say, it was like love at first sight. I just knew I was meant to be here, you know? And then he said to me, it’s quite interesting, you know, to be honest at that point, it wasn’t really the Eucharist that affected me. It was the faith of the people. I just saw these people, obviously were completely involved in this. And it just struck me, you know? And so he started reading lots of things and went to see a priest and after a bit, the priest said, “Oh, you know all this stuff already,” because he’d been reading so much, you know? And so he becomes a Catholic. He tries to become a priest. He had a lot of nervous breakdowns, so it didn’t work out. But the nervous breakdowns had started before he became Catholic, but they didn’t stop afterwards. So anyway, he ends up meeting my mum on a pilgrimage to Rome. And so they get married a bit later. And so I think for them, their marriage was pretty tough because he was very intellectual and she wasn’t at all. The thing that held them together was their faith. But for me as a kid, I felt was amazing because I had on the one side, this person who was so absolutely grounded. And this other person who, especially when I was a teenager, I could go and say, “Why do we believe this? And why do we believe that?” And he would have big discussions with me. And it really helped me develop a way of thinking about faith. And he was a chemist. He was a scientist. And then he went on, did a master’s degree in philosophy of science. And so he was talking about all the ways in which the Church understands science, which I thought was fantastic. I just listened to him talking to me, you know? So I had these two inputs, which I think have been, they kind of set me up for life really. So I always felt the Church had something interesting to say about intellectual life, you know? So when I went to university, I didn’t think I was going to have a problem with my faith and then I went to Cambridge and I studied engineering. And then I had an experience, which I sometimes tell people was my Damascus road experience, which wasn’t really anything to do directly with religion because it was reading an article. I had to read an article to write an essay and the title of it was “Engineers and the Work People Do.” The first line of the article was, “What I’m going to describe to you in this article, you’ll find really normal, but I hope by the end of it, I’ve convinced you it’s really strange.” Now this article was written by one of the top professors of engineering. At that time, you only had one professor in a faculty in UK. You had one professor at the top and everybody else was a lecturer. So if you were a professor, you were a really important person. So this guy was a professor of engineering in Manchester, you know, it was one of the top places. So he’d written this article. So he starts off describing a production line, which as he expects, all people who know something about production lines thought this was normal, you know. It’s 1980s, so there are a few people doing things in this production line. They’re making lamp bulbs. So one of these is a woman who’s picking up every three and a half seconds, a little piece of wire and putting it into the coil of the lamp bulb. A bit later, that piece of wire is going to be vaporized, make a coating for the coil. Now he says, look, people need jobs. We’ll talk about that later. Let’s just think about the type of job we’re asking her to do. He says, maybe we should automate it. He says, you could give this as a job to students. So he talks about what the students would do. He says, then at a certain point, a more intelligent or more thoughtful student might say, wait a minute, it’s great fun designing a machine, but it’s really expensive. We should buy a robot and program the robot to do this, because they’ve already been mass produced at that time. So he says, now there, that’s interesting, engineer, because he’s not just thinking about technical problem, but also economic problem, a bigger problem. He says, but still, if you’re a good engineer, you’d think this machine is really advanced. We should try to redesign things around the machine and use it better. And you can maybe see where it’s going, this argument. He then says, but nobody thinks about doing that when the woman’s doing the job. And then he had this line, if engineers could think about human beings as if they were robots, they’d give them more human work to do. And I just thought, I’ve been doing everything wrong. Everything’s upside down. It’s all the wrong way round. We designed the machines and put the people around the machines. We should be putting the machines around the people.

That’s what we should be doing. So I just got on a train, went up to Manchester and said, please, can I work with you? This had such a big impact on me, this article. And he was retiring. He said, look, I can’t take on any more students because I’m retiring, but there’s this project, there’s that project, there’s the other project. Why don’t you stay where you are and do a PhD there? Because whoever gave you my article to read is interested in this and you can get into this project. So he gave me some outlines. So then I go back, I start working on it. My dad, who as I told you, became a Catholic when he was 25. When I tell him about my project, he says, you should read Rerum Novarum. I didn’t know anything about Rerum Novarum. I’m a true born Catholic child, never been taught anything about this. So he knew about it because he’d read it as a young person. So he gave me his little copy of it and I read it and I thought, it’s a bit old fashioned, but there’s some interesting things here. So I started reading some other things and then I read Pope John Paul’s Laborum Exercens. And when I read that, I thought, I can use this in my thesis. So I went back to my professor. I said, I’ve got to write a chapter about this. I’ve got to do this. She didn’t say anything to me about it, but it was really interesting that basically she and everybody else, and this is a faculty of engineering in Cambridge University. As soon as I decided I was going to do that, everybody stopped talking to me about my project. I just had to do it all on my own. It was embarrassing for them to talk about religion in a thesis on technology. But I thought I have to do it, not because I’m a Catholic, because this is the best ideas I can find about this. That’s why I wanted to do it. And they could see that and they couldn’t say no, basically. And so anyway, what happens, I can’t talk about my project with them. And as you know, you don’t grow if you can’t discuss things with other people. You have to have a community around you talking about things. So there was one religious community in that town, the Dominicans. So I started going to the Dominican house and there I could talk about my project. I could talk about Catholic social teaching and they were giving really interesting talks as well. And so, looking back now, this is where it’s a bit of fiction, I’m making the story up, but it’s, I can see that one door closed and another door opened, basically. And I realized, look, I could go this way. Of course, when you join a religious order, you don’t know what’s going to happen. You have to be willing to let them send you and do something completely different. So I thought still, I thought by this stage, the Dominican is really the place where I should be. I felt that God was really calling me to do that. So it ended up then with me being sent to this Faculty of Social Science, where I am now, which is all about connecting social teaching and ethics and all this sort of huge body of thought in the human humanities with all these modern technical subjects, economics, sociology, psychology, international relations, all this stuff. And so my preparation doing that thesis on how can we get engineering to be more focused on putting the human person at the center was a perfect preparation. I had to learn a lot more things when I got here, but it’s all about connecting what this deep thought has to offer out in the world.

Robert Duncan: Some people listening may think, well, the Church teaches about Jesus and heaven and hell, and may not be aware of the body of Catholic Social Teaching. So could you explain what those documents are in general, that the Church also has competence in these areas?

Sister Alford: Sure, sure, sure. Well, I think you could see this thinking going back right to, you know, even before Christ, if you look at the Old Testament, there’s lots of discussions about how you should take care of the widow and the orphan should be cared. You know, God’s saying this to the people of Israel. Then of course, in the life of Christ, he is very concerned about, you know, the most excluded people, the people who are disliked, the people who have leprosy, the people who are excluded. Then, you know, the early Church develops hospitals, develops this idea of hospitality for people on the road, you know, the Benedictine monasteries. So you can go right back to early, even before Christ, you know, in the whole sort of Judeo-Christian tradition, you can see this interest in people having problems in the world, you know, and it’s connected with the revelation. It’s about living according to the life God wants for us. It’s not disconnected, but it has its own importance, you know, independent of praying, you know, don’t just pray and then hope somebody else is going to do it. You’re called to do it too. So in the modern period, where we had a real break in terms of the way the social order worked, you know, starting in UK, we had this total change in the basis of the economy. It shifted from being based on agriculture to being based on use of technology. And then in the political sphere, we got a complete move from the way most cultures had worked before, where you had some kind of king or emperor moving to a democracy, which in Europe happened in a very violent way through the French Revolution, of course, is different in the United States. So we have this really kind of abrupt change that takes place. So the Church, like the wider society, starts developing a special thinking about this. You know, sociology only comes to existence in the 19th century. It didn’t exist before that because people didn’t need to think about social problems, like they suddenly had to start thinking about them. Same with psychology, same with anthropology. Economics is a little bit earlier, but it’s still pretty modern. The only one of the modern social sciences that’s older is law. Law is the only more ancient one. All the others are born in the modern period. And so the church too is trying to think about how do we be church? How do we carry forward the gospel in this completely different situation? What are the injustices we have to face now? What are the problems that human beings are facing? And that starts this body of thinking, which in an official way gets launched with Rerum Novarum, that document we were talking about in 1891. Although there’s a lot of people thinking before and they help the Pope generate the thinking that goes into that document. Then after Pope Leo, we start getting a whole series of other documents that are produced. One during the Depression, which is called Quadragesimo Anno, because it’s exactly 40 years after Rerum Novarum. And that’s looking at the terrible crisis that people are in during the Depression. You’ve got the rise of fascism. You’ve got the beginnings of Nazism. You’ve got Soviet communism. I mean, all around, you’ve got that crisis that we were talking about at the beginning. And the Popes are saying something to the Christian people at that time, making a proposal about how to deal with it. Then we get later on, after Second World War, we get a very important cyclical on development called Populorum Progressio, that’s Pope Paul VI, trying to use the modern thinking about how should we as a church support all the initiatives that are going forward on human development? How are we part of it? How are we maybe challenging some of the thinking too? And how should we work with people of goodwill who are trying to do the same thing that we think is important too? So there’s all those elements as well.

Robert Duncan: For your average Catholic Christian, reading the Gospels, you mentioned taking care of the widow and the homeless. In that society, that might have been someone that was known by name. And now the problems just seem so much bigger. And it’s very hard, I think, for people of goodwill to know how I can personally participate in the social work of the Church, if I’m not going to sort of give my life and become a missionary, or maybe I contribute financially to a charity I think is important. But it still feels like, you know, detached. Is that a real phenomenon?

Sister Alford: I think a lot of people do feel like that. And I think we have to try to help find mechanisms. I mean, one of the ideas in Catholic social teaching is the idea of subsidiarity, that we should try to help people make decisions as close as possible to their own life. It’s a sort of counter to the sense of being not able to do something, you know, being just part of a system where what I do doesn’t really count because it’s the system that’s making everything work. You know, so subsidiarity is the idea that we, yes, we need systems. We’re not saying they’re bad, but that we should create systems in which we try to localize decision making as much as possible so people can really have an impact on what’s going on around them. And in fact, you do see people doing this spontaneously, you know, creating community support, you know, people creating a food bank for people who don’t have food to eat, creating hospitality for people who are in difficulty. So there’s a kind of assistance that people will give. But also, Pope Francis, when he’s doing his social teaching, he was talking about how we should try to bring love into the political system, for instance. Now, that’s a lot more challenging, especially in the kind of polarized political environment that we’re in. And yet, I think we have to try to find ways of doing it. And that’s the sort of thing where we should, I think, create discussions in the parishes or in local communities where we think about what does it mean in our circumstance here to try to love in the context of the political system that we’re in. You know, he says something in Fratelli Tutti about how helping an old person across the road, that’s an act of love. But if you get involved in policymaking where you create a better road system with proper security on it, or you create a bridge that connects people, that’s also an act of love. So that’s kind of interesting. If you start thinking like this, how could we connect our virtue, our love, with things that you do as part of a system, as a politician or as a business person, then I think we open up interesting lines for us to sort of grow as human beings and grow as Christians as well.

Robert Duncan: There is, I think, a narrative that I would imagine you would want to challenge, which would say that the Church before the Second Vatican Council was focused on the vertical dimension. There was a higher emphasis on theology and relationship with God and the sacraments. And following the Council, an increasing emphasis on social problems and maybe more horizontal issues. And despite the fact that Pope Francis said at the beginning of his papacy that the Church cannot become an NGO, some people would criticize him for focusing on political issues and neglecting more vertical issues. That’s a narrative, I think, that’s out there. And I wonder what you have to say about that understanding of the last, say, 100 years of Catholic history and what the right way to look at that would be.

Sister Alford: Well, I think there’s other things we can say which give you a different picture. For instance, before Vatican II, there were these huge lay movements involved in the workplace. And young Christian workers in the 1920s was having meetings of 80,000 young people coming together, you know, at a time when you just didn’t see that sort of thing happening. You had quite important, after the Second World War, the most important political parties in Europe were the Christian Democratic Parties. And three of the founders of European Union, their cause of canonization is going forward. So I think this sort of rhetoric that the Church wasn’t doing anything on the social level before is not realistic. It’s showing that people don’t know enough about the history. It’s true that there was a very active devotional life before. I mean, my mother was one of the people who grew up in that. And that became a little bit more complicated after the Vatican II. But I think that was much more to do with the kind of phase of history. If you look at all the councils in the church, you know, Vatican II isn’t the only council we know. It’s Vatican II because there was Vatican I, and there were councils before that. You tend to find that immediately after a council, there’s a bit of uncertainty about what to do with it. And so some of the things that happened, say in the liturgical reform, people weren’t quite sure what to do with it. They weren’t quite sure how to put devotions together with a real sense of the importance of the Mass, for instance. Because I remember when I was a young kid, you used to go to Mass, and all people would sit there saying their Rosary through the Mass. So in a way, some of the theologians want to say, look, let’s get more involved in the Mass rather than saying our Rosary. What was the side effect of that? It started to downplay a bit the devotions that people had, you know, and that didn’t always work very well. So I think this is a phase of change that we were in. And like all changes, they’re a bit difficult and painful, and we can try to reassess them and bring back some things that we lost and things like that. But this idea that we weren’t doing anything on social justice before the council, and then suddenly it will just change. History doesn’t bear that out, if you know something about the history.

Robert Duncan: Do you think the Church gets the credit it deserves for the social work that it did both before the Council and up through today, from the world?

Sister Alford: I think that is a really good question. I’m glad you asked me that, Robert, because I don’t think so. And I think it’s partly because we’re not very good at telling the story. The Catholic Church is the biggest provider of education in the world today. It’s interesting, we’ve just done an interesting statistical study with some postdocs connected with the Academy. And they found, you’ve got to listen to me carefully on this, they found that where you get more Catholic healthcare institutions, you tend to have a higher mortality rate. Now, not because the Catholic institutions are not doing their job very well, but because they’re going to the places where there are the most difficult health problems. They are focusing their efforts in the places where they are. So, they don’t go to places where it’s so easy. They want to go where there’s really difficulty and they work there. And sometimes they often hand over to other people and then they move on to the more difficult place. So, there’s a lot of data that we could use to show what we’re doing and we don’t show and people don’t know. There is data collected by the Holy See. There’s a feature of statistical office in the Holy See, but we need to do a lot more to get that information out to the world. But it’s there, we can show it. There is a website called Global Catholic Education Org, which has several reports on Catholic education across the world and also development indicators as well, if anybody’s interested to go and look further at it.

Robert Duncan: So you spent time teaching at the Angelicum. How many years did you teach social sciences?

Sister Alford: Yeah, I’ve been there 30 years now.

Robert Duncan: And it was, what, three or four years ago that you were appointed. Can you tell me about that appointment and what that job means?

Sister Alford: Yeah, so I was elected to the Academy in 2020.

Robert Duncan: What is the Academy?

Sister Alford: Okay, the Academy was founded by Pope John Paul II in 1994. There’s a much older academy called the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, which was originally founded in the early 1600s. Galileo was a part of it. Many famous scientists were. But with all the vicissitudes of history, it now belongs to Italy. It was lost. So the Pope refounded it in 1936. So the Pontifical Academy of Sciences has had this long history. Social Sciences was founded in 1994 by Pope John Paul II, I think because he realized the importance of the whole social outreach of the Church, the social teaching. He wanted a body of experts working in the Holy See to help with the social teaching. But also, if you look at the statutes of the Academy, the first thing we’re supposed to do is to promote the study of the social sciences and promote the progress of the social sciences. So our first goal is one about improving knowledge, trying to come closer to the truth. Then we have a second goal, which is to help the Church develop her social teaching and to apply the social teaching to contemporary problems. So the two things are connected with each other. But the first thing is, get really good knowledge so then we can use it. Because the whole idea behind that is that God is the creator before he’s the revealer or the redeemer. And we should expect, as Christians, to be able to find convergence between what comes out of science and what is coming out of faith. We shouldn’t be worried or concerned about it. We should be looking for this convergence. And so the Church wants to promote knowledge, the best knowledge we can find, to deal with the problems that we face today.

So from the beginning, the academy had three big projects. One was on work, because that’s historically very important for the social teaching. Another one was on democracy, because they could already see that there were going to be some problems about democracy in the future. And the last one was on intergenerational solidarity, which I think is really prophetic. Other people only started talking about intergenerational solidarity much later. And then since then, the academies worked on all kinds of different topics. We can talk about it more. The one that was closest to creating a social encyclical, I think, was when in 2014, the two academies came together. They had a workshop. They produced a nearly 700-page book under the title, Sustainable Humanity, Sustainable Planet. And it was because Pope Francis asked them, please bring together the best science you can find on the question of ecology. It’s human ecology as well as natural ecology. Bring them together. So that’s why there was a shared meeting between the two academies. And he used the results then to produce Laudato Si’ in 2015. So I think that’s a good example of how it’s had a big impact on social teaching. But we’re also meeting with a lot of people. We have people come from the UN, from the European Union, from research institutes, from the Islamic world. We have a lot of scholars, also members who are from India, China. The idea is to promote the best kind of understanding we can get about the problems that we face and help to find solutions to those problems.

Robert Duncan: What do you think motivates people who are not Catholic to participate? I suppose coming to the Vatican and doing something because the Pope asked is pretty cool, but...

Sister Alford: Yeah, I don’t think that’s the main... For that kind of person, I don’t think it’s the main motivation. Although, yeah, it doesn’t hurt, sure. No, I think they think there’s something here. I mean, the social teaching is... For people who get to a certain level, they start hearing about it. I think especially Pope Francis was so much present in the public sphere that people have got to know about it much more. They feel like the UN is in a very bad place. Where else do we go to try to form a kind of shared body of thinkers who can help resolve problems? Vatican might be the place to go and do that. I think they have good experience when they come because they see the church is really interested in listening to them. We have something to say, but we want to listen and learn too. So, there’s a real kind of sharing with a common goal of helping humanity face the difficulties it faces.

Robert Duncan: So, you were elected to the academy, but you’re also now the...

Sister Alford: Yeah, the president. Yeah, since 2023.

Robert Duncan: That’s a papal appointment.

Sister Alford: Yeah, that’s a papal appointment. I always joke with people. The announcement was made, as you know, as a journalist here, that usually the bulletins from the office are published at 12 o’clock. So, it was published at 12 o’clock on April 1st. So, I always joke, was it a joke or was it serious? Anyway, yeah. So, I’m now the president.

Robert Duncan: What is that role? Does that keep you very busy?

Sister Alford: Yeah, it keeps me busy. I now understand much better the concept of sin of omission because you realize all the things you could do and you really have to select what you’re going to do, but there’d be so many more things you could do. Anyway, so, yeah, you have to really kind of set an agenda for the Academy. You have to think about new members because there’s an election process and then it goes to the pope for approval, new candidates. You have to think about, listen to a lot of people coming who want to talk to you, who want to share issues, and then with the academicians, you’re working on topics. So, usually we have meetings. We have about eight meetings a year, something like this, and sometimes they’re in longer-term projects or sometimes they’re one-off meetings. It depends a bit. So, we just a couple of weeks ago had a meeting on measuring well-being because this is a big issue. As you may know, people have been saying for a long time GDP isn’t good enough. We should have a different measure. But it got a new kind of launch, this idea, in September 2024 when they had a big meeting at the UN about the future of the UN, basically, and they produced this document called the pact for the future and one of it was we have to find better measures of well-being. So, that is a big issue that’s being discussed by the UN Statistical Commission at the moment. So, we wanted to do something that would be a part of the discussion, you know, and so we had a meeting. We had some of the members of the high-level expert group that’s piloting the beyond GDP thing at the meeting, but the main point of discussion was a particular kind of measure, which is a really interesting one from the point of view of the Church. You basically got three ways of measuring well-being. You either use a composite index, like there’s one called the Human Development Index, which goes back to 1990. Human Development Index has three elements to it, an element of education. So, it depends. There’s various sub-factors that go into it, but they’re measuring how well education is running. It’s run by country, okay? So, how well education is doing in each country, health is another one, and then income. And so, you put them together and you produce a composite number and then you rank the countries. And the whole idea of the HDI is a competitor to GDP. And in fact, governments do look at it. It’s important to them to know where are we on the HDI compared to where we are on GDP. So, it’s good in that sense, but it loses a lot of information. When you make a composite measure, all the detail gets lost. So, another way of dealing with that is to have a dashboard. And lots of countries have it now. You can have lots of different individual statistics. But the problem with dashboards is what do you do with them? It’s hard to put them all together. How do you weight things? People don’t really know how to use them very well. So, this is third measure, which we were talking about this, which is called multi-dimensional measure. And this started off as a measure of poverty, but it’s now shifting in to be a measure of well-being. And the idea is that you have a number of dimensions. It’s still being discussed how many dimensions you should have, number of dimensions. And you ask people in the country to answer a question about each dimension. And then the idea is that it doesn’t exist yet, but we want to have an app where everybody can see where they are in their country compared to everybody else. What’s the average and where are they? Now, the really interesting thing about that is that you can form a synthesis. You can get overall measures. So, people can use it for policymaking, but also you can see individual people in it. It’s anonymized, of course, but on your own app, you can see where you are. And as one person said in that meeting, that is a kind of measure based on Catholic Social Teaching because it puts the human person at the center. You can see where you are compared to everybody else. And coming back to this sense of people thinking, what could I do? How do I have an impact? You start to give them some data that relates to them. And maybe we could imagine an app where you could have versions of it that’s relating to the local community, not just to people individually. I mean, there’s all sorts of things you could start doing with this. You start to help people, give them agency, and they can start to do things using the help of these measures. So, this is one thing that we’re working on now. Another thing we’ll start in June, a three-year project on pathways to peace. So, we’ll have, for instance, a meeting on religion, conflict and peace. We’ll look at the economic aspects of war and peace and that sort of thing. So, there’s a number of topics that will start on that. We’re going to have a meeting on satellites because satellites have produced a huge amount of data now. And we could use this data much better for human development, looking at where migration is going, looking at climate patterns. You can get really, really detailed data, which, of course, a lot of it’s being used for military purposes right now. But we could do a lot of peaceful use of it, which people maybe are not using enough yet. So, we’ve got a meeting on satellites. We had a big meeting on AI and human development last October. And then right now, the biggest project we have at the moment is a joint project with the Academy of Sciences on climate resilience. Because the idea is mitigation is important. But right now, we need to help people deal with the crises that are already occurring and are going to continue to occur. We can try to keep climate change down as much as possible, but it’s still going to be a factor we’re going to have to deal with. So, people need to learn to be resilient. So, we had a big meeting in Rome in 2024 about that. Now, we’ve organized regional meetings around the world. Because one of the things that’s interesting, the research shows politicians listen much more to the local scientists than they do to some big global scientists who they think doesn’t know anything about what’s going on in their country. So, we want regional meetings where you bring the local scientists and the local decision makers. And the other thing is we’re not working with national governments. We’re only working with mayors of cities and regional because they are often much more able to do things. They’re not so blocked by the political polarization that we have now. So, try to bring together these groups. So, we’ve had a couple of meetings in the US. We’ve had a meeting in Brazil. We’ve had a meeting in Nairobi. There’ll be another one in Dakar for West Africa. There was one in Europe, in Austria, trying to bring Central Europe and Western Europe together. There’s going to be one in Australia, Sydney, mostly oriented towards the Pacific Islands. There could be one in India. There’s going to be one in the Philippines. So, the idea is bring this, get the sort of thing working on local level. And then at the end, we’ll have another global summit at the end, sometime in 2027. So, you know, that’s not all of what we’re doing, but that’s some of the things that we’re doing.

Robert Duncan: So, if I’ve got this right, just last month in the middle of February, you met with Pope Leo. How often does that take place?

Sister Alford: Not very often.

Robert Duncan: Can you tell me anything about that meeting?

Sister Alford: He was mostly listening. I think that’s his definite mode at the moment. The things that he talked about were more kind of concrete things to do with how we could coordinate better in the Holy See, things like that. With regard to the big issues, he wanted to listen to us. And I brought him some books and things. And I said, you know, these are the topics we’re working on. If you want us to change anything, tell us, you know. So, he wanted to hear what we were doing. And then he may come back to us later and say, I’m interested in this. Or if you just modify this a bit or something, I don’t know. He didn’t want to tell us what to do.

Robert Duncan: Is he hard to read? Did you notice whether his eyes lit up or he was particularly interested in any of the things?

Sister Alford: Well, I think he’s very interested in the peace question. And you could tell he was really following when we were talking about that. But I mean, that’s no surprise to anybody. He’s been talking such a lot about peace.

Robert Duncan: And that was before...

Sister Alford: That was before the current situation in Iran.

Robert Duncan: So, it seems to me that you have a privileged position, more or less, to hear from a lot of different experts. How would you say you and your role see the question of peace? And when the stakes are so high, what can the Church do?

Sister Alford: Well, I think one of the key things we need to do is share the church’s tradition on how to build peace. I mean, we’ve got a wonderful document in Pacem in Terris, which we had commemorative events in the Academy. By the way, all the Academy’s publications are open access. They are all available free on the website. So, there’s a very big publication that came out on the anniversary of Pacem in Terris, which people can look at. So, I think, first of all, the Church is teaching. We really need to know it really well, because what happens is some elements of it get applied given the historical circumstances that people are in. But then situation changes, like this situation, this war that’s currently on at the moment, or wars that are currently on at the moment, they are not exactly the same. The content of them, the contours, as in previous. So, we have to, if we really want to use the richness of the Christian tradition, we have to go back and look at that teaching again, and then try to see how can we use it in these circumstances. We also need to try and find good information. And I think one very good source of information is the Institute for Economics and Peace in Australia, which produces the Global Peace Index, which produces Positive Peace Index. They’ve been working for a long time. There’s also the Nordic agencies, the Peace Research Institute in Oslo, the Swedish one, the name’s gone out of my head. Anyway, so they also, you know, these are people who don’t have anything to gain by selling information or anything like that. And they’re really interested to understand what’s going on. So, these are really good sources of information. So, I think we need to really root ourselves in the teaching. We have to try and use the best information we can get. And then, we have to try to have some kind of judgments about things, knowing that probably they’re going to be provisional judgments, because as you say, not all the information is available. There’s a big discussion right now about what to do about Just War Theory, for instance. You know, a lot of people started saying we should talk about just peace and not just war. I think we see in the Ukrainian situation that we have to find a way of saying people have a legitimate right to defend themselves. The question is, as St. Thomas would say, look, if you’re going to use military means to defend yourself, you have to have a realistic possibility of winning. You know, just throwing your people into a mincing machine with the idea of glory or something, when you don’t have a realistic view of winning, it’s not morally acceptable. Because of course, you’re always trying to limit the death. You’re trying to keep the human person in the center. But on the other hand, freedom is really important. Cultural identity is really important. So, we’re trying to put these things together. So, you need to have a realistic view that you could actually achieve something with this goal with using military means. And then they have to be proportionate. You know, you don’t just drop a nuclear bomb on Russia. That’s not proportionate, you know. So, there’s various ways of thinking about this. So, you know, one way is how to help people to think about it. There might be some judgments that we can make about specific situations. Draw on the teaching and get the best information we can. I mean, one of the things maybe we should do, I’m thinking, talking to you now, is maybe curate a list of the really good sources of information that we could put on the website so people could go there and look at it.

Robert Duncan: I think that would be helpful. That would help the journalists. This may seem like an insensitive question, but at almost every Angelus or general audience, there’s now an appeal. And if you go to Google and you search “Pope news,” or “Pope Leo news,” almost all the news stories are “Pope against war,” “Pope says no more war.” What is that accomplishing? And how should Catholics follow the news and implement that?

Sister Alford: Yeah. Well, I would say some of the time you should go back and actually listen to what the Pope said. You know, he’s not speaking for too long. It’s like 10 minutes or 15 minutes or something, rather than going to the news report. Because as you say, there’s usually an appeal, but there’s also a lot of teaching. There’s prayer. There’s, you know, it’s not only the appeal. What tends to get picked up in the media is the appeal. Yeah. But the appeal is in a context, you know. So I think, again, it’s coming back to this question we were talking about right at the beginning about living our faith. You know, prayer is essential to who we are. I think, given the crisis that we’re in, prayer is becoming more important, not less. We should be trying to deeply root ourselves in a life of prayer. We need God’s grace more than ever now. But alongside that, we are called to work in the world. You know, we’re called to be brothers and sisters to the people who are suffering around us, you know. And so this idea that we should put together in a papal Angelus or something, some reflection on the Gospel, some prayer, and some kind of appeal, telling people, please do something about this. So the Pope is trying to help guide people to a bit on where they should be giving their attention. That seems to me quite a good thing. So the Pope could do it at his level. Bishops could do it at their level. Parish priests could do it at their level. Parents could do it with their kids. You know, the sense of putting these things together and living a sort of full Christian life in that and being open to the world’s problems. I think, you know, that would be my comment to that sort of problem.

