The Culture of Death Loses One — for the Moment
The National Catholic Register portal reports that George Weigel, writing on May 20, 2026, celebrates the defeat of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill in the United Kingdom’s House of Lords on April 24, 2026, as well as the earlier rejection of a similar bill in the Scottish Parliament by a vote of 69-57. Weigel frames this as a setback for the “culture of death” against which “John Paul II” cautioned in the 1995 encyclical Evangelium Vitae. He credits pro-life organizations and members of the House of Lords, particularly Lord Alton of Liverpool and Lord Moore of Etchingham, for their effective opposition. Weigel cites G.K. Chesterton’s observation that “the dazed dupes will be back again,” quoting Lord Alton’s warning that “eugenics, and the death wish, will keep coming back.” The article references the Canadian Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD) program as a cautionary example of euthanasia’s expansion, noting that euthanasia now accounts for approximately one in twenty deaths in Canada. Weigel concludes by calling for both legislative vigilance and expanded access to palliative care. Yet for all its apparent defense of life, the article operates entirely within the framework of the conciliar sect’s compromised moral theology, fails to invoke the full weight of Catholic doctrine on the inviolability of innocent human life, and treats the “culture of death” as a political problem rather than what it truly is: the logical fruit of modernist apostasy and the abandonment of the Social Kingship of Christ.
The “Culture of Death” Without the Kingship of Christ: A Hollow Diagnosis
Weigel’s article, while ostensibly defending the right to life, suffers from a fatal omission that renders its analysis superficial and its prescriptions inadequate. He speaks of the “culture of death” — a phrase borrowed from the antipope John Paul II — but never once identifies the theological root of this culture. The culture of death is not merely a political trend or a legislative challenge; it is the inevitable consequence of societies that have rejected the Social Kingship of Our Lord Jesus Christ. Pope Pius XI, in the encyclical Quas Primas (1925), taught with luminous clarity: “His reign, namely, extends not only to Catholic nations or to those who, by receiving baptism according to law, belong to the Church, even though their erroneous opinions have led them astray or discord has separated them from love, but His reign encompasses also all non-Christians, so that most truly the entire human race is subject to the authority of Jesus Christ.” And further: “The state is happy not by one means, and man by another; for the state is nothing else than a harmonious association of men.”
When Christ is removed from laws and states — as Pius XI lamented in Ubi Arcano — “the foundations of that authority were destroyed, because the main reason why some have the right to command and others have the duty to obey was removed. For this reason, the entire human society had to be shaken, because it lacked a stable and strong foundation.” The legalization of euthanasia, abortion, and eugenics are not isolated policy failures; they are the direct fruits of a civilization that has dethroned Christ the King. Weigel’s article, by failing to make this connection, reduces a supernatural catastrophe to a matter of parliamentary procedure and lobbying.
The Compromised Authority of “John Paul II” and the Encyclical Evangelium Vitae
Weigel invokes “John Paul II” and his 1995 encyclical Evangelium Vitae as the authoritative source for the concept of the “culture of death.” This requires the most serious scrutiny. Karol Wojtyła, who occupied the Vatican as antipope from 1978 to 2005, was a figure deeply implicated in the modernist revolution. His entire pontificate was characterized by the advancement of the very errors condemned by Saint Pius X in Pascendi Dominici Gregis (1907) and Lamentabili Sane Exitu (1907). The conciliar sect’s teaching on religious liberty (Dignitatis Humanae), its false ecumenism (the Assisi gatherings), and its corruption of the liturgy (the Novus Ordo Missae) all proceeded from the authority of this usurper.
While Evangelium Vitae contains passages that reaffirm the Church’s perennial teaching on the inviolability of innocent human life — teaching that predates and is entirely independent of Wojtyła — the encyclical must be read in the context of a pontificate that systematically undermined the Church’s authority in the moral and social order. The same antiposte who wrote Evangelium Vitae also kissed the Koran, prayed with animists and pagans at Assisi, and promoted the theology of the body — a system that, whatever its defenders claim, emerged from the modernist milieu of personalist philosophy rather than from the perennial Thomistic tradition. To cite “John Paul II” as an authority without this critical context is to lend credibility to a figure whose entire project was the advancement of the conciliar revolution.
The true teaching on the sanctity of life comes not from the compromised documents of the conciliar sect but from the perennial Magisterium. Pope Pius IX, in the Syllabus of Errors (1864), condemned the proposition that “the civil power has authority to rescind, declare and render null, solemn conventions, commonly called concordats, entered into with the Apostolic See” (Proposition 43), and that “the civil authority may interfere in matters relating to religion, morality and spiritual government” (Proposition 44). The legalization of euthanasia is precisely such an interference — a usurpation by the state of authority over life and death that belongs to God alone.
The Language of “Choice” and the Worship of the False Self
Weigel rightly identifies the language of “choice” as central to the euthanasia advocates’ argument. He writes: “Choice untethered from reason and virtue is childish willfulness. Choice as an expression of my ‘autonomy’ is the worship of the false god of the imperial self: the god of Me, Myself, and I.” This is a sound observation, but it remains incomplete. The worship of the “imperial self” is not merely a philosophical error; it is idolatry — the worship of a false god. And idolatry, as the Church has always taught, is the gravest of sins against the First Commandment.
