EWTN News portal reports that Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk has pledged to recognize and register same-sex “marriages” performed in other European Union countries involving Polish citizens. Speaking ahead of a cabinet meeting on May 12, 2026, Tusk announced that Poland would move to transcribe these unions into the national civil registry, despite the fact that Polish domestic law does not recognize same-sex “marriage” or civil partnerships. The move follows rulings from the Court of Justice of the European Union (November 2025) and Poland’s own Supreme Administrative Court (March 2026), the latter ordering Warsaw authorities to register the marriage certificate of a Polish same-sex couple “married” in Germany. Warsaw mayor Rafał Trzaskowski, a senior figure in Tusk’s political camp, stated that the city would begin recognizing such unions even before national legislation is adopted, and on May 14 claimed the city had already issued its first transcription of a same-sex marriage certificate. Poland’s digital affairs ministry has proposed replacing the categories “husband” and “wife” in the civil registry system with neutral terms such as “first spouse” and “second spouse.” Legal observers, including Olivier Bault of Ordo Iuris, have argued that the government’s administrative approach exceeds its authority under Article 18 of the Polish Constitution, which defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman. The haste with which Poland’s government rushes to institutionalize the fruits of sodomy reveals not merely political cowardice but a profound apostasy from the natural law inscribed by the Creator Himself — an apostasy that no court ruling, no parliamentary majority, and no administrative decree can render lawful.
The Primacy of Divine Law Over Human Legislation
The fundamental error at the root of the entire spectacle in Warsaw is the pretension that human authority — whether legislative, judicial, or administrative — can redefine what God has defined. The Polish Constitution’s Article 18, which defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman, is not merely a positive law reflecting cultural preference; it is a juridical recognition of the lex naturalis, the natural law that proceeds from God Himself and that no human power can abrogate. As Pope Leo XIII taught in his encyclical 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 kind, and each fixed within certain limits, defined by its own nature and special object.” When the state presumes to legislate against the natural law, it exceeds the authority God has granted it and acts nulliter — with no binding force whatsoever.
Olivier Bault of Ordo Iuris correctly identified that the government’s administrative approach attempts to circumvent constitutional and statutory frameworks. His observation that “no ministerial decree can lawfully override this hierarchically layered framework” is sound in principle. Yet the deeper question remains: why does the Polish Constitution itself enshrine the correct definition of marriage? Because the framers of that constitution, however imperfectly, recognized that the state does not create marriage but merely recognizes what God has instituted. The sacrament of matrimony, elevated by Christ to the dignity of a sacrament, is not a human convention subject to revision by parliamentary vote or judicial fiat. As the Council of Trent solemnly defined: “Si quis dixerit, matrimonium non esse vere et proprie unum septem sacramentorum evangelicae legis … anathema sit” (“If anyone shall say that marriage is not truly and properly one of the seven sacraments of the evangelic law … let him be anathema” — Session XXIV, Canon 1).
The proposed replacement of “husband” and “wife” with the sterile, bureaucratic language of “first spouse” and “second spouse” is not merely a technical adjustment. It is a deliberate act of linguistic revolution, designed to erase from the public consciousness the complementarity of the sexes that God inscribed in creation. When God created man “male and female” (Genesis 1:27), He established an order that no minister of the Polish digital affairs ministry can annul by administrative regulation. The bureaucratic euphemism is a mask over the abomination.
The European Union as Instrument of Moral Subversion
The role of the Court of Justice of the European Union in this affair deserves particular scrutiny. The CJEU’s November 2025 ruling, which compelled EU member states to recognize same-sex “marriages” performed in other member countries for administrative purposes, represents yet another instance of supranational institutions imposing moral revolution upon sovereign peoples. This is the same European Union whose ideological roots lie in the Masonic and secularist movements that the Church has consistently condemned. Pope Pius IX, in the Syllabus of Errors (1864), condemned the proposition that “the Roman Pontiff can, and ought to, reconcile himself, and come to terms with progress, liberalism and modern civilization” (Proposition 80). The EU’s relentless march toward the normalization of sexual perversion is precisely the fruit of that reconciliation with modernity which the Church has always rejected.
