The ecumenical legacy of Pope Francis | One Body

Nicholas Jesson

Saturday, May 3, 2025

Photo credit: Stefano Spaziani

The ecumenical legacy of Pope Francis

by Nicholas Jesson

After Pope Francis died, an ecumenical colleague asked me about the ecumenical legacy of the late pope. As I endeavoured to answer him, I found myself clarifying at several points that Francis was not all that different in his ecumenical commitments from the previous popes, going back to Pope Paul VI and the Second Vatican Council. Each of the post-conciliar popes has presided over significant steps on the ecumenical journey, and Francis should be seen as continuing this same journey. As much as I love and appreciate him, I am uncomfortable giving Francis sole credit for achievements that are largely due to the efforts of ecumenical leaders in the Roman Curia, ecumenical agencies, theological dialogues, and national and local churches. The achievements of the ecumenical movement during the Francis papacy are certainly due to his guidance, encouragement, permission, and his genuinely open spirit, and it is for these that we can give thanks.

The Spirit asks us to listen to the questions, concerns, and hopes of every Church, people, and nation. And to listen to the world, to the challenges and changes that it sets before us. Let us not soundproof our hearts; let us not remain barricaded in our certainties. So often our certainties can make us closed. Let us listen to one another (Homily at the Mass Opening the Synodal Path, October 10, 2021).

Working as an ecumenist in the Francis years has been a great joy. I have been studying and working in ecumenism since the late 1980s, beginning in the middle years of Pope John Paul II and through the long years of Joseph Ratzinger/Pope Benedict XVI’s time at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) and then his papacy. These were positive years of ecumenical progress. John Paul II was a figure who transformed Catholic relations with the Evangelical world. He presided over the most significant years of bilateral dialogue with Anglicans, Lutherans, Orthodox, Methodists, and Reformed. He was the pope who approved the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification and issued common declarations on Christology with the Oriental Orthodox. He convened world religious leaders at Assisi to pray for peace.

During all those years, Ratzinger served in the CDF, ensuring that such doctrinal consensus and public actions reflected the core of the Catholic tradition. Ratzinger personally intervened in the approval process for the Joint Declaration to ensure that it met the strict doctrinal standards necessary for such a significant statement. John Paul II and Benedict XVI were no ecumenical slouches. So, what changed with Francis?

The difference with Francis was partly one of tone. Francis took great joy in his encounters with people of all walks of life. He didn’t have many reservations. He didn’t gently remind his visitors of the reasons for separation or the limits on our life together. Paul VI, John Paul II, and Benedict XVI authentically believed in the oneness of the body of Christ and thus were compelled to dialogue with others who share in the one Lord, one faith, and one baptism of Christ. Francis agreed with all of that, but he began from a shared humanity, a shared quest for the living God, a desire to live together in peace, and to walk together on the road. He didn’t need doctrine to steer him towards human encounter.

Francis’ understanding of ecumenism was rooted in a vision of the church as a “field hospital.” He frequently emphasised mercy and encounter rather than doctrine. This openness extended to ecumenical relationships. He described ecumenism as “a journey, not a destination” that “all Christians are called to realise by walking together, praying together and working together, waiting for the Lord to lead us to the restoration of full unity.” He used the idea of a journey throughout his writing. In his first encyclical, Evangelii Gaudium, he said,

We must never forget that we are pilgrims journeying alongside one another. This means that we must have sincere trust in our fellow pilgrims, putting aside all suspicion or mistrust, and turn our gaze to what we are all seeking: the radiant peace of God’s face (#44).

As the secular media have been reflecting on Francis’ death in the past two weeks, many commentators have described him as a progressive, a radical, or even as a disruptor. Religious media have generally been more cautious, seeing the complexities of his character and biography. My assessment is that Francis was a moderate conservative with pastoral instincts that made him very open. He was willing to talk with anyone, leading to some iconic moments. Early in his papacy, Francis caused quite a stir among the ecumenical staff in Rome when a video appeared online of Francis speaking with Bishop Tony Palmer, an Anglican Evangelical friend, and sending greetings to a conference of Pentecostal pastors. Palmer had visited him at the Casa Santa Marta, recorded the video on his phone, and released it on social media, all without anyone in the ecumenical office catching wind of it. It never occurred to Francis to allow his staff to edit the video or to vet the Pentecostal conference to ensure it wasn’t going to be controversial. He wasn’t looking for controversy, and he wasn’t naïve, but he just didn’t think anyone would notice. He was genuinely present to his friend and responded accordingly.