Robert Duncan: I think that it’s clear how, you know, the reminders of the appeals are summons to pray, and Catholics believe prayer is effective. But insofar as those are geopolitical appeals, do you believe they work? I mean, the Vatican and the Pope is often called the moral conscience of the West.

Sister Alford: Well, I think, firstly, I would say in answer to that question is, well, did what Jesus did work? Okay, so I won’t answer that question. I’ll let everybody think about it. So I think there’s a sense, there’s just value in just doing it, in just having a witness, in just, you know, even if it’s completely ignored. But I think one of the things you learn if you look at the history of the papacy over the 20th century is that the papacy is actually listened to. I mean, we get some really striking examples of it in history. In the First World War, you had Benedict XV trying to stop the war at the time. He tries in 1916, and he tries again in 1917. In 1917, he produces a document, August the 1st, which has seven points in it. It comes out, August the 1st, 1917. January the 8th or something like that, Wilson produces his 14 points.

There are scholars, political scientists, not all connected with Catholic Church, who are convinced there’s a direct connection between those seven points of Benedict XV and Wilson’s 14 points, even though Wilson didn’t like the Catholic Church. So that’s just one example. You know, you get words and ideas and things picked up from what the popes are saying. You know, Pope John Paul II was a really important figure during the collapse of the Soviet period. He wrote a very important letter to Gorbachev, reminding him about the Helsinki Final Act and talking about human rights. Exactly what the impact was, we don’t know, but it certainly might help. Even if it doesn’t, it’s setting a tone. It’s a voice. It’s present.

Robert Duncan: One of the things the Church is often criticized for is not having enough female voices in leadership and that the male mentality is the one that wants to go to war. Given that you work in social issues and that you are a woman, do you feel that your voice is heard in Rome and in the Catholic Church generally?

Sister Alford: Well, I think there is a big willingness, at least from my personal experience in Rome, to try to get more women in those kinds of positions. I mean, I think often we have this historical problem that women haven’t been in that position, and so the religious orders and the systems that kind of produce those kinds of things are not really producing them because they don’t expect them to go. So we have a bit of a sort of what the people in finance would call a pipeline problem. We need to produce a few more women who can do this sort of thing, but I think you’re kind of pushing against an open door in the Vatican and you don’t want tokenism. You don’t want women just put there just because you want to have a woman. That would also be undermining. So we need to have the women who’ve got the capacity to do these roles. I think obviously there are women who have that kind of, we just have to make sure they get the background. So I think we will see more of it. The fact that the Pope has started to do it will sort of filter down. We already see women judges in the diocese and things like this. So it’s gradually happening, I think, but maybe from the point of view of the media and the visual thing, it’s not enough yet. And I think there is something, it’s not a stupid point, but I think the tendency is hopefully good on this one.

Robert Duncan: In the series of videos I mentioned at the beginning, climate change is mentioned, artificial intelligence. We’ve already talked a bit about war and peace. When you are not in planning meetings with the Pope and doing all the things that you do, teaching classes, what are the issues, the social issues that really keep you up at night or occupy your heart, your passions? What would you spend your time thinking about? And maybe what should we be talking about more in the Church that we’re not?

Sister Alford: A really good question. I mean, I think I want to say something to you that will sound maybe very academic, but I don’t think it is. I think the thing that really worries me is that I feel like the main thinkers in the world today, they are using a way of thinking about the world, which is not able to help us resolve our problems. And that we in the academy, we have to try to help reorient this way of thinking. And because we can’t be experts on everything. I can’t be an expert on all these issues, but we need to be having a sort of shared way of looking at the world so that we can all work together to resolve these problems. If we’re at cross purposes, we’re not able to build on each other’s work. We’re not going to be able to do the sort of thing. You look at what happens in technology. They’re using each other’s work. They can build on each other. In the social sciences, we need to be much more, I think, have a much more realistic view about human beings, rather than say the idea in economics of the homo economicus, which would be a sociopath, as people have talked about, if you really existed, this person. We’ve got these problems in our way of thinking, which block us being able to work properly together. We need a sort of rethinking. And that’s the thing where I feel, when I talked about the sins of omission, that’s the thing where I think we really need to be doing something. I’m not sure that we’re doing enough. We need to do more. And then that would release amongst the goodwill of so many people to resolve the capacity, I think, to work together, because we can’t resolve problems just on our own. We really need what these problems are so complex. They’re so interrelated, and we need people at different levels. We need people on the local level who’ve got a basic idea. That was the idea of this universal fraternity idea. The universal fraternity can work on all different levels. People can start in the family, in the local community, and we can be somehow connected, working towards a shared goal.

And yeah, it gets more complicated when you get to higher levels, global level or whatever, but we can still have this kind of point of contact which links us. That’s one sort of thing we need to do. But I think we need a new kind of Enlightenment, in a way. The Enlightenment was trying to deal with a whole network of problems, and it produced a new way of thinking, which partly built on the old, but partly did new things. We have to do this with modernity. Modernity did a lot of good things, but it’s weak in many ways. And the Church, because it was in a slightly marginal relationship to modernity, in some ways it saw there were good things, but it has a lot of issues with modernity as well. It’s in quite a good place to try to help input ideas into the discussion, try to help us think differently. I’m sorry I might be disappointing people with that answer, but I think that’s where someone like me in the Academy, that’s where I’ve got to be working at that level, hoping that we can help other people do things that are more concrete to resolve those big problems you’re talking about.

Robert Duncan: For people who want to get more involved at home, that are not in the Academy, do you have any advice for them, how they can apply in their own lives the social teaching of the Church?

Sister Alford: Okay. I’d say they could learn more about it, because there’s always this joke that Catholic Social Teaching is the best kept secret in the Catholic Church. I mean, there are some people who know a lot about it, but a lot of people, even if they’ve had very good Christian formation, don’t know anything about it. So alongside that video series that I sent you the thing about, we have another one called Fraternitas, which is all about basic Catholic social teaching. But you can find, I’m sure, other good resources too. So first thing, learn something about this. Then next thing, have discussions. I think families are great places to have a kind of deliberation. Let’s think about this idea. How could we do something about it?

Then maybe the kids talk to each other amongst their friends, or you meet your friends in a coffee bar or something. So in other words, deliberate with each other. I think we’ve kind of lost this art of deliberation. We’re so used to being a bit passive and being told by experts how you should do things. But if we could try to rediscover this, the ideas are important, but then we have to do something with them. Put them into practice. Start to live them. Start to incarnate them. And I think if we try to do it, we can find a way of doing it. We have to try to do it.

Robert Duncan: Sister Helen Alford, thank you for sitting down with us.

Sister Alford: It’s a pleasure. Thank you.

In this conversation, Archbishop Fortunatus Nwachukwu offers a clear-eyed account of that shift, arguing that the Church is entering a new phase: no longer defined by Western missionary outreach, but by a global return.

In this conversation, we discuss:

• Why blaming colonialism is not enough—and how tribalism has become its modern counterpart

• The Church as the only force capable of healing ethnic division and forming the human mind

• How Pope Leo’s upcoming visit to Africa speaks not just to the continent, but to Europe and the world

• The deeper spiritual crisis behind war, violence, and what he calls the “selfie” culture of modern humanity

• What Western Christians must learn from a Church that is growing, vibrant, and confident

This is a conversation about power, responsibility, and a renewal in a rapidly changing global Church.

Transcript

Intro: Fortunatus Nwachukwu is a Nigerian archbishop serving at the Vatican in the Dicastery for Evangelization, where he helps oversee its mission in some of the fastest-growing parts of the Church. A biblical scholar and former Vatican diplomat, he has served across Africa and Europe, including at the Holy See’s mission to the United Nations in Geneva and in the Secretariat of State of the Vatican. Now, he stands at a unique crossroads—watching the center of gravity of Christianity shift. In this conversation with Catholic News Service, filmed at the Palazzo Propaganda Fide ahead of Pope Leo’s April 2026 visit to four African countries, we turn to the questions shaping the Church’s future—and what the West can learn from a Christianity that is still alive and expanding. And we ask: as Catholicism in the West shows signs of decline, is Africa becoming the heart of the Church?

Robert Duncan: Archbishop Nwachukwu, thank you for sitting down with Catholic News Service.

Archbishop Nwachukwu: Thank you for having me.

Robert Duncan: Well, I’m at your house today. I’m in your offices.

Archbishop Nwachukwu: Well, it’s a pleasure having you here.

Robert Duncan: I want to talk a little bit about the future of Catholicism and how Africa plays a role in that. People say that the global South is where the Church is growing. Do you see that Africa and the Church in Africa is going to play an important role in the Church’s future? And what would that look like?

Archbishop Nwachukwu: I think the Church in Africa is already playing an important role. We must bear in mind that the Church in Africa has grown from being a receiving church and is gradually becoming a giving church. And that is why we are talking of what I call the Church of the Sheaves. Because if you remember in Psalm 126, the Psalm that speaks of the return of the exiles of Zion, in verse 6, we read, they go out, they go out full of tears, carrying seed for the sowing. They come back, they come back full of songs, carrying their sheaves. My interpretation, our reading is currently that those who went out in tears, carrying seed for the sowing, were the missionaries that came from the West, going to the mission countries, not only in Africa. They left at a time when we did not have the current means of communication or transportation. So most of them, at their departure, did not think they would come back. So their going was like a dying. And one can only imagine the amount of tears that flowed as they bade farewell to their beloved, to their loved ones. And so they fit perfectly. The text of the Psalms, Psalm 126, verse 6, they go out, they go out full of tears. But they did not go empty handed. They were carrying the seed of the Gospel. So carrying seed for the sowing. They are the missionaries that went out and they sowed the seeds. And the seeds they sowed have germinated, produced plants, and those plants are now producing abundant fruit. We are now living the time of the harvest, the time of the sheaves. So we see the harvest in Africa, all over the place in Africa. We see it in Asia. We see it in various parts of the world where the churches that grew from this missionary endeavor are now flourishing. And so we are at the moment of saying, they come back, they come back full of songs. Think of the songs, the joy in the African liturgy. They come back, they come back full of songs, carrying their sheaves. The young churches are now bringing in the sheaves, which are the fruits of the sacrifice, the missionary endeavor of those heroes of our faith, the missionaries.

Robert Duncan: Is the church in Rome ready for African church leadership? Often those who have followed the Church and the media in particular have portrayed leaders from the African church and leaders from the European or Western church as being at odds in different matters like sexuality and church authority during recent synods. Do you see unity at risk if Africa is playing an increasingly important role, globally?

Archbishop Nwachukwu: Wherever you have two people, you have diversity of opinions. Even among Africans in Africa, we have diversity of opinions. Think of the situation in Rome. One thing I can tell you is that the Church had been blessed with excellent popes. And these popes from the time even before, but especially from the time of Pope Paul VI, have been very, very open and not just supportive, but also very encouraging to the African church. Think of the declaration of Pope Paul VI in Uganda in 1969, when he called the Africans that they have to become now the missionaries of their own continent. And then it was like telling the Africans that the church has become adult, no longer a teenage church, but an adult church. I’m going to come back maybe to talk about that. But then you think also of Saint John Paul II, and how the amount of attention he gave to Africa, even calling the first special assembly of the Synod of Bishops in Africa. And then you think of his successor, Pope Benedict XVI, who called also the second special assembly on Africa of the Synod of Bishops. And then Pope Francis, all the openness. It was Pope Francis, for example, that brought me to Rome. And now we have Pope Leo XIV. Maybe people should know that once Pope Leo XIV was elected the Superior General of the Augustinians, when he was elected Superior General of the Augustinian Order, one of his first trips, I don’t know whether it was actually the very first, but one of his first trips was to Africa. So we have people, popes, that have been open to Africa and very welcoming to Africans. Is that a generalized thing? Of course, we have also people, Westerners, not just in Rome, but all over the place, that look at Africans with some diffidence. And they look at Africans as these immigrants. Even some priests and some people think that Africans, if not just African immigrants, laypersons, but even priests and religious, like people who were coming to get jobs from them. And now that is a mentality we are trying to help them to correct. And I go back always to the text of Psalm 126, verse 6, to let them know we wouldn’t be here if there were no Europeans, no Westerners, that sacrificed the most important, the most beautiful moments of their lives, of their youth, to come to our countries to preach the Gospel. So we are not here out of accident. We are here as the children, the sons and daughters that came from the sacrifice of Western missionaries.

Robert Duncan: I’d like to pick up on that. I’m jumping around a bit from my plan, but because it’s the second time you’ve mentioned the missionary activity in Africa. I was, in preparing for this interview, I found a talk that you gave at the Gregorian a couple years ago online, and you said some very interesting things. For example: “We criticize (speaking of Africans), we criticize colonialism, but then we bring it home. We have enculturated colonialism in the form of tribalism and ethnic supremacy.” You also say, “We condemn white supremacy, but in Africa, we often practice ethnic supremacy ourselves.” And the last quote I’ll read you is, “In some places, people would rather accept a European bishop than a fellow African from another tribe. That is racism enculturated.” That is very true. And I still hold some opinion.

Archbishop Nwachukwu: That is very true. And I still hold (that) opinion.

Robert Duncan: Can you give more context?

Archbishop Nwachukwu: I can tell you, all of us criticize colonialism. And it is not rare to find Africans wanting to blame everything that is going bad, badly in Africa on colonialism. And then I tell people, look at other countries that have experienced also colonialism. I take Ireland, for example. They experienced colonialism. They are not just there licking their wounds. They have gone beyond. Of course, we don’t negate history, but we should not allow ourselves to be tied down to history. We have to go beyond what wounded us and find a show that we can go beyond our wounds. Colonialism was a very bad thing in history. We think of even the Shoah, of the Jews, for example. The Jews are not just there, staying there and weeping and wobbling on the ground. They keep the history. They don’t want to forget what was done to them, but they don’t let it pin them down. They have grown and they have gone far beyond. Now, this is what Africa should do. We should not just be there criticizing colonialism all the time and then remaining in the blame game. We should go beyond. Unfortunately, instead of working to go beyond colonialism, what we have done is almost, I put it in inverted commas, inculturating colonialism. The evils that we criticize in colonialism, we now practice to our own brothers and sisters, just because they belong to another clan, to another ethnic group, to another part, or even of the same ethnic group. And this, unfortunately, has crept into the Church in some places. This is very dangerous because we know that tribalism is rampant in many societies in Africa and who is going to heal it? The military have tried. Politicians have tried. Orders have tried. The only person, the only group we think should help in healing it is the Church. Why? Because the Church gives a common ground to everybody, a common principle, the principle of loving, not just like oneself. I have to underline that. Love your neighbor like yourself is not the basic principle of the church. That is Old Testament. Leviticus chapter 19, verse 18. It comes from the Old Testament. Loving your neighbor like yourself, almost as it were, making yourself the point of departure. No, Jesus changed that. Jesus said, loving your neighbor no longer like yourself, but like I, Jesus, have loved. So, all Christians have one point of reference, Jesus Christ. John chapter 13, verse 34. If we were to keep to what we take as our basic text, which is the Bible, for Christians, the gospel especially, we wouldn’t have space for this new colonialism that presents itself as tribalism and ethnocentrism.

Robert Duncan: Many people, though, in the West will say that the Church itself is part of colonialism’s legacy.

Archbishop Nwachukwu: No, the Church, the people, the colonialists came looking for what they would take away. The Church did not come looking for what it would take away. The Church came looking for what it would give to those in need, to the local populations. Of course, even as we have it today, we have people, politicians especially, people that are self-centered, who try to manipulate religion and use it for their personal interests. We had that also among colonial powers, among some colonialists. And so, they tried to, some places, manipulate agents of the Church. But the sincere, true missionaries had no colonial interests. Their interest was bringing new way of living, education, new way of health care, health care, new way of hygiene. They were focused on the health, the life, and well-being of the people to whom they brought the Gospel.

Robert Duncan: What formed you spiritually growing up? You’re from Nigeria. What were your early life experiences and how did they shape your vocation?

Archbishop Nwachukwu: My vocation actually came especially from my father. My father was a primary school headmaster. He was formed under the Irish missionaries and he believed very firmly, he imbibed the principles taught by the Irish missionaries. And those were the principles he transferred to us. I must tell you that my mother was Anglican until marriage. So, I began growing as a child on two legs, the firm leg of Catholicism and the other leg, weaker one, of Anglicanism. Whenever I went to my maternal home, my maternal siblings would try to make a mockery of me because of our devotions to the saints and the blessed Virgin Mary and so on. And that pushed me early to start digging into the Bible to know how to prepare my defense when I met them. Now, at the age of six, five or six, they told me I started mimicking the priest that came to celebrate in my father’s school. And that was only twice or thrice every year because the parish was so big. It had more than 50, 60 outstations and the priest was coming to our part only twice or three times a year. And although I was small, whenever the priest left, I came to learn from my parents that I would go there and I began to mimic the priest. And I tried to tell them that I would be like that priest. He later on became a monsignor. That was the priest that baptized me. So, at the age of five, six, I was already thinking of being like that parish priest. And my father started also giving me some religious books to read. Unfortunately, that dream, that lofty dream of a child was cut shut and destroyed. In 1967, when at the age of seven, I experienced the most horrible thing any child would experience. The Biafran Civil War. I was a child of Biafra and I saw my own friends, colleagues, overnight develop distended stomachs due to kwashiorkor or beriberi and they died.

Robert Duncan: What was the conflict about?

Archbishop Nwachukwu: It was a conflict between Nigeria and my part of Nigeria, which took the name of Biafra and wanted to be independent. I don’t want to go into the causes and so on, but this part of Nigeria felt there was some bit of discrimination against it and felt, okay, if you don’t want us inside, we want to be independent. And Nigeria did not want it. And so the civil war broke out and it seemed that Nigeria used hunger as one of its weapons of war. And sorry to say, Nigeria had the support, tacit or in some cases open, of most European countries of the time. And so I lost two of my sisters, not in combat, but to war, to lax. And for three years, I saw the dreams of my childhood, you know, vanish, disappear. Thanks to God, the war came to an end. When the war finished, of course, you can imagine how I felt towards the rest of the Christians of Nigeria, because many of those who came to fight us were also Christians, not Muslims. The head of the Nigerian government, Yakubu Gowon, was a Christian. He’s still alive. He’s still a Christian. So I began as a young person to ask myself, how could Christians do such things to their fellow Christians? Of course, the Nigerian side had also the Muslims with them, but the leader of Nigeria was Christian. Most of the generals and leaders of the Nigerian army were Christians. As a child, of course, I was asking myself, was it not possible for the Christians to reach an agreement? I don’t even know. I came to know that the two leaders, Yakubu Gowon, a Christian, and Odumegwu Ojukwu, a Christian, the leader of the Biafrans, met in Ghana, and they were not able to reach an agreement. Of course, they reached an agreement, an Aburi agreement. Why were they not able to implement it? So, the same feeling is the feeling I had when I heard of the Russian-Ukrainian war. People were telling me of political, geographical interests, and I was asking them, excuse me, Russia is full of Orthodox Christians. Ukraine is full of Orthodox Christians. Which Christ are we worshipping? How can we profess to be sincerely Christians and we cannot sit down and negotiate and find meeting ground based on the gospel that we receive from Christ? This is a total betrayal of Christ.

Robert Duncan: So, in a context like that, what does it mean that Christianity is growing? Are they rival Christianities? Is it all positive news that Christianity is growing in Africa?

Archbishop Nwachukwu: Christianity is growing in Africa. What I’m talking about is, of course, Christianity has always tried to challenge the consequences of sin. You know that the origin of violence in humanity is not directly from God. It is from turning away from God. I will take you, maybe, if you don’t worry, I take you quickly back to the Bible a little bit. God created the human being, according to the Bible, to be his reflection, God’s reflection. If we read Genesis 1:26-27, and God said, “Let us make man and woman in our image and likeness.” So, God made the human being in God’s image and likeness. What does that mean? That God made the human being to be like a mirror or a camera focused on God so that whoever looks into it does not see himself or herself, but sees God. That’s capturing the reflection of God. And so, God said to this human being, you must maintain me as a measure of what is good and bad. Eat of every fruit, but not that of the measure of good and bad. This is now Genesis 2:16. But then in Genesis 3, man and woman did exactly what God said they should not do. And once they ate of that fruit, what happened? They changed their camera from being focused on God, capturing God’s image, to doing selfie. So, they started capturing their image. That is why once they ate of that fruit and God called them, their eyes were opened and they saw not God, but they saw themselves as naked. So, which means eyes opening is almost like a subtle way of saying that their camera was turned the other way and they began to see themselves and no longer God, because they had eaten the fruit of using themselves as measure. And so, they began to see themselves. They became the center. And so, God put them away from the place of intimacy with God. That’s how at the end of Genesis 3, they were moved away from the Garden of Eden. And once the focus was no longer on God, but on self with the selfie, violence came. And until today, all the cases of violence we have are the consequence of selfie in human relations. Look at them. It is about me, about my interests. It is about me and my selfishness against my brother, my sister. Now, what does Christianity preach? Move the focus from yourself, return to Christ, the perfect image of God. That is where Christ says, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one can come to the Father except through me.” John chapter 14 verse 6. If only Christians were to know that they have the most formidable arm, weapon, for not defeating every violence, every misunderstanding, every war, we have the Gospel.

So, the Gospel, the Church growing in Africa, means also putting this weapon in the hands of many more people. Now we have the weapon. The challenge of the Church today is to teach the people how to use that weapon, which is the Gospel, and to reach the reconciliation and the peace and justice that that weapon brings. You know, I was amazed thinking of the theme of the Second Assembly for Africa, of the Synod of Bishops that was convoked by Pope Benedict XVI, the Church of Africa. Reconciliation, peace, and justice. These are the things that flow from a good evangelization. We are not having the numbers. The challenge is to tell the people how to harness the weapon in our hands in making the numbers work.

Robert Duncan: When this interview airs, the Pope will be just days away from a four-country trip to Africa. He’ll be going to Algeria, Cameroon, Angola, and Equatorial Guinea. Why does this trip matter beyond Africa? What should the global Church, and in particular, maybe people in the Western world, be paying attention to as the Pope goes to Africa?

Archbishop Nwachukwu: This visit is very important because the world is no longer fragmented as it used to be, especially in our moment. Since we started talking about globalization, globalization, and now we are talking about the era of social media, so we no longer have distances, as it were. We are all together. We form one single village. So, what happens in Africa reverberates also in Europe or in the U.S. If things are not good in Africa, you do whatever you want, the people are going to flood towards Europe. So, it is necessary, people are speaking, saying here in Europe, let us try to help them, help their country so that they will remain home. To change a person, you begin with the mind. And the visit of the Pope, the message of the Pope, is a message that always goes towards the formation of the mind. Think of his visit to Algeria. The symbol of the visit is that of two doves, now drinking from a common cup, sharing peace. And that means telling people, peace is what we need. Algeria, I served in Algeria as Secretary of the Nunciature for three years, in a difficult moment, from 1999 to 2002. And I saw, I visited much of the country, even down south up to Tamanrasset, to the tomb of Charles de Foucauld. I visited the tomb, that is almost, the desert sands are coming so close to the tomb. So, I visited this country. It is a country where we have a very small, a tiny population of Catholics in a predominantly Muslim country. But the Pope is giving the message that the little ship we have there is a flock that loves peace and that loves also to drink with the rest of the doves from the same cup of peace. So, his message there is going to be certainly the message of peace. I understand he’s going to visit the Grand Mosque, the Great Mosque, and then he is going to celebrate and then speak with the Christians, Catholics, at Notre Dame d’Afrique, just in front of the Apostolic Nunciature. So, that is a message also focused on the mind, speaking of peace and sharing. He goes on to Cameroon, and that is, the message of Cameroon is very important because Cameroon stands at a meeting point between West Africa, Central Africa, Savannah Africa towards the north, and a bit moving a bit towards the south. So, it is very central. And the problems, the issues we have in Cameroon are issues that we have in various parts of Africa. So, the symbol we have there is a symbol we should be able to apply to every part of Africa. Think of the Bible lying below the image of the country, and then from the Bible, the cross of Christ coming out. So, this is like saying the message of the Gospel that brings us the image of Christ. The cross is not just the cross of death, it is the cross that is the embrace. The embrace that gathers people together, irrespective of their ethnic or tribal affiliations, irrespective of their political, social affiliations, in a country that is also the part, the English-speaking part, is facing some internal conflicts. This type of message of the Bible bringing Christ and trying to speak of, there is also another image of a dove, which means peace through the Gospel and the presence of Christ. That is a very strong message. And so, the Pope is going to be certainly talking about peace, reconciliation, justice and peace. I don’t know the text, but from the symbol, from the image, you can have the intuition that the Pope is going to be addressing these issues. You go on to Angola. Angola, as we know, for various years encountered wars, and so there was a lot of shedding of blood. Maybe that is why the color red is very strong in the symbol that we have in Angola. But then also we have the other elements of nature and then of family, which means that the Pope is also going to be talking about the suffering of the people. He is going to be talking about the need to rise from the ashes and to move towards a better future.

Robert Duncan: Also mining?

Archbishop Nwachukwu: Well, he’s going to be talking about... I said we did not participate directly in preparing the Pope’s visit, so I do not have any access to his texts. If I were requested to contribute, maybe when he talks about justice and peace, you cannot talk about justice in a country like that without touching things like the question of mining.

Robert Duncan: And the reason for that, I mean, one possible connection, Pope Leo has talked about artificial intelligence, and many of the raw materials that go to build the data centers and the phones, you were talking about selfies earlier, come from mining in Africa, in places like Angola.

Archbishop Nwachukwu: Well, that’s true. Angola, but especially RDC, the Democratic Republic of the Congo. And then, unfortunately, these are countries that are battered by the selfie, personal interests of people that are not thinking of the local populations, but are thinking of their own personal interests. The selfie in man that has turned man into agent of sin. So, this is the thing that the Gospel is trying to contrast, the tendency of selfie. The Gospel is saying, change the camera, return it to Christ. Now, I have to tell you, the expression, their eyes were opened, I found in two interesting moments, permit me to just make this little digression. At the moment of the selfie in Genesis, when man and woman, people say they ate apple. No, what they did was twist what God said. God said, do not touch the question of judgment of good and evil. That belongs to me. God wants himself to be the yard stick for measuring good and evil. So, we should be focused on God. In Genesis chapter 3, that fruit they ate turned them, and they were focused no longer on God, but themselves. Think that in Genesis chapter 2, verse 24. The two of them were naked, but they were not ashamed. Why? Because they were not even seeing themselves as naked, because they were totally focused on God. But in Genesis chapter 3, once they ate of this fruit, we see their eyes were opened, which means the eyes turned, they began to do selfie. The eyes again turned again, opened again, in Luke chapter 24. If you read up to verses 31 and 32, these are the two disciples on the way to Emmaus, after the resurrection of Christ. When they received the bread, blessed and broken by Christ, we read their eyes were opened. Exactly the same Greek expression that we have in Genesis chapter 3. We have it here. Their eyes were opened, but they did not see themselves. They recognized Christ. So, it was like the selfie of Genesis was turned back and refocused on Christ through the Eucharistic bread that was blessed by Christ. So, the Eucharist brings us back from selfishness to Christ. Are we able to bring this message to our people, the message of the Gospel, that makes us focus on Christ as a center? That is the challenge we have in our Africa and in the universal Church.

Robert Duncan: The last of the four countries was Equatorial Guinea.

Archbishop Nwachukwu: In Equatorial Guinea, I think the symbol there focuses mainly on symbols like the family and so on, but it also has a boat there. I think there again, the attention is on mission and then on the family life. That is also a place that the Holy Father is going to again be focusing on the mind of the people. It’s just like saying he’s going to tell the people a new mind for a new life.

Robert Duncan: Many people listening may have heard of these countries, but may not be able to identify them on the map. Do you have a key for what they could be paying attention to, why they should tune into this trip, even if the Pope is not coming to see them and it seems like something far away?

