The Pillar Catholic portal reports that Andorra’s Minister for Institutional Relations, Ladislau Baró, announced on June 1, 2026, that the decriminalization of abortion in the country will be approved before parliamentary elections next year. The article details negotiations between the Andorran government and the Vatican, noting that the Bishop of Urgell, Josep-Lluís Serrano Pentinat, as co-prince of Andorra, faces the dilemma of signing or refusing to sign the bill. The article highlights that the Holy See has been quietly negotiating a compromise on the matter since at least 2023, with Cardinal Pietro Parolin and Archbishop Paul Gallagher meeting with Prime Minister Xavier Espot to work toward a “compromise.” The new bishop’s tone is described as a “marked change” from his predecessor, Joan-Enric Vives, who had threatened to abdicate rather than sign an abortion bill. The article also references Emmanuel Macron’s visit to Andorra in April 2026, where he stated that “many Andorrans reclaim” the issue of decriminalization, and the example of King Baudoin of Belgium, who in 1990 refused to sign an abortion law, creating a constitutional crisis. What this article reveals, beneath its veneer of journalistic neutrality, is the systematic capitulation of the post-conciliar structures to the culture of death, the hollowing out of Catholic political witness, and the betrayal of the immutable teaching of the Church by those occupying positions of authority in the conciliar sect.
The Murder of the Innocent: A Crime Against the Natural Law and Divine Commandment
Let us begin with what this article dares not state plainly: abortion is the deliberate killing of an innocent human being, a violation of the Fifth Commandment, “Thou shalt not kill” (Exodus 20:13), and a crime against both the Natural Law and Divine Positive Law. The Church has taught, without ambiguity or compromise, from her very foundation, that “From the moment of its conception, the new being must be endowed with the rights of a human person, among which, before all others, is the inviolable right to life of every innocent creature” (Pius XII, Address to the Association of Large Families, 1951). The Second Vatican Council — that fountain of modernist confusion — itself, even in its compromised state, declared that “God, the Lord of life, has conferred on men the surpassing ministry of safeguarding life — a ministry which must be fulfilled in a manner which is worthy of man. Therefore, from the moment of its conception life must be guarded with the greatest care, while abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes” (Gaudium et Spes, 51). Yet the article treats the “decriminalization” of this abomination as a mere matter of political negotiation, a “thorny” but ultimately manageable diplomatic exercise. The language itself — “decriminalization” — is a euphemism designed to obscure the moral reality. One does not “decriminalize” murder; one legalizes it. The article’s very vocabulary is an instrument of moral obfuscation.
Pope Pius XI, in his encyclical Casti Connubii (1930), taught with supreme authority: “However much they may be to be pitied on account of the state of their souls, nevertheless they are not to be held guiltless who procured abortion, which, since it is against the precept of God and the law of nature, ‘Thou shalt not kill,’ God is the avenger of the blood of the unborn.” The Holy Office, under Pope Pius IX, declared in 1869 that “the penalty of excommunication, reserved to the Ordinary, is imposed on those who procure abortion, with effect after the expulsion of the fetus” (Apostolicae Sedis). The Church has never had the authority to “negotiate” on the moral law. The Fifth Commandment is not a bargaining chip.
The Conciliar Capitulation: “Dialogue” as Betrayal
The article’s central revelation — buried beneath layers of diplomatic reporting — is that the Vatican Secretary of State, Cardinal Pietro Parolin, has been actively negotiating with the Andorran government to find a “compromise” on the decriminalization of abortion. The article states that “Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin met with Espot in 2023, together with Archbishop Paul Gallagher, the Holy See’s foreign minister, to work toward a compromise on the matter.” Parolin himself described the issue as a “very delicate, very complex question that we need to face with a lot of discretion and a lot of wisdom.”
Let us translate this bureaucratic language into theological reality. “Discretion” and “wisdom” here mean the quiet surrender of Catholic moral teaching to the demands of secular governments. There is no “delicate” or “complex” question about whether the state should permit the slaughter of innocents. The Church’s position is absolute and has been stated with perfect clarity for two millennia. What is truly “complex” is the degree to which the conciliar structures have abandoned their divine mandate in pursuit of diplomatic respectability.
The article notes that “in recent years, the Church appeared to signal tacit acceptance of efforts to decriminalize abortion in Andorra, on the condition that the Bishop of Urgell, Josep-Lluís Serrano Pentinat, would be exempted from formally sanctioning the measure as co-prince.” This is the modus operandi of the post-conciliar church: maintain the outward appearance of Catholic identity while systematically gutting its substance. The “tacit acceptance” described here is not prudence — it is complicity. The Church does not have the authority to signal “tacit acceptance” of the legalization of murder, any more than she has the authority to signal tacit acceptance of any other intrinsic evil.