At the same time, Francis understood the importance of grand gestures. His abiding concern for the plight of migrants led him to visit Lampedusa in the first weeks of his papacy. Later, when the IARCCUM pilgrimage of Anglican and Catholic bishops was in Rome in 2016, he joined with the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, in commissioning these bishops for ecumenical leadership at home. He gave each one a “Lampedusa Cross” made of wood from ships that foundered in the Mediterranean as refugees attempted to reach Europe. The gift was a reminder that the ecumenical task is not only to be good partners with one another, but to engage together in the great mission of the church in caring for the poor and the marginalised.

Another regular theme in Francis’ teaching was “human fraternity,” which he described in Fratelli Tutti as “a love that transcends the barriers of geography and distance, and declares blessed all those who love their brother ‘as much when he is far away from him as when he is with him’” (#1). With his reflections on fraternity, Francis drew his inspiration from St. Francis of Assisi, just as his earlier reflections on “integral ecology” in Laudato Si’ had been inspired by St. Francis’ love of creation.

In Quebec City in 2022, Francis explained it this way:

The Church will be a credible witness to the Gospel the more its members embody communion, creating opportunities and situations that enable all those who approach the faith to encounter a welcoming community, one capable of listening, entering into dialogue, and promoting quality relationships. ... We are talking about living in a Christian community that in this way becomes a school of humanity, where all can learn to love one another as brothers and sisters, ready to work together for the common good. Indeed, at the heart of the preaching of the Gospel is God’s love, which transforms us and makes us capable of communion with all and service to all (Homily at Vespers in Notre Dame-de-Quebec Cathedral, July 28, 2022).

For Francis, human fraternity served not only for ecumenical outreach to other Christians but as a foundational ethic for interreligious relations as well as for justice and peace. Human fraternity was the theme of a significant outreach to Muslims, beginning with the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar in Cairo, Ahmad Al-Tayyeb. Their joint Document on Human Fraternity for World Peace and Living Together was issued during Francis’ visit to Abu Dhabi in February 2019.

Ecumenism on the journey

Francis promoted a form of “practical ecumenism,” grounded in shared mission rather than doctrinal agreement. This included collaboration on poverty alleviation, migration, and climate change. Together with Archbishop Welby, Francis inaugurated a joint Anglican-Catholic ministry addressing human trafficking and modern slavery. He joined with Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew to visit the island of Lesbos to witness the plight of Syrian refugees. He travelled to Lund in Sweden to commemorate the 500th anniversary of the Reformation, appearing together with Lutheran leaders, including Archbishop Antje Jackelén, the first female primate of the Church of Sweden. With Archbishop Welby and Rev. John Chalmers, Moderator of the Church of Scotland, he led a retreat for political and religious leaders of South Sudan. Surprising everyone, he fell at the feet of President Salva Kiir, kissing his feet and begging him and his opponents to make peace. More recently, he travelled to South Sudan with Archbishop Justin and Rev. Iain Greenshields, the new Moderator of the Church of Scotland, to promote peace in this war-torn nation. He was willing to stand beside these other Christian leaders as equals, not insisting on his preeminence as bishop of Rome.

In the first months of his papacy, Francis met with Brazilian leaders during his visit for World Youth Day. He told them:

Between selfish indifference and violent protest, there is always another possible option: that of dialogue. Dialogue between generations, dialogue within the people ... When leaders in various fields ask me for advice, my response is always the same: dialogue, dialogue, dialogue.

His commitment to the dialogue of encounter was a defining mark of his ministry.

We have all received the same baptism; we are all going on Jesus’ path, we want Jesus... But now, in fact, is the time in which the Spirit makes us think that these divisions are not good, that these divisions are a counter-testimony, and we must do everything in order to journey together: spiritual ecumenism, the ecumenism of prayer, the ecumenism of work, but of charity at the same time; the ecumenism of reading the Bible together... To go together towards unity.