Archbishop Nwachukwu: Okay, I’ll just tell you some specific things about them. Algeria stays in the North and the dominant language in Algeria is Arabic. St. Augustine is from there. That was the powerhouse of the Latin church in the first years of Christianity in Northern Africa. The Pope, thanks be to God, is visiting there. He’s Augustinian. And so it is what you could call Arab Africa. Cameroon is a meeting point between English-speaking Africa and French-speaking Africa. So you just come below, you come immediately sub-Saharan Africa, the first level there. As I said, from the West, Western Africa and from Eastern Africa, they meet in Cameroon. From the North and the South, they meet in Cameroon. And so in Cameroon, you have a meeting of French-speaking Africa and English-speaking West Africa also, they meet in Cameroon. Now below Cameroon, a little bit below and towards the West, staying just below Nigeria, you have Equatorial Guinea. That is one of the few countries in Africa that speak Spanish. So you have the purpose of visiting Spanish-speaking Africa. And then Angola is a little bit further. You know, Angola is interesting. Angola was the seat of what used to be the Congo, where Catholicism stayed in the Middle Ages. The first Catholic ambassador that was accredited to the Holy See came from the Congo in today, the Kingdom of the Congo, that is today Angola. Today’s Angola. The ambassador Ne Vunda left, I think it was about the 15th or the 16th, early 16th century. He was accredited to the Holy Father, to the Holy See, and he left by ship traveling from Angola by sea towards Spain and Portugal. And then eventually, after various months, he arrived in Rome, but was already sick when he arrived. And when he arrived in Rome, he died. And the Pope then wanted him to be buried in Santa Maria Maggiore. He is the only African buried in the Basilica of Santa Maria Maggiore. So to tell you how important Angola is to the presence of Christianity in Africa, presence of Catholicism in Africa, and this Angola today is Portuguese-speaking Africa. So with these four countries, the Pope with one shot is taking Arabic-speaking Africa, French and English-speaking Africa, Spanish-speaking Africa, and Portuguese-speaking Africa in one shot.

Robert Duncan: I’d like to conclude by asking you, what worries you most about the future of Africa or the current situation now? Generally, it’s a large continent. We didn’t really have a chance to talk about Islam and the threat of religious violence. What are the issues that maybe we didn’t talk about that keep you up at night?

Archbishop Nwachukwu: Well, the issue that keeps me up at night most is what you mentioned at the beginning, and that was the enculturation of colonialism and colonialistic tendencies in the form of tribalism, in the form of ethnocentrism, in the form of clannishness that has dominated the political sphere. And where you have tribalism and clannishness and ethnocentrism, you have corruption, corruption tribes, because people don’t work for the public good. They work for the preservation of their interests, because they know that when the leader of the group changes to another tribe, they might lose their job. So they try to make hay while the sun shines. So that is a danger. That is a major danger we have there. Another danger, which is close to that, is the danger of non-acceptance. Unfortunately, if you go to the Arab North Africa, people speak of racism towards blacks in Europe and other places. Well, I can tell you, we also have it very, very strongly in the northern part of Africa towards sub-Saharan Africans. So it is an extended form of tribalism, but now influenced by the difference of color, because people in northern Africa, many of them are of lighter skin complexion, and so sometimes they have a tendency to despise their brothers from sub-Saharan Africa who have a darker skin color. That is also a challenge. Now, what about the challenge of Islam? I have to mention that violent Islam is not from Africa. I have to repeat that and underline it. Violent Islam is not from Africa. Well, you would say, I would even say further, neither Christianity nor Islam originated in Africa. Both of them came from outside. Now, if a person is a guest in your place, we ask the guest to behave himself or herself. So we are asking people who are exponents of Islam and Christianity in Africa to behave themselves. We have to behave ourselves in the continent and represent exactly and live exactly what our religions preach. Islam —from Salaam — says (it’s) a religion of peace, then let them be a religion of peace and not of violence and not of terrorism. Christianity, we say, is a religion of love, religion of the person of Christ. Then let us be a religion that speaks of Christ and not of trying to manipulate the Gospel for personal interests and personal gains. This, the thing that worries me currently, is the question of manipulating religion, whether it is Islam or Christianity, manipulating religion for personal interests and personal gains instead of using or following religion for what it really teaches and what it really represents.

Robert Duncan: So I’d like to end on a positive note. Often Africa is described as being exuberant and the church in Africa being alive, whereas churches in Western European countries or even maybe the U.S. can be described as sleepy or in decline. So what can Christians in the Western world learn from African Christians?

Archbishop Nwachukwu: Well, the first thing I tell the Christians in the Western world is that God has made them hungry and they are passing a period of hunger so that they will be able to receive the fresh food that is coming from the mission lands. Because if the Church were still to be luxuriant, to be flourishing in the West, I’m sure they would be feeling, oh, we are satisfied, we don’t have need for these others. If you want to make a person enjoy food, you tell the person to fast a little bit. So God is making the West to fast a little bit so that they will be ready to welcome the sheaves that are coming back. And once they have imbibed that mentality of welcome, I call it the mentality of the mother who welcomes her child, once that has been done, the church in the West will rise again from its trunks. I don’t see the Church in the West as dying. It is passing through a phase of hunger to help it welcome the sheaves that are coming home.

Robert Duncan: Archbishop Nwachukwu, thank you so much for your time.

Archbishop Nwachukwu: Thank you very much.

In this conversation, we discuss:

• His family background and personal ties to a statue in St. Peter’s Square

• Why the Church avoids political framing on migration

• Whether arguments about culture and identity hold up

• Why social issues have become front-and-center in the modern Church

This is a serious exchange about one of the defining tensions of our time: the necessity of politics—and the refusal of the Church to be reduced to it.

Transcript

Intro: Cardinal Michael Czerny has been one of the Catholic Church’s most prominent voices on social questions for more than a decade. The son of immigrants of Jewish and Christian background, whose parents’ story is reflected in a 2019 installation in St. Peter’s Square, his advocacy is rooted in a personal history shaped by displacement and resilience. His priestly vocation was forged through human rights work in El Salvador and later in the fight against AIDS in Africa, before eventually being called to Rome. There, he became one of the closest collaborators of Pope Francis, helping shape the Vatican’s response to migration and environmental care through the Dicastery for Promoting Integral Human Development—work he continues into the early days of Pope Leo’s pontificate. In this conversation with Catholic News Service, we explore the roots of his convictions and how his life experience has helped popes shape the Church’s engagement with the defining issues of the 21st century. And we ask: as debates over national borders and identity intensify in Europe and the United States, is the Church being heard—or does its message risk falling on deaf ears?

Robert Duncan: I was wondering whether I would start the interview this way or end it.

Cardinal Czerny: Just do it. Just do it. Just do it. Just do it and then you can edit it.

Robert Duncan: You may disagree with this, Cardinal Czerny. First of all, thank you for sitting down with Catholic News Service. But I’ve been both present at many interviews with you and I’ve watched many interviews with you, most recently during the recent conclave. And one thing that I’ve noticed is you often will reframe the question that the journalist asks. And that makes me wonder whether you think that journalists, whether they be Catholic or secular, often get the church’s story wrong.

Cardinal Czerny: Well, I mean, my feeling is they get the story wrong if they ask the wrong question. And so if the question is not going to get us to a happy answer, then it’s better to reformulate it.

Robert Duncan: Well, I will be on my best behavior. I want to start with St. Peter’s Square, which is now a testament to your own life story. I believe if I’ve got this right, the last time St. Peter’s Square was permanently altered was in the 19th century with the statues of St. Peter and St. Paul. In 2019, a new permanent feature was installed. Can you tell me about that statue and what is your personal connection to it?

Cardinal Czerny: My personal connection with Angels Unawares is a pretty long-running friendship with the sculptor, Timothy Schmaltz. And the way I remember the particular story is that there was a boat that went down in the Mediterranean with I don’t know how many hundred migrants on board. And Timothy was here for some other reason and he said to me, Father, when is this tragedy of migration going to stop? And I said to him, Timothy, migration is not a tragedy, it’s a fact of life. And he says that this inspired him to try to portray the migrants of all times and all places. And in their midst, following a citation from the Letter to the Hebrews, in their midst, there’s an angel. The sculpture is called Angels Unawares. And the angel is ambiguous in an interesting way. Because it’s not clear whether the angel is someone who is welcoming a migrant or whether the angel is the migrant bringing life into the life of whoever is helping.

Robert Duncan: And your parents are depicted in the statue.

Cardinal Czerny: And my parents are on the back of the boat.

Robert Duncan: Can you tell people who don’t know your story?

Cardinal Czerny: Well, we’re refugees from Czechoslovakia who came to Canada in late 1948. And so when Timothy was doing the sculpture, he asked for examples of people who were forced to flee. And my parents happened to fit that category. So I shared a photo with him and so they ended up on a boat. Why were they forced to flee? Several reasons. They had scarcely survived the tragedy of World War II and the persecution. And then the regime in Czechoslovakia turned communist and my father was afraid for his own life and especially for the future of his family. And so we fled.

Robert Duncan: How old were you at the time?

Cardinal Czerny: Two and a bit.

Robert Duncan: Any memories, images?

Cardinal Czerny: Not really. I mean, probably stories that I’ve been told and that I now make my own. But I mean, I think I remember a moment in the train station in Paris when we were on our way to Le Havre. I remember some moments on the boat or on the train from Halifax to Montreal. We arrived for Christmas of 1948. But the important thing of our story is that we would not have been able to go to Canada if we didn’t have sponsors. And a school friend of my parents heard that we were stuck in Europe and wanted to get to Canada. And even though he had only arrived recently himself and had his own young family, he took the risk of sponsoring us and making it possible for us to come to Canada. And that marked me very much. It was something that our family always remembered and that we are grateful for to this day. And so when the Church encourages us to welcome, it’s something that I believe in very much and that my own experience backs up.

Robert Duncan: I walk through St. Peter’s Square every day as I come to work. And, you know, people do, of course, stare at the Basilica and the Saints and the Square and all the different features. And they certainly also stare for a while and they touch — you can see certain parts where they’ve venerated the statue. And I just wonder, I mean, it must be both a source of pride and mystery and humility, I don’t know — What does it feel like to be a permanent part of St. Peter’s Square?

Cardinal Czerny: Well, that’s quite astonishing, I would say. I mean, that’s not something that I easily, I can easily believe. And especially being a refugee family, to think that you have a permanent place anywhere, much less in St. Peter’s Square, is quite astonishing. But, you know, the thing that I find most touching is how people relate to the sculpture. Because unlike many other works like that, there’s no sign. There’s no word around that tells you what it is or who did it or why it is or any of that. And so people, in a certain sense, stumble upon it and very quickly identify with it. And I think it’s fair to say that most people are walking around the boat looking for their ancestors. Because most people are the offspring of refugees or migrants of one kind or another. In fact, we all are, finally. So the fact that people recognize the meaning and relate to the sculpture so personally, that as you say, there are places which have been touched by thousands and thousands of people in a sense of connectedness. I don’t know if it’s veneration exactly, but certainly a sense of connectedness. That’s very cool because what the false narrative about migrants and refugees and displaced people and unaccompanied minors, the false narrative is that they have nothing to do with us. Whereas the sculpture says, no, no, they are us. They are us.

Robert Duncan: So this experience, you say it marked you permanently. And it’s clear from your Wikipedia page, your biography, that you decided relatively early on to give your life to the cause of human rights. Would you just talk a bit about where that vocation came from and how it fit in with your priestly vocation?

Cardinal Czerny: Yeah, no, but I would never describe my vocation as a vocation to human rights. That’s not, I wouldn’t be right. No, my vocation was a gift and a call from God to serve him and to serve his people. And in fact, and I was attracted to the Jesuits because I had studied in a Jesuit school in Montreal in Loyola. But at first I thought I was probably going to be a professor. So I don’t think, you know, it wasn’t a question of human rights. It is true, people have studied that survivors of the Holocaust often have gone into the service part of life. It’s as if this gratuitous or doubly or triply gratuitous gift of life means you have to give back and that it’s not worth living if you’re not giving back. So many of us make that option. And I suppose, unawares, I made that option too. But my vocation, you might say, or my calling to work in the social ministry came later as part of my Jesuit formation. And now looking back, it all makes sense, but I didn’t see it so clearly then. I didn’t think that much about being a migrant or refugee until, in fact, until I was appointed to the new migrant and refugee section by Pope Francis and sort of had to learn all about it. And after listening to migrants and refugees talking after a while being said, but that sounds very much like what I went through.

Robert Duncan: Right. I wanted to put a pin in it because it’s slightly going back a step. But one thing that we didn’t discuss was your Jewish heritage. And when did you or your family become Catholic?

Cardinal Czerny: Well, on my father’s side, we’re traditionally Catholic. We’re not at all Jewish. And on my mother’s side, my paternal grandfather was a second-generation Catholic. In other words, his father converted. My great-great-grandfather was the last one who died as a Jew. So on my grandfather’s side, we’ve been Catholic for four generations. On my mother’s side, in fact, my grandmother was baptized not long before she married. So she was... But being Jewish at that time in Czechoslovakia was more of a cultural thing than religious. And so we were basically a Catholic family. We went to the parish from us. And being Jewish is part of our spiritual, cultural, and human heritage. And so it’s part of us. But we haven’t been Jewish, at least on my father’s side, or grandfather’s side for a long time.

Robert Duncan: So how did that awareness of Jewish heritage shape your Catholic faith growing up?

Cardinal Czerny: We didn’t talk about it much. Partly because it was traumatic and so there wasn’t much motivation to sort of keep digging around in it. Partly because coming to a new country with a new language and new culture, there’s a very strong motivation to inculturate rather than to dwell in the past. And because of implicit, mostly implicit instinct that anti-Semitism is never over. It’s always ready to come back. And so we didn’t need to go through that again.

Robert Duncan: So there are a few... I want to get to your roles at the Vatican, the roles. But there are two very important chapters of your life in San Salvador and then Africa. And I wonder if there’s anything that maybe you would want to share in sort of a biographical broad sketch with people about how those two experiences prepared you for the role that you’ve had in Rome.

Cardinal Czerny: Well, that would take a thousand years to explain all that. I’m often astonished how my past has prepared me for my present. So that’s a long story. The two years in El Salvador were of course a very moving experience to step into the shoes of these Jesuit martyrs, to live in the same community where the women had been involved and to participate in the ending of the civil war. These are all very, very meaningful experiences. And that’s where maybe the human rights thing became explicit because my primary work at the university was as director of the Human Rights Institute. So I got very involved in that aspect. It became an important issue in terms of the relationship between the government and the opposition and an important instrument that the United Nations used to help bring about the peaceful settlement.

Robert Duncan: And then in Africa?

Cardinal Czerny: Well, that was another story. That’s a different story. So I went, in between the two, between El Salvador and Africa, I spent 11 years here in Rome as secretary for the social apostolate of the Jesuits. And towards the end of my time, one of my tasks was to help the Jesuits in Africa to figure out how they were going to respond to AIDS, which was just bursting at the end of the 90s, beginning of the 2000s. And so after two or three years of consultation and discussion and thinking, I came to the decision to establish a network amongst the Jesuits in Africa so that together we might face this issue of AIDS, supporting each other and learning from each other. And my responsibility here was to get us to that point. But then it got turned around and said, well, if you help create it, you may as well run it. So that’s how I ended up in Africa.

Robert Duncan: Was your work on combating AIDS in Africa informed by, and if so, what were the challenges taking Catholic teaching against contraception and trying to shape a response that was plausible in Africa?

Cardinal Czerny: Yeah, the contraception thing was more of a problem here in the North and the West than it was in Africa. The real issue in Africa was alienation, abandonment, trauma and semi-prejudice. In other words, a person got HIV and as if that wasn’t enough, they also became ostracized. And that became the real problem because that made everything else impossible. Kids would come home and confess to their families and be thrown out. And the fear was terrible. So the task was to, you might say, to face AIDS, not to run from it, to understand it well enough and to care for one another. And that’s what we tried to do. Our network wasn’t trying to persuade Jesuits to leave what they were doing originally and come and work on AIDS. It was to help them to face AIDS in whatever ministry they were already involved in, whether school or parish or retreat house or university.

Robert Duncan: So is that what you were doing on the eve of being called to Rome to work in Pope Francis’ Curia?

Cardinal Czerny: No, it was what I was doing, but I came to Rome in 2010. Pope Benedict was still Pope.

Robert Duncan: Oh, that’s right.

Cardinal Czerny: And I was his assistant to Cardinal Peter Turkson as President of Justice and Peace. And then after that came the new Dicastery and the Migrants and Refugees section.

Robert Duncan: What was, for people who don’t know, not maybe revolutionary — some people have described Pope Francis as revolutionary — but what was striking about the dedication of an office within that Dicastery to the migrants and refugee issue?

Cardinal Czerny: Well, I mean, in plain English, we might say that he was putting his money where his mouth was. He had clearly stood up for the migrants and refugees. He had taught significantly about them. He had made very moving and unforgettable gestures. But someone could ask, yeah, but what about your shop? And so one of his motivations, I think, in establishing the Migrants and Refugees section was to say, yes, here is our effort. Here’s what we can contribute. And along with my co-undersecretary, who is now Cardinal, also Cardinal, Fabio Baggio. So we developed an approach in which we tried to help the local churches to face the questions and challenges and opportunities of migrants and refugees.

Robert Duncan: A friend of mine who we both know, built, I think, the website — that was Matthew Sanders. And it was, I think, the most attractive Vatican website, at least for a while.

Cardinal Czerny: All compliments are welcome.

Robert Duncan: And it looked like, I mean, when something like that happens, when you get a new website, it looks like there’s a communications effort being made. To what extent did you and do you see the work of the Migrants and Refugees section of that dicastery as making a case politically in the communication space amid the rise of sort of more anti-immigration politics in Europe?

Cardinal Czerny: Yeah. No, you’re quite right to raise up that aspect because it is, you can’t reduce it to a communication problem, but communications is an important part of the problem and also the solution. And so an explicit challenge for our new Migrants and Refugees section was how could we deal with and respond to and, if possible, reduce the toxic rhetoric. And we were convinced, I think, right from the start that the only plausible response was good practice, positive stories, case studies. In other words, that we would be wasting our time to engage in the shouting match because, in fact, the shouting is not based on reality, it’s based on false ideas. And instead dedicate ourselves to telling the truth based on what people were actually living and doing. So the communication part was essential and we worked very hard on it. And, in fact, when COVID broke, we immediately started a special newsletter on how, in our sector of Migrants and Refugees, we were dealing also with COVID since that was, you might say, a cross-cutting challenge wherever you went and whatever you were doing. And I’m glad that our website made a good impression.

Robert Duncan: What challenges did you face internally in getting that project and those priorities of Pope Francis off the ground? Were there any?

Cardinal Czerny: Well, I suppose the big challenge was to get started simultaneously practically everywhere in the world. There’s no place in the world that’s not touched one way or the other by migration and refugee issues or questions. And in some cases it’s very difficult, in other cases it goes quite well, but all the situations deserve attention. And I think we recognize that for Church leadership, for bishops, for those who work with them in pastoral ministry, that these questions were sometimes quite new and quite sharp, quite urgent. What were some of the questions? Well, one of the best examples, I would say, is the church on two sides of a border. So you have a diocese on this side that belongs to the National Bishops’ Conference in this country, and they speak this language, and this is their tradition. And on the other side of the river, on the other side of the border, there’s a different diocese, they speak a different language, they belong to a different bishops’ conference in a different country. And you would think, well, these differences become part of the obstacle for the person who’s fleeing, the person who’s seeking refuge. Whereas if you put the two diocese together, if you help them to, let’s say, recognize each other as being really two parts of the same church on two sides of a border, you can practically make the border disappear. And that’s a great miracle of pastoral ministry in the migratory area, that we can’t solve the problem, that’s not our job, but we can help the migrants and refugees, the people who are fleeing, to live their experience in a more human way and to feel that the church is accompanying them. And not that they’re passing through a whole bunch of churches, but that basically they’re passing through one church, which cooperates in such a way that they can keep moving with at least some extra security and self-respect.

Robert Duncan: You have said that the migration and refugee fact of the matter is that it’s always been a part of the human story. And on the other hand, there’s this communications challenge today to speak to people about its importance and government leaders. How do you understand the situation? In other words, do you see the particular communications challenges as coming out of the 2014 Syrian refugee crisis, or do they have antecedents that go farther back? I mean, the particular political challenges of making the case for migrants and refugees.

Cardinal Czerny: Well, I mean, I don’t know if I understand fully, but I mean, why do we have to make a case for them? You know, why do we have to make a case for them?

Robert Duncan: Well, you said part of it’s a communications challenge.

Cardinal Czerny: Well, I know, but why? Why are we in this mess?

Robert Duncan: Why do you think we’re in the mess?

Cardinal Czerny: Because I think governments have lost their way and have, instead of exercising responsibility in dealing with the issue, they’re using scapegoating and stereotypes in order to try to wash their hands of it.

Robert Duncan: What do you think Pope Francis’ success was? I mean, he openly obviously made it a priority of the Catholic Church, and it seems that Pope Leo has continued this priority. But is it a lot of preaching that is falling on deaf ears?

Cardinal Czerny: Oh, no, no, no, no. Now you are part of the problem. No, it’s not falling on deaf ears. The large majority of Christians are responding. It’s a myth. It’s a false myth to associate us with this kind of blindness and deafness.

Robert Duncan: Who’s us in this case?

Cardinal Czerny: Well, you’re talking about Church people. In other words, this is the problem, is that the bad news prevails. And so you don’t know how many thousands and thousands and thousands of gestures of welcome. Pope Francis identified the four steps very clearly. Welcome, protect, promote and integrate. That’s what all of us are called to do for every person who is fleeing for their lives. And we’re committed to it as a human family by the Conventions on Refugees, which continue to be valid and which we are blithely ignoring.

Robert Duncan: Are there any challenges that are internal to the Church?

Cardinal Czerny: No, the same challenges internal to the Church as with every other important issue. That is that we need better education, better formation, more resources. And most of all, we need our faithful, our members, our baptized people to recognize their gospel responsibilities in the world. And these many different issues, whether the migrants and refugees or other marginalized or rejected people or the environment or human rights or drug trafficking, the list is very long, the ways in which sin plays out in reality. And that’s, we’re here to bring the Gospel.

Robert Duncan: Can you tell me about your pectoral cross?

Cardinal Czerny: So my pectoral cross is made from the wood of a migrant boat. And you can see the back too, it’s the old paint from the boat. So this is the wood of an old fishing boat that migrants would have used coming from Northern Africa. Probably from Tunisia or Libya, coming towards Lampedusa. And some of the boats arrived and never went back. Some of the boats crashed and fell apart. But this wood is now used by people, especially by Christians, as an expression of solidarity with the migrants trying to cross the Mediterranean. And so this cross is a contemporary crucifixion, it’s Jesus.

Robert Duncan: So it’s from an actual boat or from the wood that’s...

Cardinal Czerny: Yeah. Okay. You can see it was painted many times.

Robert Duncan: Those who say that Europe cannot accommodate the waves of migration, and there are complicated social and economic cases that can be made in that regard, there are some people worried that the crisis in Iran is going to dwarf the Syrian refugee crisis. Is this something that your office is preparing for, planning for, anticipating?

Cardinal Czerny: The basic point is that our work is not predicated on current affairs. We don’t look at the newspapers or listen to the media and say, ah, this is what we need to work on. Our work depends on the requests and concerns and needs of the church. And so we try to accompany the church wherever in the world there are tensions, struggles, challenges, especially ongoing difficulties. The Iranian, whatever you want to call it, let’s call it crisis, the Iranian crisis is very new. It’s premature to talk about refugees. And so no, we’re not preparing. What we do in our dicastery is to try to help the bishops and their co-workers wherever they are in the world with the problems that they actually have. And that’s what we do. So we’ll wait to see what, if anything, this particular war is going to bring up.

Robert Duncan: Is there ever news that, in regard to refugees and migration worldwide, that shakes your faith or that frustrates you?

Cardinal Czerny: Much of it frustrates me, but it doesn’t discourage me. I understand that given many social, economic, political, cultural, media factors, this is a difficult, it’s difficult. And our role is, as I said, is not to solve the problem. That’s a political responsibility. It’s people’s civic responsibility to solve the problem. And their faith hopefully motivates them to exercise their civic responsibility. But we are there to help the church to accompany the people in their need. And this is what we try to do. And no, I’m never discouraged about that because the Church is, I don’t think we’ve ever been in a situation where a church said, yeah, there’s these hordes of people who need help but we’re not interested. I’ve never heard of such a thing.

Robert Duncan: The message that was resounding all the time with Francis, and it’s been continued with Leo, is welcome. Is that a moral category or is that a, it also sounds like it has political consequences.

Cardinal Czerny: All of life has political consequences.

Robert Duncan: Or policy consequences.

Cardinal Czerny: All of life has policy consequences.

Robert Duncan: The hard work is implementing the policy in a way that’s sustainable and just and fair. Is the Church — does it have it too easy to be able to make the claim, you know, that welcome is the morally just attitude without proposing concrete policy?

Cardinal Czerny: The Church is not a policy machine. The Church proclaims or teaches or testifies to the importance of welcome and it welcomes. And it tries to help people to welcome.

Robert Duncan: But the question is how do we do that?

Cardinal Czerny: It depends who’s asking, you know. If you’re asking Christians how to help, you know, we can do it through our parish, we can do it through Caritas, we can do it through other projects and many people do. In Canada we have this private sponsorship program where parishes and other groups can sponsor refugees and take care of them. Which, as you know, reminds me of our own being sponsored when we needed to find someone to welcome us. And so there are many ways in which the Church can and does respond. And now under the special stresses there’s as much as possible, the Church is trying to protect people and help them to deal with their terrible insecurities and all the things that are so painful right now. But the responsibility for the borders, for quotas, for systems is the responsibility of the state.

Robert Duncan: Does the argument hold any water that there is a cultural limit of migration? I mean, concerns about Christian Europe or what would happen if too many Muslims came to Europe and what would that do to the long-term future? Do any of those arguments hold any water for you?

Cardinal Czerny: No.

Robert Duncan: Why is that?

Cardinal Czerny: Well, because they’re not real questions. They’re polemical. They’re based on caricatures and bogeymen. And if you’re having a problem relating with Muslims, solve the problem. Don’t then create a category of unwelcome people. And you can ask with some critical penetration about how migrants or refugees from Islamic countries have been welcomed and treated and what has happened and all that. And maybe there were big mistakes made and we’re facing the consequences. And those remain the responsibility of the state to resolve. But you’re not going to convince the church to say, well, in that case, they’re not welcome. We’ll never do that.

Robert Duncan: I’d like to move on and talk, if we could, about Laudato Si’ in the environment. I don’t know if you’ve ever been asked on camera, but you were rumored to have been, in large part, responsible for drafting that text. Is that true?

Cardinal Czerny: It’s a rumor. It’s a rumor.

Robert Duncan: I’ll take that as a yes. Who is the audience of Laudato Si’ and how did it make its argument, taking into account people’s sensitivities about that issue?

Cardinal Czerny: I would say the genius of Laudato Si’ was to treat the environment, well, it’s in the subtitle, as our common home, which is already a big step forward. And to, you might say, wash it of its greenness. In other words, wash it from a particular, you might say, ideological stance, legitimate as it might be in many contexts, but not necessarily for the Church. To wash it of its greenness and instead to understand it as a problem in basically all the other, in all the real social dimensions, including the economic, of course, the scientific, the spiritual, the communal, the aesthetic, et cetera. So it’s a real common home. It’s everything of what it means to live here on earth. And it’s not just, pardon to use the word, but it’s not just a green question.

Robert Duncan: Pope Francis talked about the technocratic paradigm and also with Pope Leo, we’re talking about technology — AI — as questions of moral discernment. Is the Church late to talking about technology as an ethical and spiritual domain?

Cardinal Czerny: I think if you look at issues from this point of view, what is their place in the worldwide discourse and who’s talking about it and so forth, I suspect that we’re always late. We’re always late and I would say God bless us. We don’t need another voice, you know, trying to figure out what we’re talking about. It’s not our job. We are not the UN. We’re not a think tank. We’re not a first class university. Let them do that. Go talk to them if you want to know what’s the cutting edge. That’s not our problem. Our problem is how to live the faith in this world.

Robert Duncan: So what made it an issue?

Cardinal Czerny: Well, because it was obviously an accumulating problem and it was even though a reasonable person would say, well, if the human race is making this huge mistake, they’re going to correct it. Apparently, we don’t have that rational capacity. So it’s getting worse and worse and more and more dangerous and more and more dangerous for people who otherwise don’t have a voice. So those are all reasons for the Church to speak up.

Robert Duncan: There’s Borgo Laudato Si’ in Castel Gandolfo, and Father Manuel Dorantes was saying how — he was making a case that this is actually a way to evangelize because if you listen to young people, Gen Z, there’s a lot of concern for the environment. And I’m sure there wasn’t a cold political calculation that this is how we could get people interested in the Church again. But have you seen evidence that the Church’s relatively recent focus on the environment has had an effect on attracting young people to the Church?

Cardinal Czerny: As far as I know, yeah, I think so. You have to ask the bishops, you know, in their respective countries to get a good sense of that. But I’m pretty sure it’s true, yeah. And it’s true, you know, we have this very beautiful experience, I don’t know if your listeners know about it, the Laudato Si’ Action Platform, which is a place online where people can get together to work out their concerns about the environment and find good ways to respond together. And it’s organized according to sectors for families and for parishes and for schools and for businesses and so on. Anyway, that to me is a great sign of people’s desire and willingness and generosity to get a hold of this thing and wisely thinking we’d best do it together.