The mechanism employed — using “administrative purposes” and “freedom of movement” as leverage to force recognition of sodomite unions — is a classic tactic of revolutionary movements. It avoids the frank language of moral revolution in favor of bureaucratic technicalities, thereby disarming opposition. As the False Fatima Apparitions document notes regarding disinformation strategies, the gradual normalization of evil proceeds through stages: implantation, globalization, and reinterpretation. The EU’s approach follows the same pattern — first establishing the principle in progressive member states, then using judicial and administrative mechanisms to impose it upon reluctant nations.
It must be stated with absolute clarity: no ruling of the CJEU has any binding force in the internal law of Poland when it contradicts the natural law and the divine positive law. The principle is ancient and unambiguous: “Deus potius oboediendus est quam hominibus” (“God must be obeyed rather than men” — Acts 5:29). A court that commands what God forbids is a court without authority, and obedience to it in such matters is not merely optional but forbidden.
The Apology of Donald Tusk: A Confession of Apostasy
Perhaps the most revealing moment in this entire affair was Prime Minister Tusk’s public apology to same-sex couples in Poland, in which he said many had experienced “years of rejection and humiliation” from the state. This statement is not merely politically calculated; it is a confession of apostasy. By apologizing for the state’s previous refusal to recognize sodomite unions, Tusk implicitly declares that the natural law, the divine law, and the centuries of Polish Catholic civilization that recognized marriage as a union between one man and one woman were instruments of “rejection and humiliation.”
This is the language of the revolutionary, not of the statesman. A true statesman, as described by the Church’s social teaching, recognizes that the common good is ordered toward the supernatural end of man and that the state has a positive duty to uphold the moral law. Pope Pius XI, in his encyclical Quas Primas (1925), declared: “If rulers and legitimate superiors will have the conviction that they exercise authority not so much by their own right as by the command and in the place of the Divine King, everyone will notice how religiously and wisely they will use their authority.” Tusk’s apology reveals that he exercises authority not in the place of Christ the King but in the place of the spirit of the age — which is to say, in the place of the enemy of Christ.
The apology also exposes the fundamental incompatibility of liberalism with Catholic social teaching. The liberal state, by its very nature, must eventually come to reject the Church’s teaching on marriage, sexuality, and the family, because liberalism posits the autonomous individual as the supreme arbiter of morality. When that autonomy conflicts with divine law — as it inevitably does in matters of sexual morality — the liberal state must choose between God and the individual. Tusk has made his choice.
The Silence on the Supernatural: Sacrilege by Omission
What is most striking in the EWTN News article — and in the public discourse surrounding this entire affair — is the absolute silence on the supernatural dimension of the question. Nowhere in the report is there any mention of the sacramental nature of marriage, the teaching of the Church on the intrinsic disorder of homosexual acts, the mortal sin incurred by those who engage in such acts, or the spiritual danger to the souls of those who cooperate in the institutionalization of perversion.
This silence is not accidental. It is the hallmark of the modernist mentality that has infected even nominally Catholic discourse. Pope St. Pius X, in his encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis (1907), identified the fundamental error of Modernism as the separation of the natural from the supernatural, the reduction of religion to subjective experience, and the subordination of faith to the categories of modern science and philosophy. The Lamentabili sane exitu (1907) condemned the proposition that “revelation was merely man’s self-awareness of his relationship to God” (Proposition 20) and that “the dogmas of faith should be understood according to their practical function, i.e., as binding in action, rather than as principles of belief” (Proposition 26).
When the public discussion of same-sex “marriage” is conducted entirely in the language of “rights,” “administrative efficiency,” “non-discrimination,” and “legal recognition,” the supernatural is not merely marginalized — it is denied. The reduction of marriage to a civil contract subject to state regulation is itself a heresy, condemned by the Council of Trent and by every pope who has addressed the question. Pope Pius IX, in the Syllabus of Errors, condemned the proposition that “the Church has not the power of establishing diriment impediments of marriage” (Proposition 68) and that “matrimonial causes and espousals belong by their nature to civil tribunals” (Proposition 74).
The omission of any reference to the sacramental nature of marriage in a report on the registration of sodomite unions is not journalistic neutrality — it is complicity in the denial of the faith.