Francis met with leaders from so many churches that it is hard to keep track. Almost daily, there were pilgrimages to Rome by church leaders from all over the world, each one seeking an audience with the pope. Many of them attended the regular weekly audiences, but there were also many private audiences. In a tribute to Francis after his death, the Canadian Evangelical leader, Brian Stiller, reflected on his visits to meet Francis. Stiller describes sharing simple meals in the dining hall at the Casa Santa Marta, with Francis sharing a moment of prayer with his visitors and enquiring about their families.

Francis appeared to have particularly close relationships with two leaders, the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople and Archbishop Justin Welby. Welby and Francis began their ministries in Canterbury and Rome within weeks of each other, and they have ended them within months. Each year of their ministry, they met in person at least once, but they also kept in touch by phone, letter, and presumably through their staff. There was a genuine joy when they met that communicated itself strongly to those responsible for promoting Anglican-Catholic relations. Staff anticipated these encounters with an expectation of important gestures and steps forward in the dialogue of life.

With Bartholomew, the relationship was more reserved, but also more precise. It has been a standing practice since Vatican II for the pope to send a delegation to the Phanar (home of the Ecumenical Patriarch) on the November 30 feast of St. Andrew. The Orthodox reciprocate by sending a delegation to visit Rome for the June 29 feast of Sts. Peter and Paul. During the Francis years, this was frequently an occasion for Bartholomew himself to visit Rome. When Francis travelled to Lesbos with Bartholomew, he implicitly recognized that Greece falls within Orthodox territory and that as bishop of Rome he should not act independently of his Orthodox counterparts. This subtle gesture was not missed by the Orthodox.

At Francis’ invitation, the Orthodox have also provided advice on their synodal processes and theological understanding of synodality. As they have seen signs of respect from Rome, it has become easier for the Orthodox to accord Francis, as bishop of Rome, the traditional honours as first among equals, primus inter pares. Orthodox understand the bishop of Rome as patriarch of the West, a title that Benedict dropped from his formal titles, but which Francis resurrected just last year. Interestingly, at Francis’ funeral, Bartholomew was accorded the special honour of being seated closest to the altar as befitting the next senior of the five ancient patriarchates. This, we were told, is in accordance with the canons of the Council of Ephesus in 431. One wonders if this was Francis’ instruction or a very careful liturgist?

The journey continues

There are several unfinished ecumenical projects of the Francis years, one of which is to widen the opportunities for eucharistic sharing. Following Vatican II, the ecumenical norms were revised to permit Catholics to receive the Eucharist in Orthodox churches when there is a serious need and only if they are welcomed by the Orthodox. While it is not possible for Catholics to receive in churches in which we do not recognise valid orders, other Christians can receive the Eucharist, Penance, and Anointing of the Sick from a Catholic minister under certain conditions. There have been efforts over several decades to gradually address these limits, mostly by ensuring greater understanding of the opportunities afforded in canon law. However, Francis raised hopes of a relaxation of the norms when he visited the Lutheran church in Rome.

During the visit, a Lutheran woman married to a Roman Catholic asked him about receiving communion with her spouse. Francis explained the Catholic principles involved and then encouraged her to pray and examine her conscience. Although he didn’t give her permission, he also didn’t exclude it. He said,

Is sharing the Lord’s Supper the end of a journey or is it the viaticum for walking together? ... I ask myself: don’t we have the same baptism? And if we have the same baptism, we have to walk together. ... Always refer to baptism: ‘One faith, one baptism, one Lord,’ as Paul tells us, and take the outcome from there. I would never dare give permission to do this because I do not have the authority. One baptism, one Lord, one faith. Speak with the Lord and go forward. I do not dare say more.

In his comments, Francis seemed to be concerned about contravening the established principles and norms, but he also set the broader question in the context of her own conscience. The question of receiving the sacrament is normally addressed as a matter of judgment by a priest based on the relevant canons and pastoral practice. Instead, Francis set it in the realm of the woman’s own pastoral need and spiritual discernment. This was the answer of a pastor, not a theologian, and it wasn’t a definitive ruling establishing new pastoral norms. Yet, it sparked conversation and considerable hope that this might be a point of progress in eucharistic sharing. If we cannot regularly share the sacrament with other Christians, might it at least be possible to address the sacramental needs of interchurch couples that experience this eucharistic division every week?