Robert Duncan: There is a perception that we’ve talked about, Pope Francis inaugurated the Migrants and Refugees section. Even though Pope Benedict also spoke about the environment in a very important way, Laudato Si’ was a step forward. And Pope Leo is talking about AI, and he chose his name in part because of Pope Leo XIII and social issues in general. From the outside, it might look like the Catholic Church is trying to do a rebrand. Like the primary issues are social. Some people have claimed that theology has taken a bit of a backseat, and the Church’s primary role in the world is horizontal. This is a story. Do you think there’s any truth to that story? And if not, how can you, how would you persuade people that these are indeed the core issues that should occupy the minds of Christians today?

Cardinal Czerny: The issues are so many ways of living our faith. What the Church is concerned, and the Church’s brief, is to help us to live the Gospel in our time, with our brothers and sisters. And so, I think we will always be coming late to issues. It will always be looking at, we suddenly discovered the wheel, and everybody else already knows. But that’s fine. It doesn’t really matter. Because the real question is not, were we the first to think of it, or are we part of the cutting-edge discussion? That’s not our business. That’s not what we’re for. What we’re for is to help people to live their faith authentically and evangelically in this world and thereafter. And so, the real question is, what help do people need to live their faith? That’s the real question. And if you’re in California, and reality all around you is burning, you need help to live your faith in that context, and making your struggle to survive and to protect your life and the life of your community, that’s part of your faith. It’s not a sideshow. The theoretical, ontological, metaphysical questions are all aids and supports to help us to live, and to live as humanly and as fully as possible, which in terms of our dicastery is called integral human development. So everything is supposed to help us to do that. And unfortunately, many people are excluded. Many people are abused and exploited. And our common home is in danger. And we’re doing a very bad job of treating each other humanly. But these are all questions of faith, and questions of morality, if you want, and questions of practice.

Robert Duncan: Maybe I’d like to wrap up with a few questions that are more personal. What is it like to be a cardinal? For people who maybe don’t know much about the Church, do you feel that people see you in a particular way? A lot of people think the Church and cardinals are very rich. Or do you feel that people want you for access to the Pope?

Cardinal Czerny: To be a cardinal, honestly, to be a cardinal is to have a special calling, a special invitation, a special designation to help the Holy Father. That’s what we exist for. When I became a cardinal, I gave myself five years to figure out the answer to your question. Now I’m in my seventh, but I’m still not ready to answer your question. I don’t know what it means. No, seriously, it’s a wonderful opportunity. It was great to be able to work with Pope Francis, and it is great to work with Pope Leo. And that’s what we’re for. Within the somewhat complex structure of the Church, to have a few people who are really somehow specially dedicated to helping the Holy Father to carry out his mission, I think it’s really cool.

Robert Duncan: What are your hopes for the way you will carry out Pope Leo’s vision of the Church? Do you feel it’s in continuity with what you’ve been doing?

Cardinal Czerny: Oh, sure, sure, sure, sure. No, because the Holy Father is not the custodian of issues. The Holy Father is the custodian of the Gospel and of our response, living the Gospel as Church. He’s the successor of St. Peter. He’s not a world guru or a world professor or a world politician. So, yes, each person has their gifts, and so whatever I can bring to helping him, I’m really happy to do that. And I do have now some experience here also in the Vatican, so that’s of some help. But also just having had the wonderful life I’ve had and living and working in different places and doing things like we’ve talked about, it’s all a contribution, I guess.

Robert Duncan: I asked you at the beginning of the interview about the reframing of questions. You did that a couple of times to me, which I’m grateful for. I wonder, what are the things that Catholics are not talking about that you wish we would talk about more?

Cardinal Czerny: I wish we would... I mean, there’s a one-word answer, and I haven’t given it yet, but I can give it now, and the answer is synod. I wish we would live and therefore talk about the synodal process more, more and more and more. And before you ask, I will tell you, no, I’m not impatient. I think we’ve made a very good start. These things take a while. Rushing is not going to help. But if you ask me what I wish for, I really wish that every parish, every Christian, every person responsible in the church, whether ordained or not, every church leader, whether bishop or others, that we all get involved, each according to our calling in the synodal process. And that would answer most of the questions you asked me.

Robert Duncan: I’m hoping that people who are not Catholic are also listening to this podcast, and synodality may sound like church speak to them. What does this process that the Church is going through and has been going through for some years now have to do with, or does it have to do with the wider world?

Cardinal Czerny: I would suggest that the people who are listening who don’t know what the word synod means is ask themselves, is anyone listening to me? Is anyone listening to me? And what synodality intends to do is to help the different parts or elements or components of the church to listen to one another so that together we may find how Jesus is calling us to live our faith and how we are supposed to help and serve the world. So Pope Francis went quite far. He said that listening was not only the first step, it was also the solution. And of all the difficult things we talked about during this interview, you could go back at each one and say, now what would happen to this issue if we listened? And I think you’d see that we would find our way forward. But as we tend not to listen, which is part of the human condition, it’s sin at work in us, so we need help. And the synodal process, the effort to be a Church that moves forward by listening is a very great step forward.

Robert Duncan: What do you think we will hear? What will we hear if we listen?

Cardinal Czerny: We’ll hear the, it’s like asking, what do you hear when you hear a symphony? That’s the answer.

Robert Duncan: Cardinal Michael Czerny, thanks for your time.

Cardinal Czerny: You’re very welcome.

In this conversation, we discuss:

• His childhood and rise in international investment banking

• How faith shaped his understanding of leadership, responsibility, and success

• The founding vision behind the Genesis Foundation and its focus on human dignity

• His collaboration with Vatican figures on projects in human rights, education, and the arts

• The story behind Angels Unawares, the sacred composition by Sir James MacMillan performed in the Sistine Chapel

• What it means to live with an awareness of the unseen — and how that informs a life of generosity

This isn’t just about philanthropy—it’s about what it looks like to take faith seriously in public life.

Transcript

Intro: John Studzinski is one of the world’s leading investment bankers and a philanthropist whose work, often in collaboration with Vatican officials, has supported initiatives in human rights, charitable outreach, and the arts. Born to Polish Catholic parents in the United States, he now divides his time between New York and London, where he remains an active presence in global finance. A trusted advisor and longtime friend to popes and cardinals, Studzinski recently marked his 70th birthday in Rome with a notable gesture: through his Genesis Foundation, he commissioned a new work of sacred music by Sir James MacMillan, Angels Unawares, performed in the Sistine Chapel and scheduled for broadcast on the BBC. In this conversation with Catholic News Service, we explore his early desire to serve those in need, his rise on Wall Street, and the deeper philosophy that underpins his philanthropy. As the title of his recent concert suggests, Studzinski’s vision is shaped by an awareness of the unseen—the angels, and the forces of light and darkness, that accompany human life. It is a vision that calls each of us to generosity, echoing the reminder of Scripture: we do not know when we may be entertaining angels unawares.

Robert Duncan: John Studzinski, thank you for sitting down with Catholic News Service.

John Studzinski: Great to be here. Thank you.

Robert Duncan: I want to start with what may sound like a difficult question and a challenge, but I think it’s something probably you’ve thought about a lot over your life and probably have a very interesting perspective on. So in the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus says that it is harder for a camel to enter into the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God. As a very successful person in finance, what does that mean to you? And how has that warning, challenge, statement of Jesus affected your spiritual life?

John Studzinski: Well, I’m a long-time student and fan of the parables. And that, of course, is a powerful parable. And, of course, when you go to that part of Jerusalem, you understand what it means. The needle is not a needle, but it is, in fact, a challenging place through which a camel would go. Like all the parables, they’re not meant to be absolute. They’re teaching exercises. And I think in the context of that, not dissimilar from the rich man who ignores Lazarus and wants his siblings to be referenced. And the reference from above is, if they don’t pay attention to the Scriptures through Moses and Elijah and others, then they’re wasting their time. I’ve always looked at the Scriptures and that particular parable through the words of, to those who’ve been given much, or to whom much has been given, much is expected. And to those who’ve been given more, even more is expected. So I’ve always felt that there was a bit of a cross to carry early on. Now, the good news is, I grew up in a working-class, blue-collar, Polish Catholic family. And the first thing I did when I was six years old, when I noticed we had a community of Polish women who were very good at cooking and had a great sense of community, and there was a tribe there, I said to my mother when we kept seeing all these people in the streets of Boston, why don’t we have all these people, why don’t we, on Saturday nights, invite all these homeless people for supper?

Robert Duncan: This was your idea?

John Studzinski: At the age of six, because I was— my mother, of course, she knew there was something up, because the previous year, when I started nursery school, I came home and I said, I was so enthusiastic, because it was May Day and we were celebrating the Virgin Mary, and I came in and said, great group of people, we had a great celebration, and my mother said, how many? She said, I said, 22. And she said, well, at some point, I’ll look forward to meeting them. And I said, well, actually, you will meet them, because I’ve invited them all to supper next Monday night. And she then knew that this child was not exactly going to be very straightforward about being a passive child in terms of certain types of work. And so I became very, very focused on— because my mother taught me early on, you should be prepared to give the shirt off your back. So I grew up in this mindset that despite the fact that we were, for the most part, working class and didn’t have very much money, it was necessary and it was an obligation. And it wasn’t just because of faith and Christianity. It was just part of respecting human dignity. And then, of course, later on, you associate human dignity with the face of Christ.

Robert Duncan: Do you have any idea where that came from? I mean, I sometimes wondered why I, more than some of my peers, had questions in Sunday school growing up about theological matters when we were all receiving the same instruction. Do you have a sense of why at that young age…?

John Studzinski: I think, you know, this is—and, of course, we’re getting into lots of debates today about what comes from above. And, you know, I think that even at a young age, the Holy Spirit is active and one has divine and creative inspiration. And I had a very strong feeling. I was conscious of the fact that I was born on St. Joseph’s Day, March 19th.

Robert Duncan: Happy early birthday.

John Studzinski: Thank you. And I was conscious of the fact that I was a child that was not expected. In other words, my mother had already had a child and was told she would have no more children. But being very devout, she prayed. And I was also conscious of the fact, having studied my catechism probably prematurely, that I arrived in a blizzard and my mother had to walk several miles. And then I was born almost immediately. And then it was—so fairly dramatic people arrive in dramatic circumstances. So from that point, I was—my mother always felt that— so St. Joseph was my patron, that he would always watch out for me. And he has. He’s been very close to me. And so I’ve always been very conscious of that identity and, if you will, that role model.

Robert Duncan: I would like to focus on the reason why you’re in Rome. But maybe for listeners who don’t know who you are, how did you, in sort of a 30,000-foot view, get from this young boy who had an inclination to invite the homeless over for dinner to the success you had in business and finance and the beginnings of your philanthropic work?

John Studzinski: Well, I’ve been on Wall Street for 45 years. In university, I studied biochemistry and sociology. I was expecting, and I went for a short period of time to medical school. But I felt that most of the people in medical school were more interested in saving themselves than saving society. So I left and went to business school and law school. And then I was rather serendipitously hired by Morgan Stanley. I stayed in Morgan Stanley. And I remember they actually recruited me in those wonderful interviews where someone says, why do you want to be an investment banker on Wall Street? I said, well, you invited me. I did not ask to be here. So tell me why I should be an investment banker.

Robert Duncan: I read that you were one of the first Catholics at Morgan Stanley.

John Studzinski: You’ve got good research. That’s true. And I remember walking in, and I also remember that I worked. I was very disciplined. I’ve always been focused on time management because I think time is the most precious gift from God. So you can never, ever abuse time.

And I would always go to 7 o’clock Mass at St. Patrick’s Cathedral. And now I’m on the board of St. Patrick’s Cathedral. So that was quite auspicious that I would continue to stay involved but in a broader capacity. So I was. But I decided to become an investment banker because I thought it was about advising people. And it was about giving trusted advice to people. And I like people. And it was about allocating advice, allocating resources. Of course, investment banking is at the crossroads of capital. You stand between the sources of capital and the uses of capital. So you become, whether you’re an investment banker or an asset manager or an investor, you play a pivotal role in society. So I thought this was a very interesting place to be because I met a gamut of people. But I always made sure that I devoted enough time to my faith and I devoted enough time to other things like arts and culture and certain types of community work, which meant, of course, that you could fill 15 to 18 hours a day with a whole range of things. But I’m still on Wall Street. I love Wall Street because I’ve met and — I’ve lived in London now for the last 40 years — I’ve met an extraordinary group of people. And the more people you meet, the more you realize there’s just such a beautiful, rich universe of people.

And people are interested in you for so many reasons. I think people know the story of, I was at Morgan Stanley for 23 years. Then I was briefly at HSBC for four years running the wholesale bank. Then I was recruited by Blackstone and I was there for 15 years. And one day when I was at Blackstone, my assistant comes in, Wendy, who’s still working with me, and she says, the office of Mr. Lee Kuan Yew would like to come and call on you when he’s in New York next month. And I said, that sounds very interesting, but I’m not the head of Blackstone. That’s Steve Schwartzman. I think he should see Mr. Schwartzman. He doesn’t need to see me. He’s president of Singapore. She comes back, and this story has a purpose. She comes back and says, he wants to see you. So he comes on his own and he said, I’ve read a lot about you and your relationship on Wall Street, but your whole focus on prayer and meditation and how you use prayer and meditation to think and to relax and to work with people. And can you give me a brief tutorial on that? He wasn’t there to talk about business. He wanted to understand how I related my faith to my business. And he is a Buddhist. So I thought that was fascinating. And what I’ve discovered in my 45 years is, people want to do business with you often for the reasons that have principally nothing to do with business, but to do with your personality, your faith. Perhaps you’re interested in charity or something else. So people want to see the holistic side of you. And many of my clients that I worked with in the last 40 years still are fascinated by wanting to better understand God.

Robert Duncan: It’s not the classic picture of Wall Street that you get from cinema and popular culture. Are you an exception to the rule or is the image mistaken?

John Studzinski: You’re talking about Wall Street and show me the money. Right. Money talks, bullshit walks. That’s right. There’s a gamut of people on Wall Street. But remember, it’s like anything else. Wall Street is a cross-section of the human condition. There are lots of people who are very focused on power and money, people who are focused on success, people who are sharp-elbowed. And I’ve always believed, and often when I’m, and I lecture on a number of private equity and governance classes at different schools in America, and I often go to Teresa of Avila. When I really think I’m dealing with a very tough crowd, I say, you know, Teresa of Avila really understands people like you. And they say, what do you mean? And then I have to explain that she was a Spanish mystic, 16th century. I say, one of her more profound expressions, and I don’t know if you know this expression, but you’re welcome to use it. The devil enters your soul through your ego. And I’ve used that so much. And when you actually use it with someone who is very narcissistic or egocentrical or power-driven, people realize when you say it that perhaps your ego is your own downfall.

Robert Duncan: I was listening to a podcast of you talking about when you wake up quite early, and you mentioned the fact that you don’t wake up at three o’clock, even though you know that some people believe that waking up at three is the best time to pray, to combat dark spiritual forces. And you’ve just mentioned the devil. Because of your domain of work and money and finance, do you feel maybe particularly sensitively the battle between light and darkness in this world?

John Studzinski: It’s very real. And I’m witnessing a couple of situations right now in the world where there are some very dark characters who know they’re dark and are conscious of playing a role they’re playing. And I’m focused on prayer, and I’m focusing on prayer around those people. So I am focused on that. And God has given me many gifts, but the Holy Spirit often guides me when I hear people or see people and spend enough time with people where I sense a dark agenda. There’s no question that the devil and the supernatural is very rife at the moment. You can see it across the world, given a lot of the things that are happening.

Robert Duncan: I want to come back to that because it seems to me part of the theme of the concert, that of angels being all around us, and that would include demons and dark forces. But before we get there, I want to get to the beginning of Genesis Foundation and also, I think, for people for whom this is their introduction to you.

John Studzinski: The Genesis of Genesis.

Robert Duncan: The Genesis of Genesis, but also the car crash, which is such an important part of your life. So I’m not sure if the car crash and the foundation were causally related, but the car crash came first. Is that right?

John Studzinski: The — Genesis — this is interesting. You’re the first person that asked me to link the two. The car crash took place when I was in May of 1987. Genesis was founded in 2001, so it’s a lag of about 10 years. There was a lot of work going on that probably sowed the seeds of Genesis, but the car crash was very much driven by I was doing my day job, and I was on the autobahn in a Mercedes with my seat belt on in the back seat, and there was a group of cars around. It was 4 o’clock in the afternoon, 4.15 in the afternoon, and there had just been a very heavy downpour, thunderstorm. And the German word is aquaplana, which is water planing or hydroplaning, and there was so much water that accumulated on the autobahn very quickly that a number of cars lost control, and there were several cars that were going far too fast. Of course, if you’ve ever been on the autobahn, it’s a very well-made road. It’s some of the best spent money of the European Union, but this was a good example of when going too fast. And there was a nine-car crash, no survivors. I was the only survivor.

So my driver, who I developed a really good rapport with, it was very shocking because he went through the windshield, and he died. And then I had a very strong experience after that. It was that day, but then I think probably what you’re referring to is I was in intensive care, and I actually found that fascinating, being in intensive care with having lost a lung. And then it was very interesting because I was taken to the Hertz Institute. They did all the x-rays, and the doctor came back and said, well, we’ve got to take out your lung, one of your lungs. Your other lung is very full of fluid. We don’t know. We’ll have to put you on a life support system. And you’ve broken all your ribs in three places, and your left arm is broken in 63 pieces. So we’ll have to have two separate surgeries. And I didn’t have my parents with me, or I didn’t have any friends with me. I was on my own. So I looked at them, and I said, well, I said, here’s what we’re going to do. We’re going to do both operations at once, even if it’s 14, 18 hours. We’re going to pray, and I’ll sign a piece of paper right now that basically just says that if I die, it’s my decision. There’s no negligence. And this is one of these things in life where you must give it to God. And I survived the operation. My mother arrived the following day and told me I was out of my mind for being- and I looked at her and I said, you know, you’ve got to give it to God. This was God. God had to decide, do I live or die? And I lived.

John Studzinski: So eight days later, I’m still on this life support system. The doctor walks in, and he was a fairly- he was the orthopedic surgeon for the German Olympic Committee, and he was quite a sort of- what you’d say is a sort of tough, male, macho type. And he walked in, and he had a medicine ball with him, and he threw the medicine ball right in my face and said, everyone here has noticed, and I’ve noticed, that you pray, and you’re clearly very devout. And he’d also noticed that Basil Hume, Cardinal Hume, had come from London to see me, and actually to give me last rites in case I passed away. And he said, I’m going to give you this medicine ball. I want you to try to inflate it, and I have a feeling you will inflate it, because I want you to pray and inflate that ball. It’ll take you about an hour, if you can inflate it. And he said, and if you don’t inflate it, you’ll be on the life support system the rest of your life. And I said, okay. And I decided it was a- this was before John Paul II created the Luminous Mysteries, and I think it was- I don’t know what day of the week it was, but I decided the Glorious Mysteries I would pray. So I just prayed the rosary. I just said, okay, it’s time for the rosary, and I inflated my lung after about 40 minutes. And when you have that experience, it just reconfirms you have a purpose in life. We all have a purpose in life, and this is one of the things I’ve learned with the Genesis Foundation, but also my recent book called A Talent for Giving, which is everyone has talent that God has given them. It doesn’t come from them. It comes from God, but it’s up to them to find the right tools to nurture that talent. And I decided, okay, it’s time to put some more of my talents to use for the broader good.

Robert Duncan: So am I right in thinking that the Genesis Foundation has a particular focus on the arts?

John Studzinski: The Genesis Foundation is focused on giving artists, creatives, their first break or their first commission, their first opportunity to learn how to write a play, how to write a piece of music. Sir James McMillan, who has been a partner to the Genesis Foundation and to me for 20-plus years, he’s now a very good friend, he’s been one of our first people that we’ve supported. Because think back in your own life when you started your media career. There were probably two or three people who gave you your first internship, your first job, your first opportunity. And what I’m really interested in is one of my dear friends is an actress in the UK, Janet Sussman, and we were talking one day, we’d gone to see a Chekhov play, and we were talking one day about the Cherry Orchard and some of the people in the Cherry Orchard and some of the characters. And she said something which really struck me. She said, you know, it’s very important, the arts are such an important but fragile area. We can’t just have people in this economic environment coming from the upper middle class. If you really want the arts to be a rich place, they have to come from all levels of society. And I thought at that point, let’s create a foundation that creates commissions for people, particularly people, because if you’re from an upper middle class family, you probably know people who are in the arts. You probably have a network. You probably have financial resources. You probably can do a job and not necessarily need to be paid. But that’s also not the real world. The real world has to do a job and also doesn’t always have the social confidence or the self-confidence to get engaged. So ironically, the first thing we commissioned was a piece of sacred music. I was having a real taffy pull, an argument with Basil Hume about giving him a party for his 75th birthday because he was a Benedictine, he was very austere, focused on the poor, but focused on Benedictine values and lifestyle. So I said, okay, how am I going to get him to let us give him a party? So I thought, then I had met, somewhat serendipitously, an emerging young composer, Roxanna Panufnik, whose father was Andrzej Panufnik, the Polish composer. She had just converted to become a Catholic. And I then thought, hmm, when’s the last time Westminster Cathedral in London had a mass commissioned for Westminster Cathedral? And then I looked back and it wasn’t until Ralph Vaughan Williams had written something almost 100 years ago. So I thought, okay, I talked to Roxanna, said, could we commission you to write a Westminster Mass? And I used that as a tactic to get Basil Hume to give, you know, we’d have the debut, we’d have a mass, and we’d use it also as his gift. And he taught me something really important. He said, I will agree to this mass, to this piece of music to be commissioned in my name if you score it not just for orchestra, but you also score it for simple church organ, so that people can play it around the UK. And I learned a lot at that point, because he was taking my vision of Genesis and looking at on the user side and saying, okay, we can’t have these grand spiritual orchestral things that no one’s going to have access to in terms of putting them on, it’s too expensive. And that was a good leveler for me. So we did. And that was the first pilot of the Genesis Foundation where we had a new composer, a commission, profile, PR, newly converted Catholic, Basil Hume celebrating his 75th birthday, and the celebration. So, and that became the basis for if Genesis can do things that help people, but also have a broader impact, I mean, the way what we’re doing this Sunday has a much broader impact and does many more things. Proper commissions should have multiple purposes.

Robert Duncan: So I just want to get a sense of your vision, philanthropic vision. So do you see sort of different domains when giving to the poor or the homeless and the arts, or do you see a kind of unity between both of these domains?

John Studzinski: It’s important, if we’re going to get on as friends long term, that you not think about the world in terms of a bunch of collection boxes. The world is not a bunch of collection boxes. You have to start with values. And my principal focus is protecting, respecting, and in many cases, nurturing human dignity.

So whether I’m working with the homeless in the night shelter, I was involved in starting the passage with Basil Hume in Westminster, or whether I’m involved in helping a young artist with their first commission, that’s also an element of helping their dignity. Or whether we work with, you talked about Michael Czerny. Michael Czerny, Cardinal Czerny, 10 years ago, asked me to get involved with Talitha Kum here in London per Pope Francis because he says they need someone to work with them like you who can really focus more systematically on modern slavery and human trafficking. And I’ve subsequently set up another foundation, Arise, which deals with that. So that also deals with human dignity. And at one point I was chair of Human Rights Watch. Again, human rights, human dignity. So everything comes down to human dignity. And that, for me, is very, very close to my faith because man was only given his or her dignity by virtue of God sending his son to the earth and Jesus Christ being God and man. And the God part of Christ is what basically gives man his or her dignity. And that is something we all must pay attention to. I think people forget, particularly in this day and age, and we’re seeing this a lot now with adolescents, we’ve done a fabulous, powerful, compelling new opera which I’ll ask Cecile to send you the link, and maybe you could actually, it might be something you put on, it’s called Angels on the Underground, which deals with a homeless man who encounters three angels, all of whom are different types of angels, and he’s contemplating, he’s going through depression, and he’s contemplating suicide on the underground. It’s about a 35-minute video. It’s very powerful. But again, it deals with the issue of mental illness, which is one of the bigger problems we have. It’s probably always been a big problem, but we’re just very conscious of it today in the Jonathan Haidt version of the age of anxiety.

Robert Duncan: Your fascination with angels. I mean, Catholics, of course, pray to angels. It says that in our catechism. In theory, we do that. But most often I hear people either praying to God, to Jesus, to Mary, the saints, but it seems somewhat more rare to me to have someone who is focused on the supernatural realm and the angels specifically as part of — you know, guardian angels, of course, we know this. But where did your fascination for that layer of the supernatural come from?

John Studzinski: Well, first of all, angels aren’t just in Catholic or Christian scriptures. You can find angels in Greek and Roman literature, poetry, and you also find angels among other faiths as well.

Robert Duncan: What do you think they are?

John Studzinski: Well, let’s be clear. First of all, I don’t want to unpack some of the things you said earlier, but you don’t pray to saints. You don’t pray to angels. You pray to God. You ask for the intercession of a saint. You ask for the guidance. And remember, all angels refer directly. All angels get their power and their reference. And whether they’re a messenger, a mentor... Or a warrior, they all get their guidance and their instructions from the Holy Spirit. That is absolutely true. And I’ve got a very close relationship with my guardian angel, and I think everybody should spend more time either in meditation or prayer. Because I think there’s a... And I’m not saying this to make you laugh or to make people laugh, but I think a lot of guardian angels are quite disappointed because it’s a bit like a great resource that many people don’t use.

I mean, the most powerful time to use a guardian angel and to rely on a guardian angel is the point of the offertory in the Mass when you want to offer your gifts to God. And whether it’s your thanking God or glorifying God or giving some other gift to God, you’re bringing your gifts to God, but you’re asking your guardian angel to present your gifts on the altar. And when I think of the number of guardian angels that are standing in the back of the church that don’t have any gifts to present because no one had asked them to present them, you’re smiling at me. I’m not trying to be funny. I’m dead serious.

Robert Duncan: Did the prayer to the guardian angel, is that something that was encouraged in your nightly prayer as a child? When you were young? Or did the awareness of the angelic realm, let’s say, grow as you grew?

John Studzinski: Guardian angels, I’ve always been conscious of mystical things in my life. So I always felt the presence of things. I mean, I’ve had examples of things. The car accident we talked about where I had access to a mobile phone. These two, they were allegedly American soldiers who I thought appeared, gave me a, at the time, this is the time when there was like the walkie-talkie large Nokia mobile phones that looked like the size of a club, gave me one of those. And then I turned to thank them and they were gone. The mobile phone existed. And then they went, because finally when we had to go to court and testify about the accident, because I was the only one who was there, I had a mystical experience. After these two characters left, I was able to look down and see the entire arrangement of all the nine cars. So we were, when we went to court, I was very clear. I sort of drew, I went to a chalkboard, well, it was a big whiteboard, and I drew for the entire court because it was basically a group of insurance companies that were all suing each other for who was liable for the accident. And I said, and I was very clear on where all nine cars were. The judge said, given you were sitting in the car, it would have been physically impossible for you to know what you drew. And I said, well, what I drew, I drew. So I had that experience. I also had the experience that the mobile phone, they were trying to trace as witnesses these two soldiers. The mobile phone was certified to two people who didn’t exist. So I’ve also had many other experiences. The guardian angel does, if you give the guardian angel time, you do have insights that guardian angels share with you.

Robert Duncan: I think it’s important to talk about your view of the angelic realm because of the reason you’re here now is that this concert is named after. Would you talk a bit about that?

John Studzinski: This is a world premiere in the Sistine Chapel of a new piece of music called Angels Unawares. It’s dealing with angels in the Old Testament and the New Testament, angels as mentors, messengers, motivators, guardians, and warriors, and people who love us. It focuses on 12 sequences, six from the Old Testament, six from the New Testament. And actually, they’re fabulous sequences. I mean, you start, of course, with some of the early references to angels in the Old Testament. And then, of course, you end with the great John Book of Revelation as the 12th tableau, which is very, very powerful and, of course, one of the most mystical things ever written in so many different ways of interpreting it. It’s written by Sir James MacMillan, who is Catholic, Scottish, and he’s written a number of other things with us before. We also commissioned him to write what I think is one of the most powerful, dramatic Stabat Mater. And the reason I asked him to do the Stabat Mater is I was sick and tired of hearing the Rossini Stabat Mater, which I thought was like a chocolate box. Stabat Mater is a serious subject. It doesn’t belong in a chocolate box. And even the Pergolesi, which everyone hears, is a little too romantic. The Stabat Mater is a serious subject. It’s standing at the foot of the cross as Christ dies.