The Complicity of the “Staunch Catholic” President
The article notes that Polish President Karol Nawrocki, described as “a staunch Catholic,” retains veto power over legislation passed by parliament and that his opposition could impede legislative changes. While the presidential veto may delay the formal legalization of same-sex “marriage” in Poland, one must ask: what is the value of a veto exercised by a man who operates within a system that has already legitimized the principle of sodomite union recognition?
Moreover, the very fact that Nawrocki is presented as “a staunch Catholic” while serving as president of a republic whose constitution — however imperfect — still recognizes marriage as between a man and a woman, raises the question of whether such a figure is fighting for the integral Catholic position or merely for a temporary delay in the triumph of the revolutionary agenda. Pope St. Pius X warned in Pascendi that the Modernists are “all imbued with a bitter and abiding hatred for the Church” and that they work “to bring about a complete subversion of the whole religious order.” The question is whether Nawrocki recognizes that the enemy is not merely a particular policy but the entire philosophical and theological framework that makes such policies seem reasonable.
It must also be recalled that the structures within which Nawrocki operates — the European Union, the Polish parliamentary system, the international legal order — are themselves products of the liberal revolution that the Church has consistently condemned. To work within these structures while claiming to defend Catholic truth is to attempt the impossible: to serve two masters. As Our Lord declared: “Nemo potest duobus dominis servire” (“No one can serve two masters” — Matthew 6:24).
The Spiritual Ruin of Poland: From Chivalry to Capitulation
Poland has a long and glorious history of Catholic witness — from the baptism of Mieszko I in 966, through the defense of Vienna in 1683, to the heroic resistance of Maximilian Kolbe at Auschwitz. The Polish nation was consecrated to the Blessed Virgin Mary and has traditionally understood itself as Antemurale Christianitatis — the bulwark of Christendom. The current capitulation to the demands of the European Union and the international sodomite lobby represents not merely a political defeat but a spiritual betrayal of the nation’s Catholic heritage.
Pope Pius XI, in Quas Primas, declared: “If men were ever to recognize Christ’s royal authority over themselves, both privately and publicly, then unheard-of blessings would flow upon the whole society, such as due freedom, order, and tranquility, and concord and peace.” The inverse is equally true: when men publicly repudiate Christ’s authority — as the Polish government does by recognizing sodomite “marriages” — the result is not freedom but slavery, not order but confusion, not peace but the bitter fruit of sin.
The “legal confusion” that Olivier Bault correctly identifies as the likely result of the government’s administrative approach is not merely a technical problem of civil law. It is a symptom of the deeper spiritual confusion that afflicts Poland — a nation that once knew its place in the order of Christendom and now gropes in the darkness of liberal modernity, unable to distinguish between the rights of man and the rights of God.
The Duty of the Faithful: Resistance, Not Accommodation
In the face of this apostasy, the duty of the faithful Catholic is clear: resistance. Not the resistance of violence, but the resistance of witness — the refusal to cooperate with evil, the public profession of the truth regardless of cost, and the uncompromising demand that the state recognize the kingship of Christ over all nations and all aspects of public life.
Pope Leo XIII, in Immortale Dei, taught: “The Almighty has committed to the Church the charge of guiding souls to eternal salvation; hence, in all that concerns religion and morals, the Church must be the supreme guide.” When the state acts contrary to the natural law and the divine positive law, the faithful are not merely permitted but obliged to resist. As the Acts of the Apostles records: “We must obey God rather than men” (5:29).
The recognition of sodomite “marriages” is not a matter of prudential judgment upon which Catholics may disagree. It is a direct violation of the natural law, the divine positive law, and the solemn teaching of the Church. No Catholic can cooperate in such recognition without incurring grave moral culpability. Those who draft the administrative regulations, those who implement the transcriptions, and those who celebrate the “marriages” all participate in a grave injustice that cries to heaven for vengeance.
Poland stands at a crossroads. One path leads to the restoration of Christ the King’s public reign over the nation — the path of the martyrs and confessors who built Polish civilization. The other path leads to the abyss of moral chaos and divine chastisement — the path chosen by Donald Tusk and his accomplices in apostasy. Let the faithful choose wisely, for the time of reckoning is at hand.
Ad maiorem Dei gloriam. Vivat Christus Rex!
Source:
Poland to register same-sex 'marriages' from EU countries (ewtnnews.com)
Date: 15.05.2026