The U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s revocation of in-person requirements for chemical abortion drugs has led to a significant increase in serious adverse events for women, particularly those with ectopic pregnancies, according to a March 10 report by the Ethics and Public Policy Center. The report, analyzing data from 2017–2023, found the serious adverse event rate rose by 1.35 percentage points after the policy change, with a 52% higher harm rate for ectopic pregnancies. Groups like Heartbeat International report rising complications and coerced abortions via mail-order pills, while pro-life leaders demand reinstatement of safeguards. This policy, they argue, fuels a public health crisis and undermines pro-life gains since Dobbs. The article frames the issue as one of women’s safety and state sovereignty against federal overreach, calling for the Trump-Vance administration to act. This report exposes not merely medical negligence but the logical culmination of the conciliar revolution’s rejection of Christ’s social kingship, where the state, having expelled God from public life, now legally facilitates the murder of the innocent under the guise of “healthcare.”
The Naturalistic Reduction of a Moral Crime to a “Public Health” Issue
The article’s entire framework operates within the secular, naturalistic paradigm condemned by Pope Pius IX in the Syllabus of Errors. It discusses “serious adverse events,” “complication rates,” and “emergency rooms” as if the primary evil of chemical abortion were physical danger to the mother, not the objective, intrinsic murder of an innocent human being. This is a deliberate omission of the first and gravest harm: the violation of the eternal law, “Thou shalt not kill” (Ex. 20:13), and the damnation of souls involved in the procurement and commission of this crime. The focus on maternal health, while a legitimate secondary concern, is used to sidestep the non-negotiable moral absolute. As Pius IX taught, “The civil power… has no right to pass judgment on the instructions issued for the guidance of consciences” (Syllabus, Error 44), yet here the state, through the FDA, actively promotes a procedure that is intrinsically evil, thereby assuming a false authority over life and death. The article’s language, borrowed from the “public health” lexicon of the conciliar sect, treats abortion as a medical issue rather than a moral abomination, reflecting the modernist hermeneutic that reduces sin to social pathology.
The Omission of the Reign of Christ the King Over the State
The most damning silence is the complete absence of any reference to the Social Kingship of Our Lord Jesus Christ. Pope Pius XI, in Quas Primas, declared that Christ’s reign “encompasses all men… and it matters not whether individuals, families, or states, for men united in societies are no less subject to the authority of Christ than individuals.” He further stated that rulers who “wish to maintain their authority inviolate” must publicly honor and obey Christ. The FDA’s policy is a direct, public rejection of this sovereignty. It is an act of the “conciliar sect’s” civil arm enforcing the secularism (“laicism”) which Pius XI called “the plague that poisons human society.” The article critiques the policy on pragmatic grounds—safety, state rights, electoral politics—but never grounds its opposition in the principle that no state has authority to legalize or facilitate intrinsic evil. This omission is not accidental; it is symptomatic of the post-conciliar Church’s own abandonment of the doctrine of Christ the King, replacing it with the “hermeneutic of continuity” that allows Catholic politicians to support abortion “prudentially.” The article’s authors, by not demanding the total suppression of abortion as a matter of divine law, implicitly accept the modernist separation of religion from public order condemned in the Syllabus (Errors 19, 24, 55).
The Language of Naturalism and the Denial of Superrealities
The article’s vocabulary is meticulously naturalistic: “adverse events,” “hospitalizations,” “complications,” “safety threats,” “public health crisis.” There is not one mention of sin, mortal sin, scandal, the loss of sanctifying grace, the judgment of God, or the eternal destiny of the souls of the mothers, the fathers, the doctors, and the bureaucrats who facilitate these abortions. This is the hallmark of the “Church of the New Advent”: a complete evacuation of the supernatural from public discourse. St. Pius X, in Lamentabili sane exitu, condemned the proposition that “Faith, as assent of the mind, is ultimately based on a sum of probabilities” (Proposition 25). The article’s entire argument rests on probabilistic, empirical data—the increased percentage of harm—as if the moral law were subject to statistical revision. This is the evolution of dogma in practice: the absolute “Thou shalt not” is replaced by the utilitarian “the risks are higher.” The silence on the spiritual consequences is a blasphemous denial of the Redemption. Christ did not suffer and die to reduce “adverse events” but to save souls from Hell. By framing the issue solely in terms of physical safety, the article participates in the Modernist error that “Christian doctrine was initially Jewish, but through gradual development… became… universal” (Lamentabili, Proposition 60), i.e., that moral law can evolve with “human progress.”
