One example: when the coronavirus pandemic broke, and there was a lack of room for patients in intensive care units, consideration was given to giving priority to younger people, over the elderly. The same rationale risked being applied (and sometimes it was) when, in fact, there was room in intensive care units. The dicastery for Laity, Family, and Life highlighted this risk in a document.
After the publication of the document, nothing more has been said. The bishops did not comment anything further. Above all, Catholics in society did not speak about it. The issue of a sort of “hidden euthanasia” for the elderly never came up. However, this issue is part of a cultural debate that becomes a political question. It is about giving a voice to the elderly and least able to speak for themselves. Why were there no Catholic intellectuals to rise up to this challenge?
Another big issue on the table is that of freedom of worship. There is, it is true, the need to comply with health safety measures. However, very few commentators saw in the prohibition to celebrate Mass with the faithful in attendance a possible issue from the legal/international standpoint.
In this case, there was a lack of an institutional mentality realizing that the Holy See has autonomy in making these decisions. It should not be the State deciding that there be no religious gatherings. From a formal point of view, the Church should formally agree not to hold gatherings, thus meeting the government’s needs. It is a broad issue, worth discussing. Where have the Catholic intellectuals been?
Freedom to worship is part of religious freedom. And religious freedom is about the possibility to profess religion and live accordingly. Who does guarantee, then, that the Church and the faithful, in general, will always be able to proclaim their faith publicly?