How the Papal Election Could Shape Death Rights Across the World
The death of Pope Francis has opened a rare and pivotal moment for the future of the Catholic Church and, by extension, for the world’s evolving conversation around death, dignity, and end-of-life rights. Although the Church has historically stood firmly against practices like physician-assisted suicide, Pope Francis was known for his surprising, progressive influence on other issues, from softening rhetoric around LGBTQ+ inclusion to expanding the Church’s focus on climate justice and economic inequality. Under his leadership, even longstanding doctrines were sometimes reinterpreted with greater sensitivity to pastoral needs. The selection of the next pope will not likely overturn the Church’s opposition to euthanasia or assisted dying, but it will subtly shape the tone, priorities, and global influence of Catholic attitudes toward palliative care and end-of-life accompaniment.
Enter a cast of contenders who represent different shades of tradition and progressivism, each capable of steering the Church’s messaging in crucial, if incremental, ways. None of them, to be clear, support physician-assisted suicide. The Church’s opposition is deeply rooted and unlikely to change under any new pontiff. But the nuance matters.
- Cardinal Pietro Parolin (Italy), the current Vatican Secretary of State, has consistently stressed the need for strong palliative care systems, calling euthanasia “a defeat for humanity.” His focus is on safeguarding life, while acknowledging the importance of alleviating suffering through medical and spiritual support.
- Cardinal Matteo Zuppi (Italy), perhaps the most pastorally progressive among the frontrunners, has spoken more compassionately about complex end-of-life situations. While still opposing assisted suicide, he has emphasized accompaniment and understanding over judgment, suggesting that the Church should walk closely with the dying and their families through emotional and moral complexities. His tone, more than his doctrine, signals openness to a less punitive approach.
- Cardinal Luis Antonio Tagle (Philippines) reflects a similar traditional view but with a deep emphasis on mercy and compassion, prioritizing a ministry of presence at the end of life.
- Cardinal Péter Erdő (Hungary) is firmly rooted in conservative theology, and though less outspoken on assisted suicide specifically, his record suggests a strict defense of traditional interpretations around life and death.
In a recent interview, Cardinal Anders Arborelius of Sweden offered a quiet warning that echoes the stakes of this moment. Naming the Church’s biggest challenges, Arborelius spoke of the need for building bridges in a polarized world. He also warned against internal divisions: “It can be a danger in some parts of the Church that you get divided on various issues. We should not form parties within the Catholic Church.”
His words seem especially prescient. The next pope’s orientation toward death rights and palliative care will likely not be one of rupture, but of subtle recalibration. Will he emphasize the redemptive nature of suffering, or the imperative to ease it? Will he frame death as a battlefield for doctrine, or as a final pilgrimage where compassion must accompany every step?
The Catholic Church’s formal teachings on death are unlikely to change overnight. But the next pope will shape something quieter, and perhaps even more important: the emotional and moral atmosphere surrounding how 1.3 billion Catholics think about dying.
While none of the leading candidates would usher in a doctrinal revolution, the next pope’s attitude toward death rights – particularly palliative care, hospice access, and the moral framing of suffering – will shape how nearly 1.3 billion Catholics understand what it means to die with dignity. A more pastoral voice like Zuppi’s could encourage broader compassion within the rigid doctrine; a hardliner could cement an era of resistance to any nuanced discussion. In a world grappling with aging populations, widening access to assisted dying laws, and ethical debates about autonomy at the end of life, this seemingly small pivot could have massive consequences.