Saint Pius X, in Lamentabili, condemned the proposition that “moral laws do not stand in the need of the divine sanction, and it is not at all necessary that human laws should be made conformable to the laws of nature and receive their power of binding from God” (Proposition 56). The entire framework of “assisted dying” legislation is built upon this very error: the assertion that human autonomy — the will of the individual — is the supreme arbiter of life and death, independent of divine law. Weigel’s critique, while correct in its conclusion, fails to name this error for what it is: formal cooperation with evil and a violation of the natural law that is inscribed in every human heart by the Creator.
The Canadian MAiD Program: A Case Study in the Logic of Apostasy
Weigel’s reference to the Canadian Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD) program is perhaps the most damning portion of his article, though he does not draw the full conclusions from the facts he presents. He notes that “euthanasia now accounts for approximately one in twenty deaths in Canada” and that “the government has now killed almost as many Canadian citizens as were slaughtered by the forces of the Kaiser and then of Hitler in the First and Second World Wars combined.” These are staggering figures, and they reveal the inexorable logic of the culture of death: what begins as a “choice” for the terminally ill quickly expands to encompass the disabled, the mentally ill, and eventually anyone deemed “unworthy of life.”
This is precisely the dynamic described by the maxim Weigel cites: “when the formerly impermissible becomes permissible, it will sooner or later seem mandatory — the compassionate thing to do.” The Canadian experience confirms what the Church has always taught: that the acceptance of any evil — even under the guise of “compassion” — leads to the normalization and eventual compulsion of that evil. Pope Leo XIII, in Immortale Dei (1885), warned: “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 civil power usurps authority over life and death — a matter of divine, not human, law — it exceeds its legitimate jurisdiction and becomes tyrannical.
The Failure to Invoke the Church’s Full Authority
The most serious deficiency of Weigel’s article is its failure to invoke the full authority of the Catholic Church in the defense of life. There is no mention of the Church’s teaching on the theological virtue of hope, which sustains the faithful in suffering and renders the “compassion” argument for euthanasia not merely misguided but blasphemous. There is no mention of the redemptive value of suffering, which the Church has always taught and which was exemplified in the lives of the saints. There is no mention of the sacraments — particularly the Sacrament of the Anointing of the Sick (Extreme Unction) — which provide supernatural grace to the dying and which the conciliar sect has effectively neutered through its reformed rites.
There is no mention of the Social Kingship of Christ, which demands that civil law conform to the divine law and which, if recognized, would render the entire debate over euthanasia moot. There is no mention of the binding obligation of Catholic legislators to vote against any law that permits the taking of innocent human life — an obligation that admits of no exception, no “prudential judgment,” and no appeal to “pluralism.”
Pope Pius XI, in Quas Primas, declared: “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: for it will remind them of the final judgment, in which Christ, whom not only was cast out of the state, but was also forgotten and ignored through contempt, will very severely avenge these insults, because His royal dignity demands that all relations in the state be ordered on the basis of God’s commandments and Christian principles, both in the issuing of laws and in the administration of justice, as well as in the education and formation of youth in sound doctrine and purity of morals.” The legislators who voted for euthanasia bills — and those who will undoubtedly attempt to pass them again — will answer at the judgment seat of Christ for their crimes against the innocent.
The Palliative Care Distraction
Weigel concludes by calling for “building the culture of life by expanding access to palliative end-of-life care.” While palliative care is certainly a legitimate and necessary work of mercy, its promotion as the primary response to the euthanasia crisis is a distraction from the root cause. The culture of death is not primarily a failure of medical services; it is a spiritual crisis — a crisis of faith, hope, and charity. No amount of palliative care can substitute for the grace of the sacraments, the theological virtues, and the recognition of Christ’s Kingship over all aspects of human life, including death.
Moreover, the promotion of palliative care as an alternative to euthanasia implicitly accepts the premise that the problem is suffering rather than sin. The Church has always taught that suffering, while an evil of nature, can be redemptive when united to the sufferings of Christ. The euthanasia movement rejects this teaching entirely, asserting that suffering is meaningless and that the only “compassionate” response is elimination. This is not merely a medical or ethical error; it is a denial of the Cross — the very heart of the Christian faith.
Conclusion: The Dazed Dupes Will Return — But So Will the Truth
Weigel is correct that the proponents of euthanasia will return. Lord Alton’s invocation of Chesterton — “the dazed dupes will be back again” — is apt. But the answer to this relentless assault on human life is not merely better lobbying, more effective parliamentary tactics, or expanded palliative care. The answer is the restoration of the Social Kingship of Christ — the recognition by individuals, families, and states that Jesus Christ is King, and that His law is the supreme law of all nations.
Until that recognition is achieved — until the conciliar sect is exposed as the modernist counterfeit it is, until the usurpers in the Vatican are rejected, and until the true Church is restored to her rightful authority — the culture of death will continue to advance. Legislative victories, however welcome, are temporary. The only permanent victory is the triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary and the establishment of Christ’s Kingdom on earth. As Pope Pius XI declared: “Then at last… so many wounds can be healed, then there will be hope that the law will regain its former authority, sweet peace will return again, swords and weapons will fall from hands, when all willingly accept the reign of Christ and obey Him, and every tongue will confess that our Lord Jesus Christ is in the glory of God the Father.”
The dazed dupes will indeed return. But the truth — the unchanging, integral Catholic truth — endures forever. And it is that truth, and that truth alone, which will ultimately vanquish the culture of death.
Source:
The Culture of Death Loses One — for the Moment (ncregister.com)
Date: 20.05.2026