The principle at stake was articulated with clarity by Pope Leo XIII in Immortale Dei (1885): “The Almighty, therefore, has given the charge of the human race to two powers, the ecclesiastical and the civil, the one being set over divine, and the other over human, each the highest in its own kind, and each fixed within certain limits, defined by its own nature and special object.” When the civil power commands what the divine law forbids, the obligation is clear: “We ought to obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29). There is no “compromise” possible between truth and error, between the law of God and the law of the abortionist.
The “Marked Change” of Tone: From Witness to Accommodation
The article draws particular attention to the contrast between the new Bishop of Urgell, Josep-Lluís Serrano Pentinat, and his predecessor, Joan-Enric Vives. Vives had threatened to abdicate rather than sign an abortion bill, declaring that “when the Andorran people ask for a Catholic bishop to be their Head of State, they know what it implies.” The new bishop, by contrast, said in his first public appearance that “there should be dialogue and support for those who suffer… [especially] women in a difficult position” due to abortion. The article describes this as a “marked change of tone.”
Indeed it is. The change is from the language of Catholic witness to the language of conciliar accommodation. Vives, whatever his other failings within the conciliar framework, at least understood that a Catholic bishop cannot be a passive instrument of the culture of death. His threat to abdicate was an act of witness — imperfect, perhaps, but real. The new bishop’s invocation of “dialogue” and “support for those who suffer” is the standard conciarist refrain, designed to create an atmosphere of compassion while the abortion mills continue their work. It is the language of Gaudium et Spes emptied of its already-compromised moral content — a language that speaks of “conscience” while refusing to inform that conscience with the truth.
Pope St. Pius X, in his encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis (1907), warned against precisely this kind of accommodation: “The Modernist sustains and maintains that the religious sense, which through the agency of vital immanence springs from the lurking places of the subconsciousness, is the germ of all religion, and ought to be accepted as the universal criterion of religious truth.” The new bishop’s appeal to “dialogue” and “suffering” without any reference to the intrinsic evil of abortion, without any mention of the Fifth Commandment, without any call to repentance, is the fruit of the modernist infection that has consumed the conciliar structures. It is the language of a church that has lost its faith and replaced it with sociology.
The Precedent of King Baudoin: A Contrast That Exposes the Conciliar Failure
The article invokes the example of King Baudoin of Belgium, who in 1990 refused to sign a law legalizing abortion, declaring that he “feared that this law will contribute to a palpable diminution of respect for the lives of the weakest among us.” Baudoin asked: “Is it right that I am the only Belgian citizen to be forced to act against his conscience in such a crucial area? Is the freedom of conscience sacred for everyone except for the king?” The Belgian government ultimately worked out a compromise in which Baudoin declared himself unfit to rule while the government passed the law, then restored him as king.
The article presents this as a historical curiosity, but it serves as a devastating indictment of the conciliar church. Here was a Catholic head of state — a layman — who understood his duty more clearly than the bishops and cardinals of the post-conciliar structures. Baudoin recognized that his conscience, formed by the Catholic faith, could not permit him to sign the law. He was willing to accept the consequences — even the temporary loss of his throne — rather than cooperate with evil. The conciliar church, by contrast, has been “negotiating” for three years to find a way to permit the same evil while maintaining “institutional stability.”
The difference is not merely tactical; it is theological. Baudoin acted on the principle articulated by Pope Pius XI in Quas Primas: “He is indeed the source of salvation for individuals and for the whole: ‘And there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved’ (Acts 4:12). He is the author of prosperity and true happiness for individual citizens as well as for the state.” The conciliar structures, having abandoned the social reign of Christ the King, have no principled basis for resisting the demands of secular governments. Their “negotiations” are not negotiations between truth and error, but between institutional survival and institutional survival — with truth as the expendable variable.
The Silence About the Unborn: The Gravest Omission
Perhaps the most revealing feature of this article is what it does not say. There is no mention — not a single word — of the unborn children whose lives are at stake. The article speaks of “women in a difficult position,” of “dialogue,” of “institutional stability,” of “negotiations with the Holy See.” It speaks of the political dilemma of the Bishop of Urgell, of the diplomatic efforts of Cardinal Parolin, of the ambitions of Prime Minister Espot and President Macron. But the victims — the innocent human beings whose lives will be extinguished if this bill passes — are invisible.
This silence is not accidental. It is the hallmark of the post-conciliar mentality, which has replaced the supernatural order with the natural order, the eternal with the temporal, the salvation of souls with the management of institutions. Pope Pius IX, in the Syllabus of Errors, condemned the proposition that “the civil authority may interfere in matters relating to religion, morality and spiritual government” (Proposition 44). The Andorran government’s insistence on decriminalizing abortion is precisely such an interference — an assertion of state power over the most fundamental moral question, the right to life of the innocent. The conciliar church’s response is not to resist this interference as Pius IX demanded, but to “negotiate” with it.
The article’s silence about the unborn mirrors the silence of the conciliar church itself. Where are the bishops who will thunder from their cathedrals that abortion is murder? Where are the cardinals who will declare, with St. Peter, “We must obey God rather than men”? Where is the successor of Peter who will confirm his brethren in the faith? They are negotiating. They are being “discrete.” They are exercising “wisdom.” And the children die.