This is about the most dramatic moment in man’s history. And I just felt it was time to have a piece of music that reflected the reality of that, and not just sugarcoating it. He wrote a very powerful piece. And I remember when I was talking to James about it, we were in a panel discussion with the BBC when it debuted, and the BBC interviewer said to James, so how do you channel the divine when you’re writing a piece of sacred music? And he says, it’s really hard to do that. I don’t always do that. James is a great composer. He’s very humble. And I rolled my eyes, and she looked at me, and she said, John, you’re rolling your eyes. Why are you so... And I said, let’s just get one thing straight here. You don’t decide you’re going to channel the divine. The divine decides who the divine is going to use as their vehicles. And James has been chosen to channel the divine, and his writing reflects it. It’s the whole notion of wisdom cannot be discovered. Wisdom is revealed. Wisdom and creativity are revealed by God. And that’s very clear. This commission, it’s 70 minutes. It comes from the scripture, Hebrews 13, of how we encounter angels often in our daily lives in different circumstances, and we’re perhaps unaware that angels...

And that’s why I always liked the notion that many of us have encountered angels for different reasons. Certainly I have. You have, whether you want to acknowledge it or not. And many people have. I’ve had people sit down next to me at a dinner party, and they sort of look at me and think, oh, I’m sitting next to this serious Catholic. And they say, so I understand you believe in God. And I say, well, yes.

Robert Duncan: At English dinner parties.

John Studzinski: At English dinner parties. I said, I do believe in God. I said, well, tell me something. When’s the last time you were in the presence of God? And they say, what do you mean? And I said, all of us have moments in our lives when God, the presence of God, is profound. And actually, you know, it’s an interesting exercise because people, I would say in 8 out of 10 cases, people start thinking carefully and inevitably find moments. And these are people who are often agnostic or atheist, find moments when they have had an experience or something that they’ve always wanted to talk about but were afraid of it or didn’t really know how to unpack it. So this commission, it’s a piece of sacred music. And James has written it to be accessible, which means even though it’s going to be written for an orchestra, two vocalists with a big emphasis on which two instruments would you associate with angels. Obviously the harp, but also the trumpet. So we’ll hear both instruments. But also, in looking back at the history of music in the last 2,000 years, sacred music, there have not been any major pieces of, there’s Tobias and the Angel in the opera world, but there have not been any major pieces of music dedicated to the holy angels. Because I feel as though people all have angels in their lives. Most people don’t recognize it. And the angels play a very constructive role at helping people provide almost a bigger foundation and a framework for their faith.

Robert Duncan: We don’t have that much time left, but I feel like we’ve only just built a foundation for which I could ask you a lot of the questions I’m really interested in. But I think it would be helpful to maybe use these last minutes to talk about some practical things you’ve learned through your charitable giving. I mean, one thing that occurs to me that might be a question would be, well, if I had more money, it would be easy to give and to be charitable. But my budget is tight. So is that true? Have you found it easy? Has it been hard still to…?

John Studzinski: No, no, no. That is the wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong. That is not what you want to be talking about. I’m trying to turn. You’ve got to think about philanthropy from two different ways. There’s enormous wealth in the world right now. The top 1% is just continuing to do brilliantly in this K-shaped economy. That’s great. They will continue to build buildings, museums, universities. Many of them will create the next artificial intelligence universe and all of that. Real philanthropy, I think, stems from people rethinking their lifestyle. And that’s the whole origin of my book, A Talent For Giving. I’m very interested in everyone.

Look at your own time, for example. You have treasure. You just told me you don’t have a lot of treasure. Fine.

Robert Duncan: I was speaking for everybody.

John Studzinski: Well, everyone listening, park your treasure. But you have time. You have talent. Young people are exceptionally good at ties and convening. They’re very good at technology. I’ve just written a new chapter on what I call tone for the paperback that’s coming out in the fall, which has to do with following up on that Maya Angelou quote about it’s not what you give, it’s not what you tell somebody, but it’s how you make them feel. And so much about giving and how you work with people that you’re giving things to. And one of the biggest elements of giving today is something which people overlook too much now, and that’s the power of two, which is mentoring. And I actually believe that real philanthropy is about partnership, long-term, about helping people, teaching people to fish, not giving them a fish. Giving people a fish is a transaction. It’s great. A lot of people need fish. They need to live. They need a place to sleep. They need clothes. They need health care. That’s part, that’s charity, and that’s important. Catholic charities, I do a lot with Catholic charities in New York City, Al Smith dinner every year, St. Patrick’s, all that. But there’s also teaching people to fish because it has that other element of enhancing their self-esteem and their dignity. And remember, philanthropy has to be about this notion: You have what you gave, you had what you spent, and you lost what you kept.

And everything you give in your life, whether it’s even time, that’s something you carry with you as part of your human balance sheet for God, and I do believe that. So I think I’m trying to encourage people to rethink giving. Money is there. Money is important. Money is a tool, but it should not be the first step. It should be talent, time, and other things that you have in your universe.

Robert Duncan: I had just one more question before we close, and that’s there has been with the last two popes in particular — although of course you can make a case that it’s very much in the papal teaching tradition — with Pope Francis and Pope Leo now of a focus on the poor and a focus on the people on the margins. And I know from reading about you that you have had friendships with these popes. How are they challenging people in general, and how do you feel challenged or invigorated perhaps by this new emphasis or this particular emphasis that they put on charity and people on the margins?

John Studzinski: Well, first of all, it’s nothing new. When we founded the passage, I had hammered into my head by these very formidable sisters. Whenever I was trying to sort of feed the poor and rehabilitate them, they would remind me that, you know, and there is an interesting model. Homeless people up until the age of 40, many of them, unless they have a mental illness problem, and the data is different, but let’s say 15, 20% of the people have a mental illness problem. The rest can be given some type of work training, something about life skills, something to get them back on their feet. So I do believe the poor will always be with us, though, and there’s a role to play at taking care of them, but I also believe that you can’t patronize them. You have to find their human anchor, and once you find the human anchor, many of them are thrilled, but remember that wonderful line, which I use all the time, because when I worked with, you didn’t ask me about my time with Mother Teresa, that in itself would be another hour, and those stories are much funnier, but she would always say, don’t give me all this metrics, don’t give me all this money, let’s just focus on one person at a time, and it’s just like the Matthew scripture. Worry about today, tomorrow will take care of itself, and she would say, let’s focus on one person. You can only change the world one person at a time.

So I think it’s important, and we can’t ignore it, and I think charity is important, but I think you have to look at charity, and I’m actually going to raise this with our current Holy Father, that remember charity is very important, but charity shouldn’t be about just giving someone a fish, it should be about teaching them fish, because that’s where you really empower them.

Robert Duncan: On that note, thank you very much for sitting down with Catholic News Service, and again, happy birthday.

John Studzinski: Thank you.

In this conversation, we discuss:

• What most people really mean when they say they want to “visit the Vatican”

• How to approach Rome and the Vatican as a pilgrim rather than merely a tourist

• What makes a good guide — and how to avoid superficial, scandal-driven tours

• The essential places to see in Rome beyond the standard checklist

• Why art still has the power to move people in an age saturated with images

• How the tomb of St. Peter and the tradition of pilgrimage shaped the city of Rome itself

More than a guide to sightseeing, this is a conversation about wonder, beauty, and the deeper meaning of visiting the heart of the Catholic world.

Transcript

Intro: Elizabeth Lev is an American art historian who has spent decades helping visitors unlock the riches of the Vatican collections and the artistic heritage of Rome. A graduate of the University of Chicago and the University of Bologna, she's known for bringing the history, symbolism, and spiritual meaning of Rome's art vividly to life. She has even consulted with Hollywood productions filming in Rome, helping actors and filmmakers understand the city they're trying to portray on the big screen. She has witnessed Rome during some of its most intense moments, the deaths of three popes, papal conclaves, the massive waves of visitors during Jubilee years, which means she has seen the best and the worst of how Rome and the Vatican are explained to the millions who come searching for something here. In this conversation with Catholic News Service, she shares how the Vatican is a place she shares her passion for art, the essential things to see on a once-in-a-lifetime trip, and why preparing to visit Rome as a pilgrim rather than merely a tourist may be the key to discovering the deeper power of this ancient city.

Robert Duncan: Liz Lev, thank you for sitting down with Catholic News Service. You were one of the first people that I met when I moved to Rome 15 years ago, and it seems like everybody knows you. Tell us a little bit about what you do and why is it that you are such a monument in the city of monuments?

Elizabeth Lev: It’s funny, I was just looking at you and remembering when I met you all those years ago, and look at you now, this amazing figure. You even cut a fine figure. So I’d say, wow, what a remarkable journey we’ve made. Everything I do is connected to art. At the end of the day, the thing that keeps my economic boat afloat is I do tours. I’ve been doing tours since I passed the licensing exam in 2000 or 2001, whatever it was. And I teach art history, fortunately. It’s very nice to be able to have students to pass this on to between the University of Mary, which has a Rome program, and of course the Angelicum, which is always great to be among Dominicans is something I think we would agree. And I do a lot of writing about art. So it’s very fortunate to be able to not be an art historian as an amateur, but as a professional, which means that every minute of every day is concentrated on thinking about art.

Robert Duncan: How did you fall in love with art and where did you go to school? What courses of study did you take?

Elizabeth Lev: Well, I think it’s a kind of a funny origin. I think when I think back when I was a kid, what I really liked was mythology. I just read books and books and books and books. If it had a story about Zeus or Hera, I was always caught up in what they were doing. And I also liked biographies. I liked stories about people, things that people did. And in high school, when I was already sort of leaning towards becoming probably an English major, which was probably where I was going, some kind of lit major, I had a wonderful, wonderful high school teacher, these kind of many, many stories like this, who said, I’m doing an experimental art history class during Jan term, why don’t you take it? And she was one of those teachers. If she said, I’m going to teach you how to pick garbage, I probably would have said, sure. And we took this class. I got my copy of Gombrich, the story of art. And I remember coming home with that book under my arm and thinking, this is who I am. So I went to the University of Chicago for art history. And then for my graduate program, I went to the University of Bologna, mostly because Dante went there, but really because it was a method of looking at art that was very different from what the University of Chicago did. The University of Chicago was a very kind of clinical connoisseurship, looking at how works of art relate to other works of art in a kind of enclosed circle, which seemed to me to be a little sterile. The University of Bologna was very interested in context and really what one would say in the wine world, the terroir of a work of art. And so what are these factors in the soil, in the sun, in the wind, in the winemaker, in the grape itself, as it were, that produce these works that are unique to these places? You can’t have a Sistine Chapel in Venice. There will never be a charter in Sicily. It’s just the way that this art grows is very much connected to many different factors. And that’s where the art and the history come together. And ever since then, I’ve been hooked.

Robert Duncan: So how do you go from there in your studies to ending up in Rome and doing this in arguably the city — one of the cities that you’d want to live in and do it professionally?

Elizabeth Lev: My thesis was on, it was a fluke. I didn’t like Rome when I first came here. I remember going back after my first trip, thinking, oh my gosh, I can’t wait to get back to Bologna, which is a normal city. But eventually, as we got to the point where I was going to have to write a thesis, you don’t get to choose your thesis. They choose it for you. And so I was given a very small church here in Rome and I had to come back and forth to the archives. And gradually, this kind of coming back and forth to Rome, a few stints where I stayed here for a bit, I also remember the moment I was on the train going back to Bologna and thinking, I don’t want to leave this place. And then from there, it was only a matter of time till the will found a way. And I’ve been here, I think, since it’s right before Jubilee year 2000. So I must have arrived in 97 or 98.

Robert Duncan: How have you seen Rome change over those years?

Elizabeth Lev: Tremendously. As a matter of fact, when I first moved here, it was, it had to have been a little earlier than the Jubilee year because everything was so dingy and horrible. If you’re, oh, you haven’t been here long enough, but there was the place where they now have the five-star Exedra hotel near the baths of Diocletian was actually a porn cinema. And it was this beautiful construction they’d made at the turn of the century with that sort of wonderful fountain. But everything was just encrusted over, you avoided it like the plague. The buildings were all covered with dirt. The museums kind of had things hidden off in corners. In fact, one of my, with a painting of my thesis was like, no one knew where it was. I mean, we were like wandering around in back corners of the Barberini gallery, trying to, it wasn’t in the Barberini gallery, it was in the officers club next door, I mean, of all things. So, I mean, it was a really, it was very, it was kind of a tawdry city. And then suddenly this incredible energy started to be poured into the city, energy and money. And as I’d already decided to throw my lot into this little dreadful, dirty, almost third world corner. And then suddenly they started cleaning it up. And so first of all, the Jubilee year 2000, we saw this unveiling of this new face of Rome. And with a couple of moments of setbacks, it’s been a pretty steady upward journey. I mean, like every other Roman, I complain about the cantiere, but I really feel that our present mayor, politics aside, loves our city and wants the best for our city. So, I look at these really annoying things for traffic, but I keep remembering that when they come down, we get these really lovely piazzas. Few of them probably could have been thought out a little better, but still, I think we are on a very good upward trajectory.

Robert Duncan: I mean, even St. Peter’s Basilica for people, I mean, now it seems like it was a long time ago, but you remember before the Jubilee, if I have this right, the Basilica itself, the icon of Catholic Rome, was black.

Elizabeth Lev: First of all, it was black. And then it was covered in scaffolding. And then it was covered in scaffolding. I remember in ‘99 going around with people saying, yep, and underneath is St. Peter’s Basilica, oh, underneath that is the Trevi Fountain. I think somewhere in there is the Bernini’s Four River Fountain. It was just, but St. Peter’s Basilica, we just looked at that plywood and scaffolding and thought, hmm, I wonder if we’ll ever see that again, but now look at it.

Robert Duncan: So you mentioned earlier that you are a licensed tour guide. And that means also in the museums?

Elizabeth Lev: Yes, yes.

Robert Duncan: For people who don’t know, I mean, there’s this —

Elizabeth Lev: Italy governs the profession of tour guide. And to be a tour guide, one has to have a license, which is a more or less complicated examination process, depending on the government and power at the time. When I took it, the exam was regional, so you would become a tour guide of Lazio, and then there was the tour guides of Tuscany, and then there was, and so on and so forth. Actually, I was just talking to the head of the tour guide union yesterday, and she was regaling me with some very funny stories about how this works. But once upon a time, you received your license for a region. All the exams for Rome had been blocked for over 10 years by the tour guides who didn’t want new tour guides because they didn’t want the competition. So for 10 years, there was no exam until 2000, I think it was 2000. And from what I understand, 5,000 people showed up to take that exam. It was the first time in 10 years. Somehow, miraculously, I passed that exam and became a licensed tour guide. Now, in case people are curious, there’s been a new law passed, I think in the last year, year and a half, which created a national tour guide. So now, when one takes the guiding license, one will become a licensed guide for all of Italy. This is the weeds of Italian craziness, European craziness. But already, there had been a law passed in about 2015 or so, where if you have a guiding license, you can guide anywhere in Europe. So just apparently, you need, and now, everybody wants you to have a QR code because, of course, QR codes are the thing. But yes, it does require a license to guide. The Vatican Museums will honor an Italian license and then they have their own licenses that they distribute.

Robert Duncan: And, you know, to steel man, the argument for having to have a license, I mean, I’m sure you know lots of stories of people who have no licenses, people who solicit tours on the street. And, I mean, I remember hearing stories that people would point out a totally bogus information standing in St. Peter’s Square to unsuspecting tourists who would just say, oh, okay, that’s where the Pope’s swimming pool is, for example.

Elizabeth Lev: Yeah, of course, you have to kind of wonder about the people who sort of show up and let some random person tell them stuff.

Robert Duncan: It can be hard to know what to do.

Elizabeth Lev: Some responsibility of what you’re gonna learn might be in order. But yes, so the reason for the licensing, I mean, the reason for the licensing is that Italy likes to control everything. You’ve lived here long enough, you know everything has to be controlled. So, and then ostensibly, it is to assure the quality of the guiding. But I did spend five years on the examination board. I mean, I was one of the examiners. And I would have difficulty telling you that everybody who passed the exam was that much different than the characters that you’re pointing out. So I think when the exam used to require a high school education, so you needed a high school education to become a guide, then they passed another law that would make, if you had a degree in archeology, history, art history, you could take this exam upon which I was one of the commissioners on that exam to be able to turn that into a guiding license and the stuff I heard.

Robert Duncan: Can you, some examples of the wildest ones?

Elizabeth Lev: Let’s see, I think the one that really floored me, I could usually keep a pretty straight face during these things. But the one that really floored me was that we were coming up to June, we’re doing the exams and I’m like, okay, well, you have, it’s good news that we have this week, this Tuesday off because it’s June 29th. Like, yes, June 29th, it’s a holiday. And so what happened on June 29th? Well, no, it’s a holiday. I’m like, it’s a holiday that only Rome has, right? Nobody else has this holiday in Rome. Why, why? And the guide, this aspiring guide did not know that June 29th is a holiday in only Rome because it’s the feast of our patrons, St. Peter and St. Paul, who were traditionally martyred on that day. I mean, I tried saying, well, did you notice the big church? This guide was planning on becoming a guide where she would be doing tours of the Vatican without knowing, like, why we have this Peter and Paul. They tried to get around, like, how about the two guys who came to Rome? It was just an, that was, and I remember being so surprised. And she, oh my gosh, she was, she was unhappy. She showed up, I think, a few weeks later with a very large boyfriend trying to, like, catch me in a corner to tell me what was what, but that did not work out.

Robert Duncan: So I want to talk more about the tours that you do, but you also have this trained art historian background. So how did you, how have you mixed over the course of your career, your specialization in art history? Have you worked on papers or — I think you’ve written a book?

Elizabeth Lev: So I, the way I try to incorporate are the way that these things all mesh together, and they do, they mesh together very well. It’s, it never really fails to amaze me how it feels very providential when I’m working on something that happens to dovetail with something else and it works out great, that it just makes a tour that maybe I’ve been doing for years and I’m beginning to feel like, ugh, again, and then suddenly it’s all exciting again. So I find that a very, a truly providential aspect of my work. I, for example, my thesis, which was, it’s about counter-reformation art. It’s like it hit your head against the wall, kind of, you know, and I said, then the Council of Trent, and then they wrote this treatise. But, you know, the things I learned, which were kind of heavy and dry, when it got to be 2017, and, you know, we’re talking about the 500th anniversary of the Protestant Reformation, it became very apparent to me that some of those arguments that we had made, that I, you know, that people were making at the time of the counter-reformation were very similar to what we were living with today. And so all of that work I did in the thesis, which I had been sort of incorporating in my teaching since I was teaching a Baroque art class, suddenly found a way to, it just, it made sense to turn it into a book where you could actually see, and I really do see it this way, that in the course of the late 16th century to the early 18th, late 16th century to the late 17th century, there are a series of questions that are confronted in art that are very close to the heart of the Catholic Church, so sacraments and intercession. And that, the works of art, these famous works of art that people love so much, respond to these questions in a very public way. And so that’s how the book, how Catholic Art Saved the Faith came into being. And so I think it’s been very, very fortunate. And to the touring, there is an aspect of what I do, where you kind of, you’re an art historian, you want to have graduate students and you want to just like, you know, sit in a little room with the people who are writing down every word from your lips and you hear my ideas and I’m gonna pass my ideas into the future and I’m going to be, but you know, I, as I tell an old friend of mine, I’m a grunt, I’m a grunt. My dad was a Marine. I feel like I’m a, I’ve got, that’s, I prefer to be in the trenches. So I don’t teach graduate students. I teach students who are really approaching art history for the very first time. And that’s good, because there is a sort of divorce between art and the public and it’s nice to be able to try to create bridges, but also to remind people that art’s not just like whatever you feel or I’m gonna look at this and see this, if you’re going to use art as a means, particularly to communicate the faith, you better have some sort of methodology behind it. So that’s, I’m very excited that I get to do that. I’m very happy that I get to write and sometimes I even get to write things that are academic, but the bread and butter of my life, those tours is hugely important because it is a different circumstance from teaching. The students, I’m holding the grade book. I’m just not gonna get that much pushback. In the other hand, in a tour, the client is holding the pocket book and they want their questions answered. And so they will hold my feet to the fire. Some will hold my feet to the fire and say, I don’t understand this. Why is this? Well, this doesn’t really make sense. How does this work? And so you learn, you have to learn to not just speak in ways that sound great to you and make you feel like you sound super smart, but you have to learn to speak in a way that speaks to many different people. I may have an engineer in front of me. I may have someone who didn’t make it out of fifth grade and each one of these people deserves an explanation and a way of talking about art that is accessible to them. And without those people, then I would just be stuck in my little classroom mode or my little island of writing in front of my computer and how I sound so great in my own head. So I’m very grateful that I have all of these outlets that allow me to try to make the communication about art as universal as possible.

Robert Duncan: The Church now and for the last several decades has been looking for, really since the Second Vatican Council, a new way to reach and talk to people, especially those outside the Church or who’ve been alienated from the Church. And because you’re not a priest, you’re not a religious, you get these questions in your tours. And so, I mean, it seems to me like you have privileged access to what maybe people are thinking and what the challenges are, especially when you consider that a lot of the time when people come to the museums, I’m sure you get this also some, well, why doesn’t the Church just sell all of this and give it to the poor? So what have you learned about how to reach people? You talk about art specifically, but what lessons might be more universal?

Elizabeth Lev: When I was studying at University of Bologna, I had a professor named Anna Maria Matteucci, who I think was about four feet tall. She was a world-famous, she worked in architecture. She was a world-famous art historian among the very elite world of art history. And we were a little cohort of art history grad students in her class, and we’re so cool that we’re studying art history. I think we might’ve all worn black. And she asked a question, we were studying Renaissance art. She asked a question about a 19th century poet, no, a 20th century poet. And I remember all of us kind of looking at each other like, we’re not doing 20th century poetry. This isn’t our thing. And little forefoot Anna Maria Matteucci smacked her foot on the floor and said, you are art historians. You have chosen the hardest part. You have to know everything. And that’s really the approach that I take to this job. That if there’s something I don’t know, it is my obligation to know it. If I don’t know how to explain, if I’m sitting here talking about a painting that elicits questions, I’m talking about the Pieta that elicits questions about Mary. It elicits questions about how the Christians think about life and afterlife. It is my job to go and to be able to answer those questions to the best of my ability. I mean, to the best of my ability, I’m not gonna be a theologian or a philosopher anytime soon, but with enough thought and enough asking people who do know and reading on my own, I can come up with a plausible answer for people. And if I can’t, I can always say, I don’t really know how to answer that question. But I have made it the point over the past almost 30 years that I’ve been doing this job. I don’t like not being able to answer a question. So if I didn’t know, I would go home and study until I did know, which is very much in keeping with all the Renaissance artists I admire, all the people that I look to in my studies who were the sort of people that Brunelleschi, how am I gonna put the cupola up? I don’t know, but I’ll figure it out. I mean, he left Florence after he lost a competition, said, I’m not coming back until I can do something better than the rest of the Florentines. Michelangelo says, I’m gonna paint a ceiling for you. Like, but Michelangelo, no one’s ever painted stories on the ceiling and you don’t paint. Yeah, I’ll figure it out. So there is something about this wonderful

Robert Duncan: Is that true?

Elizabeth Lev: He painted very little. He had frescoed, he had studied fresco under Ghirlandaio from about 13 to 15, according to him. As I like to point out to my students, he basically slept through fresco class because he planned on becoming a sculptor. We know he did a panel painting and we know he was set up to compete with Michelangelo. So clearly they knew that he could do it, but he just didn’t have the practical experience. And plus what he was planning on doing on the ceiling, which is to do a series of narratives. That’s not been done before. People do narratives on walls, but not on ceilings. So really he did plan something that was beyond what could be done and then he did it. And so there’s something about these characters or even the first professional female painter, the woman who first said in 1580, I’m gonna set up a studio and let’s see what happens. I mean, I’m surrounded by the most extraordinary examples who just tell me, work hard, right? It’s the same beauty of the American work ethic, which I find in these people, the sense of apply yourself, work hard, be bold and you can do it. And I love that gratification of finding myself in the company of these people who did that. So, you know, it can be done.

Robert Duncan: So your domain, which is as it pertains to the Vatican at least is the museums. And when people say they’re going to go visit the Vatican, they really mean the museums and the Basilica, I think, right?

Elizabeth Lev: Yes. And so- It really just means hill. It’s the name of the hill, but okay.

Robert Duncan: Right, right, right. So what can you tell us about what is actually available to be seen when people go visit the Vatican? I mean, when people say, I’d like to see the Vatican, maybe it doesn’t sound to them immediately like they’re talking about a museum and going to the Louvre or something like that. But what does it mean to visit the Vatican and how are the museums that access point for, really, the masses?

Elizabeth Lev: So I think it’s an interesting question. I think what people are really interested in is this teeny tiny state with this strange, mysterious history to it, this figure that the world stops while we wait to vote in our next, when the Pope dies, the whole world stops. And whether you like it or not, whatever religion you are, wherever you are, you got to sit and wait for this group of Catholics to go, this group of guys to go choose this next guy, and then you go back to the regularly scheduled programming. So clearly there’s something about this tiny little space that has a prestige and a mystery to it. So many parts, many elements, they really just want to penetrate into this mystery. Now it depends on whether you’re talking about a person who has no sort of Catholic or Christian experience whatsoever, or you’re talking about the religious pilgrim who for that person, the Vatican, is where St. Peter will be as Petrus. And so where is Peter and where is Peter’s successor? And everything else is gravy because a big part of seeing the Vatican is seeing Pope Leo, as we can see by the fact that you can see outside your window the people spilling out every single Wednesday for the audiences. So the Vatican is remarkably open for visits. I mean, if you think about it, it’s a quarter square mile. You can go, 55% is garden, 45% is building. You can go into the gardens. They have all kinds of tours of the gardens. You can go out and see this theater of the universe. As it were, you have these plants that come from all over the world. You have these little monuments and statues that talk about devotions in different places. You can visit the museums, which is three and a half miles in and of itself and covers a huge stretch. And then of course, the most important part that people visit is St. Peter’s Basilica. The entry point, the calling card into the world at large is generally the museums because of the Sistine Chapel, because of the collection of ancient sculpture, because in the kind of the world of culture, the Vatican museums is the calling card. But there is the aspect of St. Peter’s where first of all, it’s free. And secondly, it has this approach of these big kind of open arms. That is kind of the magnet. And so I think people want to, when they’re thinking about what is there to see, they’re usually thinking about there must be something in the museum. But when they’re thinking about what is drawing them, whether they realize it or not, it’s that Basilica, the presence of Peter and that magnet, which draws people from everywhere.

Robert Duncan: Do you think that the Vatican does a good job? You said that the Vatican is open to visitors, but does the Vatican, the various institutions, the Basilica, the museums, do they do a good job connecting people with the faith or does it feel like you’re visiting a museum?