Symptomatic of the Conciliar Apostasy: The “Pro-Life” Strategy’s Bankruptcy
The article quotes pro-life leaders demanding the reinstatement of “commonsense safeguards” and calling on the “Trump-Vance administration” to act. This is the dead-end strategy of the conciliar sect’s “pro-life” movement, which operates entirely within the framework of the secular state and its “religious freedom” principles. It never questions the state’s authority to legislate on morality at all, nor does it demand the explicit recognition of the Social Kingship of Christ as the only foundation for just law. This is a direct fruit of Vatican II’s Dignitatis Humanae, which Pius IX’s Syllabus condemned as Error 15 (“Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true”) and Error 77 (“In the present day it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religion should be held as the only religion of the State”). The “pro-life” movement, by accepting the state’s neutrality, accepts the state’s right to permit abortion under certain conditions. Its goal is “regulation,” not the total suppression of a crime against God. The article’s call for “safeguards” like in-person visits implicitly concedes that abortion, if made “safe,” is a permissible choice—a direct contradiction of the Fifth Commandment. This is the “moderate rationalism” of the Syllabus (Errors 8-14): treating theology and morality as subjects for natural reason and political negotiation, rather than truths to be imposed by the divine law.
The Coercion Narrative: A Distraction from the Primary Evil
The article highlights the case of Rosalie Markezich, coerced by her boyfriend. While this is a grave evil, it is used to create a category of “victims” who deserve protection, while the millions of women who voluntarily procure abortions are implicitly framed as exercising a “right.” The conciliar sect’s moral theology, post-Humanae Vitae, has developed a nuanced distinction between “free choice” and “coercion,” but both are mortal sins against the Fifth Commandment. The focus on coercion is a tactical move to gain traction with a culture that worships “autonomy.” It suggests that if abortion were truly “free” and “safe,” it might be acceptable. This is abject Modernism. As St. Pius X taught, “The dogmas of faith should be understood according to their practical function, i.e., as binding in action, rather than as principles of belief” (Lamentabili, Proposition 26) is an error. The article’s implicit argument is precisely this: the danger is in the *circumstances* (coercion, lack of ultrasound), not in the *act itself*. The true Catholic position, held before the conciliar apostasy, is that any direct procuring of abortion is a latae sententiae excommunication (Canon 2350, 1917 Code), regardless of coercion or “health” risks.
The Political Trap: Trusting the “Trump-Vance Administration”
The article concludes with a plea to the “Trump-Vance administration” to reinstate policies. This is a profound theological error. The state, even a “pro-life” one, has no legitimate authority to define the limits of a moral crime. Its role, according to Catholic doctrine, is to punish crimes against the natural law, including abortion, because “the civil power… is endowed with a certain right not circumscribed by any limits” (Syllabus, Error 39) only when it acts in accordance with the divine law. To appeal to a political administration as the savior of the unborn is to place hope in the “prince of this world” (Jn. 12:31) rather than in Christ the King. Pius XI in Quas Primas warned that when “God and Jesus Christ… were removed from laws and states… the foundations of that authority were destroyed.” The “Trump-Vance administration,” regardless of its rhetoric, operates within the secular, apostate framework of the U.S. Constitution, which enshrines the “separation of Church and State” condemned by the Syllabus (Error 55). To place hope in such an administration is to reject the doctrine that only a state officially consecrated to Christ the King can fulfill its duty to protect innocent life. The article’s final sentence—“we are not going to stop calling for action to protect countless lives”—is a pious but futile exercise in naturalism, ignoring that true protection comes only from a society where “all willingly accept the reign of Christ” (Quas Primas).
Conclusion: The Only Solution is the Reign of Christ
The EPPC report correctly identifies a grave danger, but its analysis and the article’s presentation are crippled by a naturalistic, modernist worldview that cannot name the root evil. The root evil is not the FDA’s policy; it is the apostasy of the state and the “conciliar sect” that governs it. The state, having formally rejected Christ’s kingship at Vatican II and in the constitutions of modern democracies, now acts as an enemy of God and His law. The only Catholic response is not to demand “safeguards” within a murderous system, but to preach the Social Kingship of Christ and to work for the establishment of a state that explicitly acknowledges His sovereignty and punishes abortion as the supreme crime against the natural and divine law. As Pius XI taught, “the annual celebration of this solemnity will also remind states that not only private individuals, but also rulers and governments have the duty to publicly honor Christ and obey Him.” Until the “conciliar sect” is exposed as an apostate structure and the true Catholic faith is restored, all political maneuvering within the current system is a game of whack-a-mole against the “plague of secularism” that will inevitably produce new, more efficient ways to kill the innocent. The report’s findings are a dire warning, but the article’s proposed solutions are part of the problem.
Source:
FDA Abortion-by-Mail Policy Puts Women in Danger, Report Finds (ncregister.com)
Date: 12.03.2026