The Heresy of “Institutional Stability” Over Truth
Minister Baró stated that the government’s goal is “decriminalizing abortion while maintaining the country’s institutional stability.” This phrase — “institutional stability” — is the key to understanding the entire conciliar approach to moral questions. For the post-conciliar structures, the preservation of institutional arrangements takes precedence over the proclamation of moral truth. The “institutional stability” of Andorra — the arrangement by which a Catholic bishop serves as co-prince — is more important than the lives of unborn children.
This is the logic of the hermeneutic of continuity applied to politics: maintain the forms, preserve the structures, and quietly abandon the content. The Bishop of Urgell will continue to be co-prince; the Vatican will continue to “negotiate”; the appearance of Catholic influence will be maintained. But the substance — the public witness to the truth that abortion is murder — will be sacrificed on the altar of “stability.”
Pope Leo XIII, in Libertas Praestantissimum (1888), taught that “the nature of human liberty, however it be considered, whether in individuals or in society, whether in those who command or in those who obey, supposes the necessity of obedience to some supreme and eternal law, which is no other than the authority of God, commanding good and forbidding evil.” The Andorran government’s claim to the right to decriminalize abortion is a claim to liberty without obedience to the divine law — a claim that Leo XIII explicitly condemned. The conciliar church’s willingness to “negotiate” with this claim is a betrayal of the Church’s divine mission.
The Example of Emmanuel Macron: The Secular State as Anti-Church
The article notes that French President Emmanuel Macron, as co-prince of Andorra, visited the principality in April 2026 and stated that “many Andorrans reclaim” the issue of decriminalization of abortion, and that “a dialogue was set in motion” to move forward with the proposal “within the respect of the institutions, everyone’s conscience, and tradition.” Macron’s language is revealing: “everyone’s conscience” — as if the conscience that recognizes abortion as murder is equal to the conscience that demands it; “tradition” — as if the Catholic tradition of defending the unborn is merely one tradition among many.
This is the language of religious indifferentism, condemned by Pope Gregory XVI in Mirari Vos (1832) and by Pope Pius IX in the Syllabus of Errors (Proposition 15: “Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true”). Macron’s appeal to “everyone’s conscience” is not a defense of genuine conscience — which must be formed by the truth — but a defense of the modernist notion that all opinions are equally valid. The conciliar church’s willingness to engage in “dialogue” with this position is itself a form of indifferentism — a tacit admission that the Catholic position on abortion is merely one option among several.
The Complicity of the “Catholic” Press
The article itself, published by The Pillar Catholic portal, is a specimen of the problem. It reports on the negotiations over abortion decriminalization with the detached tone of a political correspondent covering a trade dispute. There is no moral outrage, no theological analysis, no invocation of the Church’s teaching on the sanctity of life. The article treats the “decriminalization” of abortion as a political development to be reported, not as a moral catastrophe to be denounced.
This is the fruit of the conciliar revolution in Catholic journalism: the replacement of theological analysis with political reporting, of moral witness with diplomatic commentary. A Catholic publication that reports on negotiations to legalize abortion without clearly and unequivocally condemning abortion as murder has failed in its most basic duty. It has become, in effect, a secular publication with a Catholic veneer — precisely the kind of “Catholic” media that the conciliar revolution has produced.
Conclusion: The Abomination of Desolation in the Holy Place
The situation in Andorra is a microcosm of the global apostasy. A Catholic bishop, serving as co-prince of a Catholic nation, is being pressured to acquiesce in the legalization of murder. The Vatican Secretary of State is “negotiating” to find a “compromise” that will permit the killing of innocents while maintaining “institutional stability.” The language of “dialogue,” “conscience,” and “suffering” is deployed to obscure the reality of what is being done. And the unborn — the weakest and most defenseless members of the human family — are forgotten.
Pope Pius XI, in Quas Primas, warned that “when God and Jesus Christ — as we lamented — were removed from laws and states and when authority was derived not from God but from men, the foundations of that authority were destroyed.” The Andorran government’s claim to the right to decriminalize abortion is precisely such a claim — a claim derived not from God but from men, from the “will of the people,” from the demands of “progress.” The conciliar church’s response — negotiation, compromise, “discretion” — is the response of an institution that has itself removed God from its laws and its practice.
The true Church of Christ — the Church that endures in the faithful who profess the integral Catholic faith — has no authority to negotiate on the Fifth Commandment. She has no authority to signal “tacit acceptance” of the legalization of murder. She has no authority to prioritize “institutional stability” over the lives of the innocent. The conciliar structures, in their eagerness to accommodate the world, have betrayed the very mission entrusted to them by Christ: to teach all nations, to guard the deposit of faith, to proclaim the truth without compromise or apology.
Let those who have ears to hear, hear. The abomination of desolation is not coming — it is here. And the conciliar church is helping to build it.
Source:
Andorran minister says abortion will be decriminalized before next election (pillarcatholic.com)
Date: 03.06.2026