Elizabeth Lev: Ah, that’s an interesting and somewhat tricky question. There’s a lot of tension in the history of art. So the history of art, as you can well imagine, it’s a modern discipline. It’s not something that’s been around basically, I’d say the 19th century, the field really. Johan Winkelmann invented it in the 18th century. The 19th century, it becomes a field. Art history was created in a very Protestant milieu. Protestant would be the lighter end, moving into the world that was really more or less secular. And as art history developed, it developed in an increasingly secularized environment. Ergo, when we talk about, in art history, it is considered unfashionable, anti-intellectual and flat-out off-putting to try to link faith to art. Fortunately, in the past couple decades, that has changed. There have been some really important, really excellent scholars, whether it’s Rona Goffin or Galvin Bailey, which we have some amazing, amazing, amazing people, Marshall Hall, people I really admire who have done a wonderful job of bringing magnificent scholarship, Pamela Jones and Roman altarpieces and their viewers, the magnificent sculpture as a scholarship without fear of following where the thread of faith might bring you. So instead of it being a hard no, we’re just gonna talk about this in this clinical form, these scholars have been willing to talk more and more about how the faith might inform the art. That, however, is very still, unfortunately, fringe. And most of the time, the religious element of a work of art is treated the same way. Bon temps, you don’t talk about politics and you don’t talk about religion. And so, unfortunately, when we look within the didactic services of the museums in the Basilica, I mean, there are many people who have gone on the Scobie tour, the tour that has the excavation where you go to see Peter’s bones, only to walk out of there asking, did I see Peter’s bones or not? And you have people going through the Vatican museums occasionally on sort of official tours where you’re hearing far more about the scandalous behavior of the popes than the sort of redemptive art that they attempted to produce in order to create the legacy that we have today. So I think it is not exactly hidden that I have some questions about the way the Basilica is run at this exact moment. I have great admiration for the Vatican museums and what they have to do. To accommodate in a very small space, 30, 35,000 visitors a day. I appreciate more than I can possibly say, and I will always stand in their corner, I will fight by their side, the desire to try to limit as little as possible. And I know that people look at this like they’re just, it’s just a cash cup, but that is not the reasoning that the director is using nor the Governato Rato. The concern that I would have about limiting, the only way you can limit these people, limit the number of people, yes, you’re right, limit the number of people who come into the museum, the only way you can limit them is by making the tickets, the only people proposed for limiting is by making the tickets more and more and more expensive. And that becomes a world of art which is limited to a very, very few. And I don’t, I mean, true, the art of the Vatican museums was originally limited to a very, very few, but over the course of 500 years, the Vatican museums has found ways to open that collection and let those works speak to everybody with the most amazing results. So I admire a great deal the way that the Vatican museums is constantly thinking. It’s a very dynamic institution that’s always coming up with things. And the things that people don’t like, like how come I can’t take my pictures in the Sistine Chapel, or even me, I don’t like- What is the reason? Because it makes people move. So I can’t explain in the Sistine Chapel, they don’t let guides explain in the Sistine Chapel, which breaks my heart. And you can’t take pictures in the Sistine Chapel, why? Because if you’re not explaining and people can’t sit there doing selfies, they’ll be out the door in half the time, in two thirds of the time, so it keeps people moving. It is a very intelligent way of using human nature to just allow the flood to go. They come up with all kinds of interesting ideas and I find it very, very, very, very interesting that they’re so proactive in trying to resolve this problem. The problem that I see in the problems of the Basilica are a little bit more complicated, but a problem I see in both cases is a lack of respect for the person of the guide. That’s not for me. Personally, I hear I’m treated very, very well, so obviously I would never lament how I’m treated because I really, for a person who’s a foreigner who came to this country, the way I’ve been welcomed and the way I’ve been treated, I have nothing but gratitude to Italy and the Vatican. But I do see that the figure of the guide, and again, my friend who is the head of the guide union of all of Italy, the government, and even many times the Vatican administrations of both the Basilica and the museums, treat guides as feudal workers. As feudal workers. I mean, the contracts they’re given are feudal. They are, you are tied to the land and you will do nothing else. But even the way that they were addressed in the course of the Jubilee year, the guides at the St. Peter’s Basilica were really made to feel persona non grata. It was a hard year where they were really openly scorned and kept aside. Their work was, they were embarrassed publicly on several occasions. So, I mean, you wonder.

Robert Duncan: Do you think that that’s because maybe they’re, to accommodate the number of pilgrims, there were a lot of guides who maybe weren’t up to a certain standard and so they became, as a class.

Elizabeth Lev: Oh, it had nothing to do with standards. What people were saying or how, what kind of guides, no, it had nothing to do with that. It simply had to do with this plan to control the flow of tourists. They planned to create the fast pass line. There were a number of things that were being put into place for the Jubilee year that needed organization and they found that the guides were just, sort of a necessary evil to bring the paying, the people who are paying for the headsets, the people who are paying for the passes. The only function they have is just to bring these people through. And it really was a difficult year. However, I’ve just been taking the online course for the Basilica to become an official Basilica guide, which I must say is a truly beautiful piece of work. The technology, I wish they’d talked to you, but it’s a beautiful piece of work. And to listen to Dr. Pietro Zander explaining to us aspirante guidee, that how we know the bones of Peter are there and the excitement he has. He’s been on that site for 40 years and he’s talking into a camera and he’s so excited that I, I’m like, I wanna go to St. Peter’s, I wanna go to St. Peter’s right now. So the way they transmit, they had the parish priest of St. Peter’s, they have this, it’s a beautiful piece of work so that if a guide really wants to be well-informed and well-formed, they actually have a system with which that can be done. So that set. I do think there was a kind of an unfortunate divorce between the guides and in particular the Basilica, but it’s not just the Basilica, it’s really the state itself, which will inevitably side with these huge tour operators so that the tour operators have control to all the access to the sites and the tickets. And so a guide has to put him or herself, again, in a feudal position underneath an agency. These are people who, many of these guides, advanced degrees, these are people who love the city, these are the, this is the face that is the link between the city and the tourist.

Robert Duncan: So you are saying that they were mistreated by Rome, by the Italian state?

Elizabeth Lev: Oh, by both. I mean, I really, it’s a blanket situation where the figure of the guide, I don’t think is really respected enough and you can say, and I know, I know you and I have had these conversations a million times about the bad guides and the, but the bad guides are actually not the norm. I mean, there are plenty of people who get off the plane and they, you know, get a guidebook and if you’re gonna fall for that, you’re gonna fall for that. Again, I repeat, some of it is on the shoulders of the tourist, but there are so many guides here who I go to, I’m walking in the Vatican Museums and I see guides by themselves studying. I go to these shows, I know, I give lectures to guides and the room is full and they’re whole, they try to learn and they try to improve because they love their job and they love their country and most of them, most of them are these people. And so to have to be treated all the time, like you’re some charlatan or your job is to simply be the person who takes the group of people that are really going to be dropping money at the restaurant and the ticket booth and the gift shop, your job is just to lead them to the places where they can, like your job is to lead the sheep so that they can be shorn. Really, it undermines the dignity of the figure and so since these are the only people actually talking to the tourists, that’s an excellent way to burn them out, to make them tired, to make them not enthusiastic about what they’re talking about. So if I were to say one thing between A, the Vatican and B, the Italian state is, why don’t you put a little bit more trust and support into the figure of all of these guides we have?

Robert Duncan: It’s encouraging to hear you say that there are a lot of very good guides, especially for people who may be planning a trip to Rome. I have a couple of different directions I’d like to go but maybe now would be a good time to ask: I mean, first of all, what advice would you have for someone who is maybe planning, as many people do who do come to Rome, it’s a once in a lifetime trip and they get on Google or maybe now they ask ChatGPT, what advice would you give to someone planning a trip to Rome in order to make sure that they get a good guide, besides going to your website, of course, and make the best of that possibly once in a lifetime trip?

Elizabeth Lev: Well, again, like everything, if you’re serious about something, you put a little time and effort into it. So first things first, I would say, leave yourself time. Now, if you, for whatever reason, travel expense, you don’t have a lot of time in Rome, I’m not a big fan of more bang for your buck. So you have to run and go see, you’ve got a checklist of 10 things you have to see in the course of the day and it really just involves walking in, looking at it and walking out. I don’t, why don’t you just put it on the TV and just look at the picture. It’s not, I would say that to leave enough time to actually experience the site. So make a decision about what you’re going to do and leave yourself time. And leave yourself time so that you’re not exhausted. And people live one kind of rhythm and then they come here and they think they’re gonna see 25 things in one day and they can’t understand when they’re tired. They’re not used to walking and then suddenly we have to walk for hours. They’re not used for standing and then suddenly you have to stand. So I think, try to, you don’t wanna have dead time where you’re just sitting there doing nothing but sucking down Aperol spritzes. But I think a certain sense.

Robert Duncan: It’s a perfectly valid way to spend time, by the way.

Elizabeth Lev: Yes, you are of course right. I mean, it’s a question of, first of all, there’s a question of time management. Second, when you go to choose a guide, we have many, many excellent guides. We have guides who are extraordinarily accomplished in this city. We have the people, when you see those digs, some of the same people who are the archeologists who dig that stuff, they’re doing your doors. I mean, it’s really quite remarkable what we have out there. And so I would say there is a way, you don’t have to give your guide a test, but I would tell you a couple of things. If you are approaching a historical site and the only thing your guide is telling you or the only thing you’re getting are scandal stories, that’s the refuge of the lazy. That’s the refuge of someone who really doesn’t have a compelling story to tell and has no way of telling the story compellingly. And so the best you can do is to fall back on sex and scandal. You’ve got a bad tour right there. I mean, it’s fine. You drop it in, it’s funny. Alexander VI Borgia, always good for a laugh. Probably not in 1492, but fortunately we’re 500 years later. But the fact is that kind of touring is lazy and people who look for, accept that kind of tour, they are lazy. They feed the market. That’s your problem. If you don’t like your tours because they’re scandal, but they’re scandal-ridden, you think they’re superficial, it’s because you allow that to happen. So the other thing is I would really just read something, learn something, be more responsible about what they’re telling you. I’m not telling you you have to come here an expert on things, but it’s good for you to know that, oh, let’s start with The Last Supper by Leonardo da Vinci is not here. It’s in Milan. And so just, even when people read novels, it just, it gets you more excited. It gets you more prepared for what you’re gonna see and where you’re going to see it. So these are the things I would propose to bake. So be, manage your time well. So if you can have more time in Rome, that’s great. Leave time for you to not be sort of running around from thing to thing. You look for, when you contact a guide, talk about yourself. Tell who you are, what you’re interested in. I’m a first-time visitor. I’ve enjoyed seeing this. I’ve enjoyed seeing that. It’s like a sommelier. Sommelier, you had the giant, giant wine list. I don’t know what, people don’t know what kind of wine they want, but do you like, well, I like a dry, I like a little bit more fruity. I had this wine once. It was like this. It’s like that. I’ve traveled here. I’ve traveled there. I’ve really liked seeing the ancient sculptures in the Cairo Museum. It helps the guide to begin to get a sense, and the good guides will weave what you’ve, your experience into what they’re talking about. The more that you participate in your experience, the better the experience is going to be.

Robert Duncan: I hate to do this to you because it’s probably a mortal sin in your book, but most people want to see the Vatican, see the Roman Forum, Trevi Fountain, Colosseum, (that’s) probably a short list of what’s out in most people’s book. What are maybe three or five places or things to do that people don’t think to do that you would recommend them to do, even if it’s their first trip?

Elizabeth Lev: Well, the wonderful, there’s a wonderful Bernini-Borromini walk from, say, Santa Maria della Vittoria to Santa Andrea al Quirinale. So you can see the St. Teresa in ecstasy, and you can see this wonderful rivalry between Bernini and Borromini, between this all-white, sort of undulating church of Borromini and the theatrical Andrew going up to heaven in the St. Andrew of the Quirinale. And while you’re in the neighborhood, since it’s very close by, there’s St. Mary Major, which is really just an amazing, amazing church. And as a matter of fact, Mary Major is flanked by two other churches that have the most ancient, incredibly ancient mosaics. So Santa Pudenziana is the oldest Christian mosaic in Rome, and then Santa Braccede has this unique mosaic chapel. So you can see these different types of art forms. The Caravaggio crawl is always wonderful. Nice to start at Piazza del Popolo, which is the northern gate. That’s the way the visitors, if you had come to Rome in 1600, 1500, when Queen Christina came to Rome, that’s the way she came into the city. And so you have Caravaggio placed in the very first church that you encounter coming into the city and kind of thinking about why would you put a guy with an arrest record like that in the first church that you encounter in Rome, which gives us furiously to think. And then you can walk all the way down this wonderful road to Via della Ripetta and see four more of his paintings. And that’s a lovely, lovely thing to do. The San Clemente church with the three layers in one is another incredible site where you can just walk through Roman history. So you’ve got a Mithraic temple, you’ve got a fourth century church, you’ve got 12th century church. It’s really, it’s Roman history and kind of like a, it’s like an elevator speech for Roman history. And of course, the Galleria Borghese is my favorite museum of all. It’s the young Bernini producing his first sculptures, but really an example of art patronage, which is breathtaking. Scipione Borghese, he had some questionable ways of acquiring it, but I find it really hard to condemn him when I see that collection.

Robert Duncan: There are also all sorts of things that perhaps people don’t know about. And this, many Catholics might, but maybe not non-Catholic visitors to Rome. I mean, there’s the Scala Santa, the, I mean, the papal, the idea of a papal basilica and that there are multiple papal basilicas in Rome. Could you talk a bit more about that category of sort of pilgrimage sites or why they might be of interest also to non-Catholics?

Elizabeth Lev: Well, Christian Rome, I love it when people say, I’d like to do a Christian Rome tour. I’m like, well, let me see. We’ve got 360 churches here. I’m not quite sure where we’re gonna do, what we’re gonna do here. 360? Some people say 500, I think it’s 360 active ones.

Robert Duncan: Okay.

Elizabeth Lev: And you have them spread over the seven hills and there are incredible walks you can do to really experience the settling of Christianity into the city and then its growth and then its triumph. One of the places to start, however, if you’re gonna do that is with the catacombs, the Catacombs of Priscila, which have this amazing art. I mean, as an art historian, for me, the Catacombs of Priscila, which have the earliest Christian art in the world, that’s an unmissable thing. You have the First Madonna and Child. You have the Three Magi. St. John Lateran, which is where you’ll find the Scala Sancta, is actually the Cathedral of Rome. And it’s a church that, again, it’s sometimes hard to approach because it’s so piecemeal. It’s a strange looking church because it’s got statues from 1600 and a ceiling from 1500 and a Ciborium from 1300. And it kind of looks like someone’s eccentric aunt’s living room with a lot of brick and rack. But when you look at that museum, when you look at that church through the right eyes, what you’re looking at is 1700 years of Christian history. And it reminds you, in that one space, that this faith, since 313, has been working its way forth in the city. It was legalized in 313 by Constantine. It came up from the underground, the catacombs, the hidden churches, and it comes out onto the landscape. And it’s not easy. It’s a struggle for it to get into the heart of the city. And you can really trace that. You can go from St. John Lateran to the Church of Holy Cross, where we have these relics. When Helena goes to demonstrate, there was a cross that Jesus died on, and here it is. We have the Scala Sancta, which is the old chapel of the popes when they lived at St. John Lateran. Then you can go towards the San Clemente Church, which is remarkable. You can see the first, the St. Peter in Chains in 450, which is where Leo the Great built a church overlooking the Forum. So Christianity had been legalized now for 150 years, but the Christians still couldn’t get a church in the Forum because the resistance to Christianity, despite the fact that it’s the sole religion of the empire, they will not let them dang Christians into that Forum. And there is that Leo the Great builds this church of the Chains for the Chains of Peter, looking down. They’re now buildings, but you have to imagine once upon a time, it was looking down into the Forum, like the general before the next battle. And then you head down in the Forum, and in the Forum, there’s Cosmas and Damian, the first church the Christians managed to build in the Forum. So it’s really, it’s such an exciting tale to watch the Christians moving around in the city. The Caelian Hill with the site of the martyrdom of Saints John and Paul, and then this crazy round surround sound martyrdom church of Santo Stefano Rotondo. It’s everywhere you look, everything you walk into, there is some fragment memory of the Christian history, which just permeates the city.

Robert Duncan: I know you’ve also given a lot of tours because of how long you’ve been in Rome and your success in doing what you do. Certain VIPs, Hollywood types, I don’t know if you’re under any NDAs, but can you talk a little bit about some of the more famous people that you’ve shown around and what their reactions to the Christian story of Rome and the Vatican has been?

Elizabeth Lev: Well, my favorite was always taking Jim Caviezel. Every time they asked me to take Jim Caviezel around, I get excited because I get to take Jesus places. That’s always been my, I’m hoping one of these days, maybe I’ll get to take Jonathan Roumie, so I can have two Jesuses in my resume. But yes, so the way the tour business works is that usually the figures who are the Hollywood, the sets, the stuff like that, that’s usually set up. When a movie star, a famous person is in Rome, it’s usually through the concierge at a hotel, and that’s a different kind of work that I’m not interested in being tied to a concierge. That’s a different kind of call girl, but I’m not gonna be that kind of call girl either. But every now and then, because of some work I’ve done with production companies, they will call me up and they’ll say, we need you to take someone out. So this all began with the infamous Angels and Demons situation where the production company, which a friend of a friend worked for it, and wanted me as someone who knew something about Bernini to help with the Angels and Demons people. And so in the course of that, I met and I took Ron Howard and Tom Hanks and the rest of that gang around. One of my favorite memories is Ron Howard walking into St. Peter’s Basilica. He always wears his baseball cap. He walked into St. Peter’s, big coat baseball cap, and he swept the baseball cap from his head. And it was, no one had to tell him, it was just a, it was, you know when we talk about that gesture of respect of removing the hat? It was, you understood what that meant. And he just stood there, he turned into, I remember I was looking at him, he turned into like Opie, just this huge eyes looking at this place. And I really, I still see that in the movie, which, you know, leaving behind how I feel about Dan Brown. I see that love and that wonder of Rome in the movie, which I think it’s the redeeming quality for what is the most ridiculous story ever. And then I worked with the Conclave people, with the movie, that movie, who were charming. They were lovely. I find it hard to reconcile the, you know, completely uselessness of that, the complete uselessness of that book with the really delightful people who were on that tour. I mean, Ralph Fiennes was, I think he has a relative who is a theologian in the Anglican church. He had a lot of very interesting questions about why Peter. It was actually very, very fun. He kind of stood right in front of me and was like, so why is this Peter guy? And I was like, well, okay. And it was lovely. And he listened and he listened and he responded. And Stanley Tucci loves art. He loved l'Acquario. He loved the works of art, which is a beautiful thing. And I feel myself very, I consider myself again, very, very fortunate because the contact I have had with, you know, whatever these movie star people are, I usually get the thinking movie stars. So I get the people who actually think about things and want to know about things. Because first of all, to get to me, it’s complicated. Like someone’s gone to some trouble to put them in the room with me because that’s like, I’m just not the, I’m not the person that’s the guide for movie stars. So I usually get people who are thoughtful and people who are intelligent. I have taken around a few of the people who are completely self-absorbed and can’t see beyond them, something boring. So I never really wanted a career of taking around movie stars because I’d rather talk about Michelangelo than you.

Robert Duncan: I want to ask you also just about your passion and how, after all these years, you are someone who always is passionate about what you do. And although I know you have various issues as anyone does, you have not become cynical about any of this, as far as I can tell. And, you know, I just think that we’re in this scenario now where all these images, many of them at least, are online for people or we’re oversaturated with images. And it can be difficult to appreciate the way it would have been for someone from a different period in time, seeing a beautiful work of art, because that would have been such a unique experience. You know, we’ve got Hollywood and movies, Instagram, everything else. How have you retained your passion personally, but then also, how is it, as I think you would say it’s the case, that this place, the museums and the art that’s there, how does that still affect people despite what seems to be like the odds are against it?

Elizabeth Lev: Well, I think two thoughts come to mind. One, you don’t really get burned down on your spouse, your kids. I mean, you just, this is my, these works of art are my, I’ve known them longer than I’ve known my kids and my spouse. I mean, these have been what drew me to here, to this country to begin with. So art really never disappoints. I was up on the scaffolding in the last judgment this week and I was standing under Jonah. There was a lot going on. I was talking to somebody and then suddenly I turned around and I’m standing underneath Jonah and I felt something so powerful. It weakened my knees and I was like, I can’t believe, I think I might’ve said, now Lord, you may let your servant go in peace. I mean, it was just, to be there was something that I have seen and talked about, I don’t know how many hundreds of thousands of times, but I realized that it’s still there. It’s still, the spark is just as strong. Also, the other thing is cynicism. The only person you hurt with being cynical is you. The only thing you’re ruining is you. You’re not smart. I mean, I see cynical guides all over the place. I mean, it’s not intelligent, it’s not smart, it’s not energizing, it’s just draining and it’ll kill you. It’s a poison that will slowly kill you. I mean, a certain jaundiced view of the kookiness that goes over there and if my own head, I just treat it all like a giant sitcom. Like this is just, this is like a funny twilight zone. There’s some days where that’s, you’re just looking at it that way. I mean, in Rome, fortunately, I think you know this, Rome, we tend to laugh. I mean, we’ve been invaded a lot. We had Nazis and at a certain point, you just gotta be able to take a step back and go, I don’t know. So I think the humor is always a very good antidote for the cynicism, and a reminder constantly, I mean, we live in a city filled with saints, so there’s really no excuse to not be remembering this, but a reminder of the tremendous providence I’ve had to be here and what I do. I mean, complaining about my average day of work, I’m not gonna get a lot of traction with people. I have a very, very, very wonderful career and really to not, to descend into the, being unhappy about the various little things that don’t work the way I’d like them to, that would be a level of ingratitude, which would really be sinful. The fear of images, I’m not that concerned about images. I mean, one of the great steps forward, my frenemy in the history of art or my love-hate relationship is with Jacob Burckhardt, who wrote the history of Western civilization. And he is the man who gave us the thesis that Dan Brown is working on. He had studied theology and then realized he didn’t believe in God. Because of that, he really needed to create a thesis that these artists who are working for the church were not invested in the message of the church. And so it’s his work that every single morning I have to get up and deal with. But at the same time, he was the man who believed that art was forever. And so I think that’s a great example But at the same time, he was the man who believed that art was for everybody, that it was something that wasn’t supposed to be an elite thing where only the few who could travel or only the few who could get into these spaces. So he’s the one who pioneered the use of images in his lectures. But we’re talking about 1880, he’s getting photographs and he’s using these photographs. And what he was able to do was to get wet the appetite. And so the photographs are a lot better today, but all they’re ever really going to do is wet the appetite. Because when I was there in the Sistine Chapel this morning when the first group of people who had been waiting outside at eight o’clock, they came running into the Sistine Chapel when they opened the doors. And I was in that chapel when they walked in and happened to turn around long enough to see everybody going like this. Technology can do everything technology can do, but technology cannot take away the wonder of being in a space where 500 years ago, a little cranky guy wandered up on a scaffolding and just changed the way we see the story of salvation.

Robert Duncan: I want to bring the conversation to a close talking about one thing that many people who may not be Catholic, or even maybe if they are, may not know that you mentioned, you alluded to, but St. Peter. I think it’d be appropriate to conclude that the real motivation, or the real reason, or the original reason at least for Christians to come to this city was to see the tombs, the trophies of the apostles. So what would be your pitch for people who maybe never have been, to see their visit to Rome in that primary religious sense?

Elizabeth Lev: So this is a city that’s built on pilgrimage. It’s what it is. The ruins of ancient Rome, I’m leaving behind the ancient city, which is now in ruins. This is a city that is completely built on pilgrimage. The roads we have, the fountains we put in, the decoration, the reconstruction. It’s a city that has been welcoming pilgrims since Gaius wrote that letter which you were referring to to his friend in Asia Minor, come to Rome and I will show you the trophies of Peter and Paul. We have this movement of people here which has determined the way our streets are laid out, the obelisks you see, the way we recouped from the ancient Rome. It’s all about drawing pilgrims into this city, north, south, east, and west, leading them through this adventure of beauty and martyrdom and these many different figures that have walked through these streets and they culminates in the tomb of St. Peter who starts his career unable to catch fish in the Sea of Galilee, ends up, the head of the apostles, ends up in Antioch and then is crucified upside down here in the wake of Nero’s great fire, basically blamed for something, blamed for a fire over a real estate deal essentially. So he’s buried in this hole in the ground. To me, the most amazing thing about this city and again, something that never gets old, every single day talking about it. Peter was crucified upside down in the circus over by the Vatican Hill which was out of sight, out of mind. He was cut down off the cross, buried in the cheapest possible grave that they could come up with. It was a trench covered with some dirt, covered with some pieces of terracotta. That was the end of Peter except it wasn’t. So the Romans put Peter’s body in the ground. The Romans who had built those incredible structures, who took Rome a city of brick, changed it to a city of marble, they conquered everything. The Romans are people who do not make mistakes. They build roads from here to Russia and 40 mile aqueducts. They put his body in a hole in the ground and the Romans assumed they had taken out the trash. But what we see every single day, when you walk out the door, every single day you see it. What the Romans inadvertently did 2,000 years ago was plant a seed and in many ways, that seed which is the vertical of Peter’s body all the way up to the golden ball at the top of Michelangelo’s dome. That’s our beautiful symbol. Of all of these successors of St. Peter, these 267 successors to the present Pope Leo, this continuity in the vertical line and then spreading out like tendrils are these incredible works of art, whether it was the reconstruction of the Trevi Fountain to give pilgrims some fresh, clean water when they came to Rome, whether it’s the straight road that leads to St. Mary Major that allows you to get from Mary Major to the top of the Spanish Steps and see where you’re going. All of these things, they were built for pilgrimage. The entire city is meant to be seen under a Christian lens.

Robert Duncan: Elizabeth, thank you for sitting down with Catholic News Service.

Elizabeth Lev: Thank you very much. This was fun.

In this conversation, we discuss:

• His experience as a military chaplain during the Vietnam War

• What he learned from American soldiers about sacrifice and service

• The role of priests ministering to troops during times of war

• How he helped the Church respond to the 2002 clergy sex abuse crisis and reformed seminary formation

• The situation of Christians in the Holy Land and the work of the Knights of the Holy Sepulchre

More than a personal biography, this is a reflection on faith forged amid conflict — and on how suffering, discipline, and service can deepen Christian witness in a divided world.

Subscribe now

Transcript

Intro: Cardinal Edwin O’Brien has spent a lifetime serving both the Catholic Church and the United States military. As a young priest during the Vietnam War, he jumped out of helicopters to minister to American troops in the field. In 1997, he became Archbishop for the Military Services, overseeing Catholic ministry to U.S. service members around the world during a period that included the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. He later served in the Holy Land, working closely with Christian communities living amid one of the most volatile and contested regions in the world. He also took part in the conclave that elected Pope Francis. Now 86 years old, Cardinal O’Brien lives in retirement, dividing his time between Rome and Baltimore, where he once served as archbishop of the first diocese established in the United States. In this conversation with Catholic News Service, we talk about his years ministering to American soldiers, the lessons of discipline and virtue forged in war, his role helping reform seminaries after the 2002 clerical sex abuse crisis, and his hopes for the future of the Church under Pope Leo XIV. Recorded just days before the United States entered a new war with Iran, the cardinal reflects on something he has witnessed throughout his life on the front lines of conflict: that suffering, endured with faith, can draw Christians closer to Christ and become a powerful witness beyond the Church’s walls.

Robert Duncan: Your Eminence, thank you for sitting down with Catholic News Service. I want to start at the moment of your ordination, 1965, if I’ve got that right.

Cardinal O’Brien: That’s right, yeah.

Robert Duncan: The first years of your priesthood, there were a lot of changes in the United States. There was not only the sexual revolution, massive changes in American culture, but then in the early 70s, Roe vs. Wade. As a young priest, looking at the changes in the United States that were underway, how did you see your vocation and your mission as a priest at that time?

Cardinal O’Brien: Well, I’ve been in seminary work for many years, and I always held that the first five years after ordination are as important as the five years preparing for ordination. And they were very significant years. When I was ordained, I was supposed to go to Puerto Rico to learn Spanish, because we had all kinds of numbers of Puerto Ricans coming to New York, and Cardinal Spellman, for our class, sent half the group, 15 of us. But last minute, they got word from the academy, West Point, that they were doubling the size of the academy, and they wanted a third priest there. So long story short, I went to West Point as a civilian chaplain for almost five years. I was marrying cadets in June week, and two years later I was burying some of them, because they went right over to Vietnam. It was a very sad, sad time. And I figured after a while, gee, these young people are sacrificing. Why don’t I put on a uniform? And I asked Cardinal Spellman, and he didn’t get anywhere, but Cardinal Cooke let me join the military at the end of 69. And I spent three active years. And they were wonderful years. I enjoyed my time at West Point. It was like a seminary. It was so disciplined, and such a place full of goals and virtue and sacrifice. And I was ready then to put on a uniform. I spent a year as a chaplain, a parachute in Fort Bragg in Carolina, a year in Vietnam, and I wound up in Fort Gordon, Georgia. And I was willing to stay on. I said, but I have to study something. I need the books. And the Army said, fine, we’ll send you to study. You’ll get your master’s degree. What would you like to study? I said, theology. They said, can’t study theology. It’s the church and state. We can’t spend money on theology. So at the same time, New York, the Archdiocese, my home, said, we need someone to study theology in Rome. Oh, that was an answer to prayer. And so I spent three years here and got a degree in theology. They were good years. I was with two fine priests for my first five years. In the military, I certainly got to know a lot of chaplains, and it was a great experience. And then when I got out of the military, my life started over again in academia. So it was a good flavor for the priesthood, my first eight years as a priest.

Robert Duncan: I’d love to talk about some of those moments in greater detail. I mean, Vietnam really stands out. You say that you were marrying and then having, unfortunately, to bury men very quickly thereafter, that you also jumped from helicopters. Can you take me back a little bit to maybe some of those memories specifically? What stands out? Were there any…

Cardinal O’Brien: Well, I’ve had a lot of honors and so forth and a lot of privileges. But one of my main honor is to be called a vet, an Army veteran, United States military, because I learned so much from the people I served. Their life was full of self-sacrifice. They entered the service. That’s a virtue. Greater love than this no one has than to give up your life for your friends. Peace I leave with you. And I admire the military very much. I do today. I remember at one stage, it was early in the 70s, I was invited up to Boston for the 4th of July concert. And I had my uniform on. As I walked through the crowded field, I was booed. In those days, it was not an honor to be in the military. Changed today, thank goodness. The military has high regard, I think, in America. But those days were very controversial. And the military just did what they were asked to do and I think did it fairly well. And I learned a lot in service then.