Another unfinished ecumenical project is to broaden the recognition of ecclesial elements in other Christian churches, and, in particular, to find ways to recognise authentic elements of ministry exercised in these churches. Vatican II’s Lumen Gentium recognises “elements of sanctification and truth” (#8) that have been preserved in the different churches and ecclesial communities. The presence of these elements permitted the Council to describe the “real but imperfect communion” between the churches (cf. Unitatis Redintegratio #3). Catholics would include sacred orders among the essential elements of ecclesial life, , but there are few churches in which we can confidently affirm the presence of valid orders. Nevertheless, in our ecumenical experience over the past several decades, Catholics have come to recognise that Christian ministry is occurring in and through the ecclesial service of clergy from churches where we cannot yet affirm valid orders.

So, what was Francis’ part in this? Like his predecessors since the 1960s, when he met with clergy from other churches, he treated them with respect and accorded them the dignity of their office. Beyond simple matters of protocol, popes have given gifts to visiting clergy that represent a shared ministry. For example, following the example of Paul VI’s gift of an episcopal ring to the Archbishop of Canterbury, Michael Ramsey, in 1966, every pope has given gifts with strong symbolic meaning to Anglican bishops, These have included chalices and patens, pectoral crosses, stoles, and other items used solely by clergy. These gifts are not inconsequential or mistaken; they are intended to signify a degree of recognition that cannot yet be expressed in theological or canonical terms, but that is nevertheless real. Our unfinished task is to find language to express this recognition that is commensurate with Vatican II’s “real but imperfect communion.” If we focus solely or primarily on sacramental validity, we are constrained by binary alternatives of valid or invalid. The Vatican II development in ecclesial recognition was possible with the adoption of an ecclesiology of communion. Could an alternative theological framework assist us in expressing the “real but imperfect” recognition of ecclesial ministries among our ecumenical partners? Perhaps like Francis, we need to insert a missional perspective into our discernment.

Lastly, the unique primatial role that the pope plays in the Catholic Church and within global Christianity has been a historical point of contention and a more recent point of dialogue. John Paul II insisted that the bishop of Rome’s “petrine ministry” is a universal ministry of unity, and yet paradoxically is also one of the great obstacles to unity. In his encyclical Ut Unum Sint in 1995, he invited all Christians to reflect upon ways that this ministry might be exercised as a service to Christian unity. As the 30th anniversary of the encyclical approached, the Dicastery for Promoting Christian Unity collated all the responses to this appeal from ecumenical partners and theological dialogues. The Bishop of Rome: Primacy and Synodality in the Ecumenical Dialogues and in the Responses to the Encyclical Ut Unum Sint was published in 2024. Displaying Francis’ influence, this document harvests the many responses but relates the central theme of “primacy” to the recent ecclesiological reflections on synodality prompted by Francis.

The ecumenical implications of synodality have been described in several previous posts in this One Body blog. See, for example, “No Synodality Without Ecumenism” from October 2023. Francis has left the church a substantial challenge to receive the gift of synodality in the coming years. Very recently, the Synod Secretariat advised local dioceses of a three-year implementation phase in which local synodal conversations should be focused on the Final Document of the 2023-2024 Synod. In each diocese, we should be exploring relevant aspects of the document and considering ways to implement it in our local ecclesial life. To complement local implementation, Francis established ten working groups following the 2023 Assembly, each charged with bringing detailed recommendations to the whole church, with interim reports due in June of this year. Synod Working Group 10 is charged with “The reception of the fruits of the ecumenical journey in ecclesial practices.” To receive the fruits of over 60 years of ecumenical dialogue and relationships is an ongoing task of the whole church that won’t be completed before June. Still, the working group should identify “indications” in the Synod reports that point towards paths that this ecumenical journey should take.

Let me conclude with hopeful words from Francis on the 25th anniversary of the encyclical Ut Unum Sint:

On the path that leads to full communion, it is important to keep in mind the progress already made, but equally important to scan the horizon and ask, with the encyclical Ut Unum Sint, ‘Quanta est nobis via?’ (“How much further must we travel?”; #77). One thing is certain: unity is not chiefly the result of our activity, but a gift of the Holy Spirit. Yet "unity will not come about as a miracle at the very end. Rather, unity comes about in journeying; the Holy Spirit does this on the journey."