Robert Duncan: You were a military chaplain.

Cardinal O’Brien: I put on a uniform in 1970, that’s right, as an active duty chaplain for three years.

Robert Duncan: And you served alongside people of other faiths, Protestants?

Cardinal O’Brien: Oh, yes. Every day in Vietnam, we’d board a helicopter with a Protestant chaplain and fly out to a distant fire base where young people, guys at the time, were waiting for the hot food once a week for their mail. And I’d offer mass, hear confessions, and stay the day. It was a great relief for them and for me as well, great pastoral work. And I saw such generosity in these young people. The mail would have a box of cookies or something. First thing they would do, they’d open the box and pass it around. A sense of these 19 and 20-year-olds, a sense of great service and generosity. And I think that’s true today, too. I have great regard. I guess 18 years of my 60 have been spent dealing with the military in some way or other. And that’s been a great benefit to me, a great blessing for me.

I guess 18 years of my 60 have been spent dealing with the military in some way or other. And that’s been a great benefit to me, a great blessing for me.

Robert Duncan: Was there any experience specifically in Vietnam, someone you met, something that happened that you think had a lifelong impact? You’ve already said that the entire experience had a lifelong impact.

Cardinal O’Brien: Yeah, I have no war stories. It was a daily routine. And I saw a lot of self-sacrifice on the part of troops on the edge of the war. We were trying to get out of Vietnam at the time. And so we were strictly defensive. But it was a difficult time, too, because they’d get restless. And they’d wander off to find a woman in the nearby town or to get some drugs or something. Morale was very low. And so the chaplain’s role was very important. And I valued that at the time.

Robert Duncan: Did you feel prepared for that task?

Cardinal O’Brien: Oh, yes. I think our seminaries do great work. And every four or five years, my job has changed. And I’ve learned flexibility. And the people, wherever I’ve been, I’ve been supported by the people and impressed by the people. And that’s what’s kept me going, with God’s grace.

Robert Duncan: As someone who has done a lot of seminary work, who’s been in charge of the formation of men for the priesthood, what do you think it is that remains attractive about the priestly vocation today?

Cardinal O’Brien: Well, it’s God’s grace and very often through the example of other priests. I grew up in the Bronx. And everything revolved around the parish. And the priest was the leader. It was education. It was worship. It was sports. And that was a kind of leadership that got to me. And I saw it as a time to serve God and to serve my neighbor in a very effective way. And to go to the seminary, I had no hesitation. And I enjoyed the seminary. And I enjoyed the challenge once out of the seminary to meet the needs, the changing needs, in a very topsy-turvy world in the 70s.

Robert Duncan: Did your experiences in the military, in Vietnam—did you ever suffer from the consequences that many people do, such as post-traumatic stress? Did those experiences stay with you over the years?

Cardinal O’Brien: Thank goodness. I have many memories. But I came out pretty healthy, I think, still. But I was close to the Lord. I said my prayers. I kept association with other chaplains, other priests. And that kept me going. And I found it a challenge to keep morale among the troops during those years. But it worked. And I came out much better experienced as a priest and ready for whatever the Church was offering. And it offered studies and then working with the Archbishop of New York for a few years.

Robert Duncan: I wonder if you have any advice as a pastor for those who are suffering post-traumatic stress from their military service.

Cardinal O’Brien: Well, it depends on the background. You’re working with men and women from all kinds of experiences in their lives. Some are seeking refuge in the military. And it works. Others are finding it very difficult to serve. It depends on their assignment. It depends on their support system. And I think everyone needs a support system once they leave the familiar surroundings of home and neighborhood. And if they do find that support system among friends and fellow workers, I think they can get by pretty well if they stay true to principle, their religious life, their prayer life, if they’re religious people, which certainly helps to keep balance and to keep perspective. The military has structures which are supposed to help. And I think they do very often. And it’s very, very important for someone who is finding stress to seek help while they are in uniform. To let it go and to wrap yourself in some kind of neurosis is not good for anybody. And so I would stress anyone in uniform to take advantage of the help that the command offers and that medical people offer and the chaplains offer. And many do. And many, because of that, stay pretty healthy.

Robert Duncan: So after your time in Vietnam, if I’m not jumping ahead too much, you then came to study in Rome. So you’ve spent a lot of your life in Rome, also abroad, overseas. What do you remember about Rome in your first visit studying theology?

Cardinal O’Brien: Well, I remember how emotional it was. I didn’t expect to come. But I recall the Casa Santa Maria, the house of studies for priests, kneeling in the chapel for the first time. And very, very tears came to my eyes. And I was very grateful for what had gone on in my life and for the new opportunity I was given. I lived in a house of studies for all American priests who were wonderful examples. And I spent three years there. And it was a kind of good education. Priests from all over the country and studies from universal teachers at the Angelicum, where I went. And I enjoyed the studies. I thought I’d be teaching afterwards. But Cardinal Cooke decided to open an office for evangelization. He didn’t call it at that time, but pastoral outreach. And for two or three years, I worked on special projects. It was a time of cults, the Moonies, for instance. And we started a group of ecumenical group to counter the cults, separated and divorced, an outreach to separated and divorced, outreach to people homosexually inclined called Courage. And so it was a good pastoral experience, those first three years out of Rome from 73 to 76 when I got my doctorate. And then I worked in the chancery in New York as vice chancellor, head of communications, secretary to Cardinal Cooke and to Cardinal O’Connor before I was put into seminary work.

Robert Duncan: So after you were director, I believe, of St. Joseph’s, you were also director of Rome’s seminary for North American men called the North American College. How did that appointment come about? And what were the different challenges of being a rector of this seminary versus a domestic…?

Cardinal O’Brien: Well, I remember on a weekend, it was Labor Day weekend. I was driving Cardinal O’Connor up to the country for a pastoral visit. And it was a Sunday of the weekend. And on the way, I said, Your Emminence, I know Dunwoodie needs a rector. And I have been rumored. I said, I really don’t think I’m fit to be a rector. I don’t have that educational background and so forth. So he said nothing. But on the way back, he said, you’ll be the rector of Dunwoodie. So I started the next day. And on Labor Day, we had a big dinner at the seminary. I was welcomed. And I did almost five years, then went to Rome for almost five years, and then back to Dunwoodie for four or five years. And it was great. I love the priesthood. And I loved forming other priests. It was a great privilege. And to this day, I keep in touch with some of them. And I remember the days very fondly. As I said, I was being formed as I was trying to form others. And I found seminary work very supportive of my priesthood and didn’t realize I’d be in that work for so long. But I benefited from it very much. And after I became a bishop, those years proved to be very profitable for me.

But I benefited from it very much. And after I became a bishop, those years proved to be very profitable for me.

Robert Duncan: How did they form you? I can imagine the ways that you would help the others.

Cardinal O’Brien: Well, discipline, a prayer life, a sense of service. I saw people around me serving. And that was very supportive and instructive to me. In ways I didn’t realize at the time, I guess. But when I found myself out of the seminary and served as an auxiliary bishop and then bishop for the Military Services, I found those years in seminary formation formed me in a way that I was self-disciplined and motivated, goal motivated. And that was a wonderful blessing for me for the rest of my life.

Robert Duncan: What mark do you think you had personally on these seminaries? I mean, every rector is different. What were your priorities as you led both the minute at Dunwoodie and then later in Rome?

Cardinal O’Brien: I think as a rector, you set an example. There are always tasks that you have to perform, sometimes to revitalize the community, to set a new policy, to find the right faculty members, to set discipline in a balanced way, and to relate to the seminarians as a father. And I found that very fulfilling. And I think I got a good response both in New York and both trips as seminary rector in Dunwoodie and here in Rome. I enjoyed Rome very much. Didn’t expect it. Didn’t know Rome very well. But it was a good exposure for me, a good experience for me.

Robert Duncan: Would you take me back to the time after your service in Rome as seminary rector to when you were appointed a bishop? Do you remember how you heard about that, how that came about, and what your reaction was?

Cardinal O’Brien: Yes. I was here in Rome, in fact, visiting. I was rector at Dunwoodie. And I was bringing some people up to Orvieto because the North American College needed some help financially. And on the way back, we got a phone call. And they said, please call Cardinal O’Connor at the next stop. We didn’t have cell phones at the time. And I called Cardinal O’Connor. And he said, what is an auxiliary bishop of mine doing in Rome when he should be at the seminary? And of course, he was giving me a hard time. But that’s how I learned I’d be an auxiliary bishop. He said, do you accept? I said, yes. He said, here’s the number. Call the nuncio and tell him you accept. That was in ‘96, I guess. And I was auxiliary bishop for the cardinal for one year. And then the military archdiocese opened up. The archbishop was retiring. And unexpectedly, I was appointed an archbishop after a year as a bishop. And I moved to Washington and spent, I guess, 10 years as military archbishop.

Robert Duncan: I read that you would divide your time as military archbishop. Well, first of all, can you explain to people who may not know how the military archdiocese works?

Cardinal O’Brien: The archbishop of the military is chartered by the pope to take care of all the men and women who are Catholic in uniform in the United States, plus diplomats, plus VA hospitals. We had, I guess, 150 priests far below our quota. And I traveled wherever our military people were, 40 countries, mostly in Europe and North America. And it was a great sense to support our priest chaplains and to support the people they were serving. And it involved a lot of travel, as I say, which I enjoyed. And I had a lot of good support.

Robert Duncan: What were some of the countries that you would have to frequent most in this time?

Cardinal O’Brien: Oh, where did I go? I certainly, the US, half the time was US bases all around the country. Western Europe, Japan. And I was always on the road and had a good budget and was able to fly when necessary and be in the midst of the people, which is, I think, the job of a priest and certainly the job of a bishop.

Robert Duncan: You were still serving as archbishop of military services when the United States went to war in Iraq. How did you see your role as pastor to the Catholic men and women in uniform during that time?

Cardinal O’Brien: Well, I think the war was a difficult one. It was great divisions. And I just reminded the priests, you’re not here to take a side in the war. Certainly, you’re an American and want to see the Americans safe and bring about peace, and that’s why they’re there. But keep your eye on the mark, and you’re a priest first, and then you put on your uniform as a chaplain. And one of my roles was to keep morale among priests and to help them serve their people who were under great pressures in those days.

Robert Duncan: And I can imagine that the reasons that the morale is low is because people that they know and love are dying.

Cardinal O’Brien: Yeah, and there was criticism. I mean, as I mentioned, to be booed because you were in uniform of the United States is not a pleasant thing. And this country was very divided, and they blamed the military for a war, which is not the case. And so I had a hard time lifting morale of our people by serving the good, healthy work our chaplains were doing.

Robert Duncan: What strategies did you have for lifting morale when, I mean, that was a time, as you described, that was very, the country was very divided.

Cardinal O’Brien: To be present. I think I was welcomed wherever I went. I felt that it was important to be there and to pray and sacraments and just to do what a good priest and a good bishop should be doing, brought life into the community. And that, I think, the role of a bishop is to bring the life of Christ more present into the local parish and the local community. And I found that to be a very, very attractive way of life for me.

Robert Duncan: Are you surprised that you ended up spending so much of your life in the military?

Cardinal O’Brien: Over 60 years as a priest, I think I counted 18 in some way associated with the military. And I didn’t ask for it. The only thing I asked for in my many years was to put on uniform at the end of the 60s and to serve as a captain in the chaplaincy. Other than that, I just went where I was told to go and to do what I was ordained to do. And it’s the same in whatever role it is for a bishop, is to bring the sacraments and to bring Christ into the lives of your people that you’re given to serve. And I found I was prepared to do that and I gained a lot of strength, a lot of grace doing it.

Robert Duncan: Journalists have called you in the past Warrior Priest. Do you like that title?

Cardinal O’Brien: I never accepted it, and I think it’s distracting, but not going to change things.

Robert Duncan: After your time in the military archdiocese, you were made the Archbishop of Baltimore.

Cardinal O’Brien: That’s right.

Robert Duncan: Which is the oldest see in the United States.

Cardinal O’Brien: Yes.

Robert Duncan: And (it’s) highly symbolic. I take you to be a very patriotic American, a patriotic Catholic priest, and so that must have been quite an honor for you.

Cardinal O’Brien: Great history. Baltimore’s great history. And I got a great reception there. I thought I’d be there till God called me to heaven, hopefully. But it didn’t wind up that way. I was called one day and said, the Holy Father would like you to come to Rome and serve as the head of the Order of the Holy Sepulchre, which was a great surprise, but one that I accepted and embraced and found very, very rewarding.

Robert Duncan: Was it hard to go back to the United States after so much international travel and experience and be a local bishop?

Cardinal O’Brien: I was with American Catholic communities for the most part, and they were away from home, and therefore I was away from home, too. And we appreciated the role each of us played, both those who are serving in uniform and those who are civilians working with the military. And I found it no tension and no distraction to go where the troops were, to be with the people, to do what a priest does and what a bishop does.

Robert Duncan: You were also an American archbishop in the United States during the greatest challenge and scandal of the Catholic Church’s history in the United States, the fallout of the 2002 sexual abuse crisis. And by all reports, you were a key figure in shaping the response of the Church to that crisis. What did you learn as a part of that experience?

Cardinal O’Brien: Well, my predecessor, Cardinal William Keeler, in Baltimore in 1992, made the decision against great opposition to reveal all those who had had accusations against them and what the outcome was. And he really set the foundation in Baltimore for a pretty healthy presbyterate. And I’m very grateful to him for that, but he suffered for it. And when I came there, I guess, in the year 2000, there were a few problems, but by and large, the lawyers kept us clean in the late 90s, and we didn’t take any chances, and any accusations were followed up very clearly. And we were one of the fortunate dioceses because of the decision of Cardinal Keeler to move in with no compromise at all, and I benefited from that.

Robert Duncan: And you went on to work with seminaries in the United States.

Cardinal O’Brien: I was a seminary rector before that, yes.

Robert Duncan: I mean as the apostolic visitator to the American seminaries.

Cardinal O’Brien: Oh, yes, yes.

Robert Duncan: And that had to do with preparing men to, forming men to address...

Cardinal O’Brien: No, there was a question at the time as to what is a seminary doing about this? And Rome asked me to take part in a review of all the American seminaries, and we had maybe 30 or 35 people on our staff. They were all active bishops or religious, men and women, and we set up an agenda out for them, and they would go around to each seminary and review it and report to me, and I would report back to Rome as to what shape the seminaries were in. And by and large, we found the seminaries were doing a pretty good job. I never received a report as to what was done, but I think Rome followed up, and the local bishops were very attentive having that review to keeping an eye on the formation in their seminary.

Robert Duncan: Do you know why you were chosen for that role?

Cardinal O’Brien: I was with a couple of other bishops, and we had experiences. Obviously, I was many years in seminary work, and Rome thought it would be a good idea. I don’t generalize, but by and large, I think our seminaries were doing a fairly good job at the time. They were chastened by the scandal, and many of them had taken action. Most of them had taken action already, and I was happy to report that to Rome.

Robert Duncan: And the action would have been, at least in some cases, greater screening for men, psychological exams before entrance, a higher threshold for who can be admitted?

Cardinal O’Brien: Yeah, in 1992, Pope John Paul had a meeting, and it was on seminary formation here in Rome, and I had just gotten to Rome, and I was helping out in that meeting in kind of a messenger job. But out of that, in 1992, came a document, Pastores dabo vobis, which is my motto. I will give you shepherds. And there was great emphasis on renewing seminary formation, especially in human formation. For the first time, Rome was very strong on a proper psychological approach in screening to get into the seminary, and once in the seminary, to make sure that the balance, personality balance, communications, and performance were those of a mature seminarian. And that was a turning point, I think, that Encyclical, Pastoral Letter of the Pope, and I relied on that in reviewing the seminary, all the seminaries of the United States, and it was a watershed, I believe, in bringing further up to date the formation of priests, especially human formation.

Robert Duncan: After your time in Baltimore, as you’ve already mentioned, you were called back to Rome again, this time as, it’s a complicated title, so maybe you better say it, the Grand Master of the...

Cardinal O’Brien: I’m not sure I’ll remember it.

Robert Duncan: The Grand Master of the Knights of the Holy...

Cardinal O’Brien: …Equestrian Order of the Holy Sepulchre of Jerusalem.

Robert Duncan: What do they do?

Cardinal O’Brien: There are two papal orders. One is the Order of Malta, which takes care largely of medical attention throughout the world, Catholic hospitals and so forth. The other is the Order of the Holy Sepulchre, and our role, given by the Pope, is to support the Church in the Holy Land. We do that by encouraging pilgrimages on the part of our faithful. We have about 30,000 members of the Order of the Holy Sepulchre, men and women, very dedicated, very good, strong Catholics, very generous, maybe $13, $14 million a year we would raise and send it to the Patriarch of Jerusalem. Great support, especially in these days with tourism down. But I visited every year. We’d go to the charitable institutions, the orphanages and hospitals and the parishes, and once again to show universal Catholic support in a land that was under great pressure and persecution at times. So it was a job once more to travel and to be on the ground with those who were challenged to serve the Church on the ground.

Robert Duncan: In that role, what did you learn about the situation of Christians in the Holy Land?

Cardinal O’Brien: Well, the (Christian minority) in the Holy Land were under pressure from the Israeli government sometimes, were under pressure from Islam, and to keep the focus on the Church and the role of the universal Church in supporting the smaller, more challenged Church in the Holy Land was the job of the Order of the Holy Sepulchre. And our lay people, our membership, responded very well in their pilgrimages. They were sure to be present in the places that most needed Catholic support, and certainly the priests and the bishops of the Holy Land appreciated very much. And the Archbishop, now Cardinal Pizzaballa, would come to our meetings three or four times a year here in Rome and to express his appreciation on behalf of the Catholic community, which was so beleaguered in the Holy Land, and that is still the case.

Robert Duncan: Do you have updates regularly from your contacts there?

Cardinal O’Brien: I’ve virtually lost contact with the changes that have been taking place over the last seven or eight years. I follow the news, and it’s not always good, but I think the Church under Cardinal Pizzaballa is very strong and very well respected among all the factions there. He’s a great, great leader.

Robert Duncan: One thing that I remember very distinctly of our past history is that we interviewed you the day that Pope Benedict XVI resigned from the papacy. You were one of the first interviews we at Catholic News Service had, and there’s this... I think it’s a remarkable clip of you reflecting on the meaning of that resignation, and you become quite emotional in this clip:

Cardinal O’Brien (ARCHIVAL FOOTAGE): It will be easier for him, but in another sense it’s going to be a very traumatic transition, I think. So I’ve been kind of praying and quite taken by it, for his sake mainly, really. END.

Robert Duncan: You can see that the gravity of the moment was sinking in, even as we were speaking. Do you remember how you reacted? Why that moved you so much?

Cardinal O’Brien: Well, I loved Benedict XVI. I think he’s a saintly man, if ever there was a saint. He served the Church well on a great sacrifice. I don’t think he relished being the Pope, but he took the burden and was, as the Lord said to Peter, support the brethren, and he did. Total surprise that he resigned, but I understood it then, and I think his health was deteriorating, and it was a prudent move. And he handed it over to Pope Francis, but I missed him. I had great fondness for him, and I think his scholarship, his pastoral leadership between John Paul II and Benedict, there’s a whole body of Church teaching and Church tradition, Church life, which is going to be with us for many, many decades to come.

Robert Duncan: What have you been doing in your retirement? What have you been up to besides your travel that you’ve mentioned, going back and forth to Baltimore? Have there been any projects, books, relationships that you’ve wanted to focus on?

Cardinal O’Brien: On retirement, I’m low-key. I have a lot of visitors. When you have a place in Rome and tourists come, they know that they’d be welcome, which is good for me, I think. I keep active that way. It’s kind of armchair evangelization. I have a lot of visitors, and I can talk about the Church and the Gospel and vocation, and I’m kept fairly busy that way, but I get a lot of rest, a lot of reading, a lot of prayer. I say I kind of lead my life like an active monk, and it’s between rest and study and prayer and sociability. It’s a good retirement.

Robert Duncan: I wonder if I could ask you, you are someone who has seen a lot of pain in your life, and whether that was in Vietnam or, we talked about the horrible sex abuse scandal, or your work in the Holy Land. In all of that experience, was there ever a time that your faith was challenged, and how did you hang on, if so?

Cardinal O’Brien: I forget who said it. I think it was John Paul II. There’s nothing so wasted as wasted pain. And when you’re suffering yourself or when you’re suffering in part of others, we just realize we are carrying on in the body of Christ today what Christ left undone.

The Church is continuing as the body of Christ, the suffering of Jesus in the world. And I think when I was very young, we’d say, offer it up. And that’s a Catholic phrase, but join whatever the suffering, in order to pay in your suffering, to the sufferings of Christ for the salvation of the world. And there will always be sufferings, and sometimes I just wonder, for instance, in the Ukraine today and some places, how it can be that people can be so persecuted and so put to the test in many places of the world, in Nigeria, where there’s persecution. And I don’t have a chance to do so in person, but I would think the message is always there. Don’t waste that pain. Join it to the pain of Christ, which is continuing in his mystical body today. And then it becomes productive. It becomes redemptive and has a purpose. And I think whether it’s in a family situation, where there can be often great pain or in a hospital or on the world political scene, don’t waste it. Join it as a Christian to the cross of Christ, and it can then take meaning and redemption follows.

Robert Duncan: I’m thinking of people who may be watching that are perhaps interested in your life and your life story, but don’t have Christian faith. Maybe they’ve never had it or they’ve lost it because of things that have happened in their lives. And I wonder how would you make that message of taking on pain and not wasting pain applicable also to them?

Cardinal O’Brien: Well, I know we have many who have drifted from the Church and remain outside the body, but many, having drifted, get lost and realize the Church has something to offer. And I think the mercy of God as it shines through the teaching of the Church and through the sacraments of the Church is something we have a great message to deliver. And I think you hear of people going to confession for the first time in many years and what a relief it is to get back to the sacraments and back to the church. And a lot depends, obviously, on the messenger. And I think the messengers of the Church are not always the bishops and the religious. It’s fellow Catholics and fellow Christians who, by example, are encouraging others to come back, to be nourished by what the church has to offer. And, you know, we’ve been around a long time, and through thick and thin, I think today, from what I understand, there’s a great resurgence of faith on the part of young people, especially young men. And what I’ve heard is they say the church is always there. It’s stable. It’s reliable. It’s helpful. And with so many questions swirling around, it’s one of the sources that I can find meaning in in my life. And I think that’s happening today. I read an article recently in England, the same thing. And the same reasons are given. There’s a stability in the church that I cannot find elsewhere in my life. And I hope that that grows, and it’s a matter of God’s grace coming to work.

Robert Duncan: Pope Francis and Pope Leo have really been on a constant refrain of no more war. They’ve had very, very strong messages encouraging the conflicts around the world in Ukraine and the Middle East to cease. We may, in a short period of time, the United States be going to war with Iran. That’s in the news. There are many, many Americans serving in the places where there already are active conflicts. For the Catholics there, do you see there being a challenge of morale? How do Catholics take to heart the spiritual advice of the Pope and do their duty with honor?

Cardinal O’Brien: I recently heard from the wife of a Navy officer. Two kids, married six or seven years. He was due to come home this month. It’s the second time he’s been extended, another 30 days, another 60 days. And she’s at wit’s end, and he is too. So there’s great pressure on the military. You see the buildup now. Those men and women have been away from home for a long time, and it’s the families that are suffering as well. So I think there is a real question of morale, and I hope our civilian leadership is aware of the pressures we are putting on our military. And the military has shown great restraint, great strength in serving our country and obeying in their command. But there comes a limit, and I think the sensitivity of our national leadership has to be growing as to what we’re asking our military to do in overwhelming pressures. And I would hope not only are we praising our military, but we should be sensitive to their suffering as well.

Robert Duncan: You did not take place in the conclave that elected Pope Leo, although you did take place in the general congregations beforehand. And we now have a year of Pope Leo, more or less, under our belt, and I wonder what, given your life experience, your pastoral experience, how you see his priorities, where he’s going to take the Church. What are your hopes? Where do you hope he takes the church?

Cardinal O’Brien: Well, Leo keeps speaking about unity, and he’s a very disciplined man. He’s always got a script he’s reading from. He’s well-prepared. He’s well-received. His personality is perfect. He’s trusted, and I think he’s going to help the church through difficult days to be predictable. Sometimes, under Francis, we had some surprises we didn’t expect, but I think he’s a man faithful to the teaching of the Church, a man whose personality is well-suited for the role. He’s open to listen. He listens very carefully, evidently, to people who know him well and who have met him. He’s intently interested in what they have to say and responds accordingly. So I think his appointments will be interesting to various dioceses and to the dicasteries, but he comes well-prepared to lead the Church, and I think he’s shown that already by his balance, his receptivity.

Robert Duncan: Have you had any interaction with him?

Cardinal O’Brien: Very briefly, very briefly. I have no office I hold any longer, and I know he’s... I’m not knocking on his door every day, no.

Robert Duncan: I’d like to close by asking you, in your retirement, as you read the news, as you read Church news, what is it that Catholics are not talking about enough? What should we be talking about more that’s not getting enough attention?

Cardinal O’Brien: We need vocations, that’s for sure, and I know in New York, St. Joseph’s Seminary has three dioceses, New York and Brooklyn, Rockwell Center, and they don’t even have 100 seminarians, and so I think we have to highlight the role of priests and religious in serving the people. Some dioceses are doing that better than others, so that is one of the priorities I would think the new Archbishop of New York will find himself faced with. And just to be a listening Church and a supportive Church, especially those areas where the pressures are great, and I think every diocese has those areas, and certainly every area of the world. So the role of the Church is to be present and to serve, especially with the great sacramental gifts that Christ gives us.

Robert Duncan: Cardinal O’Brien, thank you for your time.

Cardinal O’Brien: Thank you for yours.

In this wide-ranging conversation, we discuss:

• Why reflecting on mortality should shape lifestyle

• His position on euthanasia and end-of-life care

• The sustainability crisis facing aging societies

• Whether religious practice improves health

• What surprised him most about Rome

More than a policy discussion, this is an exploration of how secular expertise and religious tradition can converge in unexpected ways — especially around mortality, meaning, and the limits of medicine.

Transcript

Intro: Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel is one of the most influential architects of modern American healthcare. Advisor to Presidents. Chair of Medical Ethics and Health Policy at the University of Pennsylvania. A central figure in some of the most consequential healthcare reforms of our time. Recently, he was invited inside the Vatican to address the Pontifical Academy for Life on how nations like the United States and China might build universal healthcare systems that actually work. He calls himself an atheist and a practicing Jew. He disagrees with the Catholic Church on some of its most foundational bioethical claims, including the right to life from conception. And yet, on questions like euthanasia and end-of-life care, there are surprising points of convergence. In this conversation, recorded in our Catholic News Service studio, we talked about his childhood, his rise to the center of American health policy, what he experienced inside the Vatican, what he told Pope Leo, and why his central message is disarmingly simple: Remember that you are going to die. Because as the Lenten season reminds us, the secret to living well may begin with keeping death before your eyes.

Robert Duncan: Dr. Emmanuel, shall I call you Zeke?

Dr. Emanuel: Yeah.

Robert Duncan: Tomorrow in the Catholic calendar is Ash Wednesday. And every Catholic who goes to receive the ashes will hear the words: Remember that you are dust and to dust you shall return. You start your new book, Eat Your Ice Cream, with a reminder that we’re all going to die. What is important to you about that remembrance? And is there something about maybe traditional religion that helps people remember that also?

Dr. Emanuel: I’m an atheist. I’m a practicing atheist. I go to Jewish services most Saturdays in the year. So I don’t find it actually religious. I just think it’s a fact of life. We know that people die. They die all the time. About 2.7 million people will die in the United States this coming year, in 2026. And I think we have a culture, probably driven partially by evolution, driven partially by culture, of trying to minimize our thinking about death.

I actually find it quite helpful to think about the fact that I’ve got 75, 85, 90 years, something in that range, and that it’s not unlimited, and that I think actually can focus you on what’s important and what’s not important. I’m an oncologist, and one of the things you know as an oncologist is you treat a lot of patients, and the ones who are terminally ill, the very focus on what’s most important. Even the ones you cure, they almost always say, you know, I stopped doing X, Y, and Z. I realized they weren’t really important, and I’m really focused on the most important things in life. And I think actually keeping your mortality in front of you and the fact that there will be a decline helps to focus you on important things, trying to do important things in life. And one of the important things of life is not to try to get the next two or three days or an extra week. It’s just that that’s not going to be materially as important as figuring out what you think your purpose is and actualizing it.

Robert Duncan: How has keeping that at the forefront of your mind helped you focus on what your purpose is and helped you live a better life?

Dr. Emanuel: Well, when I was a college freshman, I was sort of flailing around and trying to figure out what to do with my life, actually what course to pursue. There was a lot of pressure on me to do medicine in part because I was very good at science, but that idea didn’t fully satisfy me, and I took a walk. We had a bird sanctuary with a lot of woods, and it was a cold winter day in January, and I took a walk out there and thought. And it really occurred to me, you inherit the world. You come into this world, and so much has been done. We in the 21st century don’t fully realize it. Electricity, indoor plumbing, telecommunications, reliable food supply, weather forecast so you know how to dress and you don’t get caught out, all sorts of things that are there. We live in a democracy, or I hope a democracy, and that hard fought for, people died constantly. And so it occurred to me that my job is to take what I’ve inherited and make it better and make it better for other people. And it could take a variety of roles. I am not, by my character, good at doing that one-on-one-on-one. There are some people, my father was one of those, who loved caring for patients and individuals and getting to know individuals. I have an eldest daughter who that is very, very important for. I tend to think of tens of thousands and hopefully millions of people and try to think what can I do to the social arrangements that are going to help the most people. And then you have a finite amount of time to actually implement that and to try to do it in actuality. And so that, I think, knowing that I don’t have unlimited time here, very helpful. And knowing that I’m not just going to focus on living a few weeks, months, longer. That’s not going to make the difference.

Robert Duncan: You speak about your family, and that’s, in your autobiography, a very important part of who you are. You have two very successful brothers in very different fields. Can you talk a bit about your upbringing and your family?

Dr. Emanuel: Yeah. So my father came to the United States from, he was born in what was then Palestine and became Israel. He studied medicine in Switzerland and then came to the United States with $24 and a Parker pen. And he was an incredibly hard worker and very much devoted to caring for people. My mother was very active in the civil rights movement when it was quite unusual for a white woman. She was active in the late 50s and early 60s and then became active in the anti-Vietnam War movement. And they were very much committed to social justice. And my mom would regularly take us to demonstrations, regularly talk to us about our privileges. We had a housekeeper, and she was very, very clear about trying to promote her, get her a better job. We would go and visit them. So we were very, very well aware that we weren’t particularly rich. I’d like to say that most of my pants had patches on the patches. But we had privilege, among which was education. And my father was very devoted to travel so we could see the world, and he thought it was the best form of education. That very, very important. My parents were also very, very willing to let us speak our mind, have different views, not agree. Also very, very important. Mostly it was important to, you know, how are you going to justify your view? What’s the reasons you have this view? And then my mother was particularly, I would say, she was the anti-helicopter parent. She would shoo us out of the house, go play. And, you know, we had to figure it out. We had to figure out what we were going to play, negotiate rules, negotiate disagreements, you know, occupy ourselves. We got into plenty of trouble. She was very good about that, too, actually. She was particularly good, especially at school, when we stood up for something, got us in trouble, coming and defending us. And so we learned a lot of independence, a lot of self-motivation, a lot of how to deal with people, and a commitment to social justice.

Robert Duncan: And your mother would take you to Dr. Kings’…

Dr. Emanuel: Yeah, so when Martin Luther King marched in Chicago, we went. And it was, let us say, a not peaceful demonstration, but not because we weren’t peaceful, but just thrown a lot of food and sometimes rocks at us. Yeah, very memorable demonstration.

Robert Duncan: How did you go from the child that you’ve described in this family to wanting to give your life to medicine?

Dr. Emanuel: Involuntarily. I, the son of an immigrant, the son of an immigrant doctor, and I also happen to be very, very good in science. In America, that tends to over-determine you to become a doctor. As I said, I did a lot of summer research in college, going to various labs, including a very famous lab, Cold Spring Harbor, that Jim Watson was the head of. It just didn’t wildly excite me, being lab work. Lab work just was not something that I enjoyed. Other people enjoyed it. I had a roommate at Cold Spring Harbor who really loved it. He described it as his temple. I went to Oxford for two years. I did pretty well. I published three papers, but it also confirmed to me I didn’t like it. But I got into med school, and I hadn’t had a plan B, so I went to med school. Between my first and second year, I went to Washington to do journalism at the New Republic at that time. I realized I didn’t want to be reporting on events. I wanted to actually do events and do the change that I thought was important. So I went back to our med school and took time off to do a Ph.D. in political philosophy, thinking that would be helpful. So that’s the path. I ended up in oncology because oncology, people are very sick. They’re reexamining their deepest values, what their life’s about, helping them in that. Also great science and great bioethical issues. All the big bioethical issues, whether informed consent, end-of-life care, expensive medicine, all show themselves in oncology. So it was the area for me.

Robert Duncan: It sounds like the social justice background, what you came to do in medicine, had more sort of a social impact.

Dr. Emanuel: Yeah. As I said, I’m not the kind of person, just from a satisfaction standpoint, helping people one-on-one was great. I really love my patients. Hopefully they all love me. I still keep in touch with some of them. I get letters out of the blue. But that wasn’t sufficient motivation. I wasn’t feeling like the system had problems that I could see, and part of what called me to is, well, how do you solve this problem? Initially I started out trying to fix end-of-life care. It was not good for cancer patients but wasn’t good for anyone in America. When I started out, 72%, 75% of Americans died in the hospital. We were resuscitating people who it was quite clear they weren’t going to make it. So I set out to try to change that.

From there you also see the inequalities of the system, the fact that it’s actually not working for a lot of people, so try to fix that.

Robert Duncan: You came to advise at the highest level, right? President Obama and other ways as well.

Dr. Emanuel: It was a great honor to be able to serve and work on the Affordable Care Act. I think it did a lot of good. It clearly gave a lot of people insurance. It also held costs down. But it also had problems. A lot of the things we hoped we could achieve we didn’t. It certainly made the health care system more complicated, which I think was a chief defect. We kept asking, well, are we simplifying the system? Are we making it easier to use? Are we getting rid of a lot of administrative problems in the system? We didn’t ask those questions. We didn’t ask them enough if we ever asked them. I think that has come home to roost to some large extent now.

Robert Duncan: So all of that is a prelude of maybe this particular moment which you find yourself in Rome in the Vatican, I suppose. They called you. They emailed you. How did this come about?

Dr. Emanuel: Yeah. I knew someone who worked for the Pontifical Academy for Life. I had been here once before under his auspices, and he asked me to come and talk about what we could learn from other health care systems in order to guarantee health care for all.

Robert Duncan: Was it surprising given what you said about your faith background, not being Catholic, that the Vatican would reach out to you?

Dr. Emanuel: Yes. It wasn’t something that I had put on my list of things. Well, the Catholic Church is going to call and ask me to advise on health care.

Robert Duncan: When they made the invitation, what specifically did you want to bring? I mean, given the sort of uniqueness of this opportunity, what did you want to communicate?

Dr. Emanuel: Well, I think the reason they brought me is because I have studied. I published a book called Which Country is the World’s Best Health Care. I studied 11 health care systems, including the United States and 10 others. And lessons about how different systems function. As I say in that book, no system is ideal. They all have defects. Every system you study has some squeaky wheel, some problem that really doesn’t work very, very well, and that people complain about. Sometimes there is more than one. I mean, the United States, as I put it today in my presentation, we have five goals in any health care system. Universal coverage, reasonable cost, consistent high quality, reducing disparities, and satisfaction. The United States doesn’t fulfill any one of the five.

There are many other health care systems in the world that fulfill two, three, maybe even four. And there’s a lot we can learn about what the problems are. I think many of the problems have been misdiagnosed or not put together coherently. It’s not just one problem. I’ve identified three major problems. But that’s critical to understanding how to get a good system. And every system in the world, no matter what they spend on health care, complains about the costs. Costs are going up everywhere. It corresponds with aging. As people age, they have more illnesses and therefore will intersect with the system more, will cost more. And how to figure that out is a preoccupation of all countries. And it can help by looking at what other countries do.

Robert Duncan: How do you see the Vatican’s strategic role in the public health policies that you want to promote?

Dr. Emanuel: Well, I think the Vatican can be a source of moral conscience and a source of certainly setting out ideals. But it also can be a source of helping actually implement them.

There’s an extensive Catholic health network around the world, not just in the United States. We do have a lot of Catholic health care systems. One of the questions I think every health care system has to ask is, how is it differentiated because it’s called a Catholic as opposed to some other kind of secular or other denominational health care system? What’s distinctive about it? In the Catholic faith, abortion tends to be the one, but that would seem to be a thin reed to stand on as distinctive. I think a big question is how do they structure what they do and how does it help people who are left out, people who sometimes don’t know where to turn. I think that has to be distinctive. And the Vatican can help in those moments.

Robert Duncan: One of the questions that came up in the press conference had to do with Catholic teaching and public health, especially on bioethical questions. You not being a Catholic, I wonder how you see the challenges of collaborating sometimes with the Catholic Church.

Dr. Emanuel: I don’t have a problem collaborating with them. I do have a problem — we have to figure out how we disagree. The United States is a pluralistic country, just to take abortion, a concrete case. I think this has often been characterized as a secular Catholic issue. I mean, I’m Jewish and Jews don’t have the same problem. We don’t view life as starting at conception. We have a very different view about life quickening, heartbeats and stuff more important, but also we’ve over millennia had lots of arguments about weighing the mother versus the fetus, infant, and baby. And the mother takes precedence. It’s a very different perspective. I’m also, I happen to be, as a matter of fact, against euthanasia and assisted suicide for a whole lot of reasons. I think it’s a mistake.

I think this is one of those fuzzy areas where it’s not clear what the profession and what society, some states have legalized it, some states haven’t. They’ve legalized assisted suicide, not euthanasia. And I do think it’s one of those places where we really are genuinely, as a society, uncertain. I’ve had patients ask me and I’ve explained to them why I don’t think it’s going to be necessary for them, and if it comes up, then we can talk about how to care for them.

Robert Duncan: Do these conceptual sort of philosophical divergences with the Church ever come up in meetings like the one you’ve been at? Did any of the priests or hierarchy, the bishops that are present ever challenge you on any of the issues, or do you ever have constructive dialogues?

Dr. Emanuel: In this conference so far, no. I haven’t been challenged. I mean, we haven’t really talked about abortion or euthanasia. On euthanasia, I think I actually have, my justification or reasons are different than the Church’s as far as I understand it, but I think we come to the same conclusion about that.

Robert Duncan: What are yours?

Dr. Emanuel: On euthanasia? I can imagine, I mean, if you’re an oncologist, it’s hard to say you can’t imagine circumstances, or you haven’t experienced circumstances where if a patient said, I want euthanasia or assisted suicide, you can’t imagine. That seems like a pretty legitimate. On the other hand, I think almost all the cases that you read about, that I read about, I find I don’t think you need them. First of all, it’s a very complicated issue. Most people think that the reason to give euthanasia or assisted suicide is excessive pain. It turns out that is very rarely the reason for people. The reason for people is mostly wanting to control self-determination, wanting their control at the end, their worry about the loss of autonomy. I don’t find that a very persuasive argument, especially if you are terminally ill and you are going to die. The other thing is we clearly know there’s a big debate in the 90s and 2000s whether there was a slippery slope. If you legalize it for this patient, will it…? There is no debate today, can be no debate today, only people who want to put their heads in the sand. There is a slippery slope. Once you do it for a defined group, well, now we can do it for people who are mentally ill. We can do it for infants who have these problems and things like that. So there’s no doubt it’s a slippery slope. The conditions expand that you find acceptable, and I find that unacceptable. I think if you can imagine legitimate cases for euthanasia, they should be pretty darn narrow, and the idea. So I prefer to have it illegal, and for any person who engages in it, any physician who engages, to have to justify it. It turns out in America we’ve had one person who’s been convicted in this, Mr. Kevorkian, a guy who did not stick to any of the rules, violated them on TV. So I think actually it shows that if you have a good reason, most juries and most prosecutors would like, well, it’s not worth prosecuting. There was a good reason behind it. So that’s the kind of circumstance. Does it put someone in potential jeopardy? Yeah, but you should take this exceedingly seriously.

Robert Duncan: What about your trip so far has surprised you? I mean, to Rome and working with the Vatican at this visit.

Dr. Emanuel: Those are two different things. So here’s one. You come to Rome, and the first thing you are confronted by is you’ve got all these ruins that are 2,000 years old. You have to step back and say it’s amazing that they built something that lasted 2,000 years, right? You go to New York, Washington, Chicago. Anything there going to last 2,000 years? And the answer is no, quite clearly no. We don’t think in that kind of timeline. We don’t build for that kind of timeline. We don’t think about, well, what’s necessary for that kind of timeline. And that, I think, changes your mental attitude a lot. We think, well, if it’s going to last 30 or 40 years, that’s great. But I think that actually changes your perspective. And again, going back to what am I going to do? I inherit a lot from the past. What am I going to do to further that and perpetuate it? The second thing, and this probably is far from what you are thinking, but the second thing that strikes you is how little perch the cell phone has in this place. You go to restaurants. You go to wine bars here. And the overwhelming sense is people are actually talking to one another. They’re not on their phones doing parallel play. And I think that’s pretty amazing. It’s a very different phenomenon than exists in the United States where you can go into a restaurant and each side is sort of doing the phone thing. And the result is obviously a lot more social connection. It’s also structurally here. You’ve got a lot more piazzas. You’ve got a lot more parks. There are a lot more venues. I mean, a lot of narrow streets where people are just cheek by jowl interacting. And I think that’s pretty amazing.

Robert Duncan: I don’t want to jump ahead too much, but one of the things in your book that you say is important to general well-being is social health. So there’s something about these medieval societies’ architecture that we engineered it for.

Dr. Emanuel: Yes. Well, partly they didn’t have a car. I mean, one of the big differences between cities developed after 1900 and cities before is the car. And yes, that’s overwhelming. But it also ended up designed to bring people together. You had central fountains. You had central water supplies. There are lots of things that encourage people to interact, and you see it. It still exists in the 21st century, again, thinking about how you design cities and how you design places that people are encouraged to interact. I mean, I think one of the big issues, a question that was asked at the press conference about the rich and poor. One of the things that’s happened in society is the segregation, not on race basis but on income basis, on experience basis. So we are, especially in the United States, very much segregated by political affiliation, by income, and other things. And the opportunity to intermingle very much reduced. It used to be sports was, when I was growing up in Chicago, going to a Cubs game, sitting in the bleachers, was a buck, $1. All right? This is the 1960s. Anyone could afford a dollar for three hours of entertainment. And you mix with lots of different kinds of people for a buck. Very hard to do today. Very hard to do. So I think those kind of opportunities, kind of really important to figure out how we can bring them back to American society, society in general, that phenomena. We are at the far extreme in the United States, but exists everywhere.

Robert Duncan: I’ve heard a lot of arguments over the years about the ways in which classical civilization got being human right from the perspective of classical architecture, beauty in these civilizations. But I’ve never heard quite the argument that they were good for human beings because of — from a perspective of public health.

Dr. Emanuel: Yeah, I think it’s actually, I don’t know if it’s medieval so much as, you know, pre-car, by and large, where it takes you, you know, you can experience this in American cities. I live in Philadelphia, right? You walk in Philadelphia, you’ve got a grid in center city, and it’s definitely, you can easily walk to places. The roads are narrow, the whole city is pretty narrow, and it actually affords lots more opportunities to interact.

Robert Duncan: So you’ve talked about Rome, but what about the Vatican? What about your experience here working with Vatican officials has been noteworthy? Has there been anything that surprised you or…?

Dr. Emanuel: I mean, well, I will say, first of all, I was very impressed by the Pope’s speech. This was an opportunity for the Pope. He gave us 10 minutes, but he clearly, he cares broadly and he wants to make sure that we are inclusive of people from all different backgrounds and that we do think of the fact that it’s very important to focus on the common good so everyone can have opportunities for health, for a long life. That clearly came out, and I think very, very thoughtful in that regard. I would say the people I’ve interacted with in planning this and in participating, very much open to hearing views. There’s nothing particularly Catholic or not Catholic about my views. It wasn’t, if there’s any strong moral undertone to my view, it’s like heavily emphasizing children and prioritizing health care for children, which I think we all tend to underdo because it tends to be sick people who are sick people, old people who tend to have more illnesses. But I think also there is an importance of making sure health care doesn’t financially burden people. We think often in poor countries that people have to pay a lot of money to get health care services, but the same is true in rich countries. And I think making sure that doesn’t become the norm is very, very important. I do think the other thing is this sort of care of how are we going to deal with an aging society is one of those very, very strong themes here. I don’t think we’ve answered it by any stretch of the imagination, but it’s a very, very strong theme that everyone’s going to, all societies are going to have to confront over the next few decades.

Robert Duncan: You bring up the issue of aging populations and population decline. That’s something clearly present in Europe with regard to the birth rate. Was that something that came up during these meetings and how is the Vatican thinking about that?

Dr. Emanuel: Well, it is certainly come up right from the start. Dr. Colombo from OECD talked about the demands, mainly because of the aging population, the workforce gap with the amount of aging people. And that, I think, plus the number of workers who are going to support that, the ratio is going down. And so how we balance this and where the resources come from, I think, is a big issue. And I know we haven’t resolved it. I think no country has a secret message on that.

Robert Duncan: You talked about Pope Leo. Did you meet him afterwards? Did you have a chance to shake his hand?

Dr. Emanuel: Yes.

Robert Duncan: What did you say to him?

Dr. Emanuel: I did three things. I said that I was from Chicago. We actually grew up in the city around about the same time. He was on the south side. I was on the north side. That’s why he roots for the White Sox and I root for the Cubs. I gave him a jersey, collecting sports memorabilia, I think, from many people. But I’m 100% sure he doesn’t have it. It’s a jersey from the women’s professional basketball team in Chicago, the Chicago Sky. I gave him a jersey with Pope Leo and the Roman numeral 14 for him on there. Graciously accepted. And I gave him a copy of my book, Eat Your Ice Cream.

Robert Duncan: What did he say to you?

Dr. Emanuel: He was just very gracious about it.

Robert Duncan: Can we talk a bit about your book?

Dr. Emanuel: Sure.

Robert Duncan: There’s been a lot of interest in the media about it because you’re pushing back a little bit on the health and wellness industry and some of the scams or over promises that are out there. Can you tell me why you wrote it and sort of summarize in your own words a bit about this over interest perhaps in American culture with health and wellness?

Dr. Emanuel: Yeah. So there are really three streams that come together that motivated me to write the book. The first is I am a doctor. Lots of people ask me questions about what I should do. I relate one of them, you know, what diet are you on? What diet should I be on? I get asked about all sorts of supplements. I get asked about all sorts of activities. So constant requests for information about that which suggests that people aren’t getting something that they reliably trust. Second, many years ago I was at a conference, many years ago, about three or four years ago I was at a conference, and Arianna Huffington asked me a question about why isn’t there more wellness taught in medical school. And I said, well, you know, first of all, it’s pretty simple. There are six things. Second of all, no one is making a lot of money. You know, the health care system, hospitals aren’t making money on this. Drug companies aren’t making money on this. So there’s no real motivation within the health care system. And truth be told, we don’t focus on wellness in health care and medicine. And the last thing was actually the pivotal proximate cause, as I think you would say in the Catholic Church, was Peter Attia’s book, Outlive. Two years ago I got it. I had just finished teaching. Finals hadn’t come in. Grading wasn’t happening. And I read the book and it made me pissed off. No other word for it. I was just infuriated. First of all, all this emphasis on three things, physical things, exercise, which was the dominant thing, a little on food and a little on sleep. And I’m like leaving out the biggest, most important thing in health care and wellness and longevity, and that is social interaction. And so I then took the next three weeks before grades were due and I basically scribbled out the first version, the first draft of the book. And I just had to do some research, but I had most of it I had known. And if you look at the data on social interaction, it’s overwhelming that it’s the most important thing from a longevity standpoint, from a health standpoint, and from a happiness standpoint. And you can see lots and lots of studies about the social isolation is bad, increases your risk of mortality, social interaction is good, decreases your risk of mortality, plus increases your happiness factor in all sorts of interactions. And that’s true, by the way, even whether you’re an introvert or an extrovert. When introverts are asked to behave extroverted, initiate a conversation with a stranger, turns out they’re happier, even though they anticipate that they won’t be happy. It’ll be energy. I won’t learn anything. They’ll rebuff me. All of that turns out generally not, I mean, sometimes it’s true, but generally not to be true. People actually like talking. You actually turn out to be happier because you’ve communicated even with someone who’s not, you know, you don’t know.

Robert Duncan: So you have described yourself as a atheist, but practicing Jew.

Dr. Emanuel: Yeah.

Robert Duncan: And I wonder because some social scientists have pointed out that the decline in religious practice has led to some of the isolation that we see today as church or synagogue would have been the way in which you interacted with your broader community outside of your family, most regularly apart from work.

Dr. Emanuel: Yeah. Those are the three.

Robert Duncan: So I wonder if your own choice to go to synagogue has something to do with your own personal health and wellness program.

Dr. Emanuel: It’s not consciously, it wasn’t consciously as a mechanism to do wellness. I actually find reading the, what we call in Judaism, the Torah, but the five books of Moses, I think Old Testament quite meaningful, quite challenging to think through. I think there’s a lot of wisdom in that book. There is a reason it’s remains the world’s biggest bestseller. There’s a lot of stories there that have a lot of deep meaning. And they’re like, you know, ancient Greek myths or stories, very pithy descriptions of very deep issues. And therefore lots of people have been able to spin out interpretations and try to understand that. And so I find that quite enriching. And it’s as much intellectually enriching and morally enriching. So I don’t go to synagogue. I don’t go to synagogue, well, it’s going to keep me healthy. That’s not the reason.

Robert Duncan: It sounds like it could be a valid reason though.

Dr. Emanuel: Oh, for many people it is. Exactly. I mean, I think for many people, that’s as you point out, that’s a place where they have social connection. That’s a place where they can stay mentally engaged. That’s a place of community. Absolutely.

Robert Duncan: When I think about the title of your book, Eat Your Ice Cream, I think about feasting and how Christianity and Judaism share, albeit in different ways, feasts and fasts throughout the year. And when this podcast airs, Catholics will be halfway through Lent, looking forward perhaps to indulging in the thing that they gave up at Easter. And I wonder if you think that this ancient division of the year between feasts and fasts has some health or wellness message for contemporary society.

Dr. Emanuel: Well, and the Muslims have Ramadan and the Eid. So I think these are important communal activities. So in Judaism, we have Passover, which celebrates the leaving of Egypt, the gaining of freedom. And we eat lots of different foods. We deprive ourselves of certain foods. I think, again, I’m not sure how much was wellness and how much is sort of a communal activity, getting people together, but also thinking about what you’re eating, thinking about the meaning of that food. You know, in Judaism, we have a prayer before we eat, a blessing typically over bread. But if you’re not having bread over all the foods that you have, you have a grace after meals. I think those actually are very valuable practices. And they’re practices to make you appreciate that and pause for a minute before you get to serving and everything to appreciate that. You know, we’re lucky enough that we don’t have to go hungry and to appreciate the fact that we have this food. I think that’s a wonderful item. The sort of sequencing, I mean, for me, the sequencing of religion, I mean, there are lots of Jewish holidays, which I do not appreciate, Hanukkah being one of them. I don’t know that it’s actually a holiday we ought to celebrate. Led to a lot of problems in ancient Israel. But the idea of repentance, you know, that we are imperfect, I think is incredibly important. Thinking about moral growth over a year, thinking about how we’ve deviated over the year. I also think it’s kind of important, and this is a difference between Judaism and Catholicism. We only do it once a year and we do it in the fall. And if you think about repenting as a way of starting anew, I think it also, so why is it in the fall after you’ve harvested, you’re not planting? You know, part of that I do think is there’s this, you know, if you’ve planted a garden, you put in the bulbs and then you have to wait. And so it gives you a moment or many months of reflection about the kind of changes you want to put in place to grow.

Robert Duncan: So I’d like to return to where we began the conversation, reflecting on our mortality as part of the recipe for living a meaningful life. I wonder if in your work as an oncologist and dealing with difficult end of life related questions, you have ever been challenged in terms of your worldview or changed your mind about something in that, dare I say, privileged thin space, as some have described it to me, between this world and eternity that is often there in a patient’s last moments of life. What have you learned in those situations and how has it shaped you?

Dr. Emanuel: I do think the most important experience about being close to death, first of all, is people who survive have been in near death experiences and survive. I think the reorientation that that brings is a constant reminder to me about, you know, are you spending time thinking about the right things or doing the right things in the world? Or find a justification for why I’m doing something. And I think that’s a kind of important element. I will say the other thing that is very motivating to me, and I don’t know if it experiences for the same people, if you’re an oncologist, and I began treating patients in my early 30s, having someone who’s younger than you die is really transformative. It’s the sense of tragedy. This is very much, remember, a 19-year-old Yale student who was being treated for acute leukemia and unfortunately the chemotherapy on the first round didn’t work. It was in the second, very low chances that it was going to work. That really is powerful about focusing on kids and focusing on young adults and adolescents in particular. The snuffing out of life when it’s just about to take off. You know, you’ve done all this preparation through college and then you’re about to launch your own life separate from your parents. And that snuffing out I think is very, it weighs on you a lot. Even though you didn’t cause the disease, you did your best to fight it. But that is a transition moment that’s really important. Getting kids to that moment, giving them a safe, healthy launch, I think very much a motivator for me. I couldn’t treat pediatrics. It would just drive me nuts if I had to treat young kids. But I think trying to get kids or people who are younger to live a full life is very much important. And that has changed the way I think about health care. You know, at this conference, a lot of discussion about life expectancy and stuff. I actually think that’s a terrible metric. Life expectancy has gone up, it’s whatever, 84 in Japan and Switzerland and 79 in the United States. That’s not the right measure. The measure is who are the people at the bottom? Who are the people who are dying before 75? That’s the people we ought to really be thinking about and trying to do the most. You know, when someone, a recent actor who died at 49 from colorectal cancer, that’s a real problem. We are missing something here. That’s a totally curable disease. We should not be having young people die of that disease. Same thing of cervical cancer. We shouldn’t be having young people die of, women die of cervical cancer. And so I spend a lot of time thinking about, you know, a real metric ought to be how much are we bringing people up to so that they can live a full life. 75 is certainly full enough. 90 is, you know, if you’re in good health, better. But, you know, getting to 75, people should not be dying in their 40s and 50s.

Robert Duncan: I asked you earlier, what did you want to bring to the Vatican in terms of a message? And you said you were invited to speak on a certain key topic. But of all your experiences, having met the Pope, what do you think you will bring back, besides maybe stories about pistachio gelato, to either to your profession or into your personal life? Is there anything you’ll be bringing back with you?

Dr. Emanuel: Again, I think this Pope does seem to me to be very committed to a kind of equality, making sure people have enough for a good life and for their own life. I think that commitment and to the extent that it permeates what the Holy See does and the kind of leadership it can provide is very, very important. I do think, I sense certainly in the United States among the Catholics I know, a kind of hope for him that he humanizes the Catholic Church and is successful. I will say I’ve spent a lot of time thinking, well, if you were the Pope, maybe my egotistical, if you were the Pope, what would you do that would be really transformative? You know, I don’t know a lot about church history. It’s not been part of my education. But thinking about, you know, you had Vatican II. What equivalent could you do? It doesn’t have to be in the Catholic, you know, necessarily changing the theology, but could be very much in changing its role in the world. Anyway, I think it’s a very important question for everyone. Obviously the Pope is the top, but, you know, every bishop, every person who works for an organization like the Church. I have learned here, one of the important, is there’s been an increase in attendance at church, which certainly in France and Germany, and I think people aren’t quite sure why, but I do think there’s an important … if there’s a failure of liberalism, one of it is it doesn’t give a lot of meaning to life, leaves it to the individual to fill that in. We all have the challenge of, well, what, that’s a big question. You know, what’s the meaning of life? What’s the meaning of my life? And, you know, the Church can help people, I think, in that. There’s obviously a very long tradition of service in the Church, a long tradition of, you know, wrestling with big questions in various aspects. And I think reorienting the Church to help the world address that, I think, and help Catholics in particular, is very, very important. I mean, there are a billion Catholics in the world, right? An enormous, and in the United States, 25% or more of the population. So a lot of people listening and wanting, I think, guidance.

Robert Duncan: So I think that’s a really nice place to end. So, Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, thank you for sitting down with Catholic News Service and for sharing a bit about your life and your work and your visit to the Vatican.

Dr. Emanuel: Thank you. Not all the questions I had anticipated. Many, many unusual ones.

Robert Duncan: I hope good ones, though.

Dr. Emanuel: Yes. Yeah. Challenged me.