Andy Drozdziak reports for EWTN News (June 17, 2026) that the Catholic bishops of England and Wales are “deeply disappointed” by the reintroduction of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill in the House of Commons. The bill, which passed a Commons vote in June 2025 but stalled in the House of Lords, was reintroduced on Wednesday by Labour MP Lauren Edwards. While the bishops express concern and call for improved palliative care, their response reveals the spiritual bankruptcy of the post-conciliar hierarchy, which lacks the doctrinal teeth to condemn this legalized murder for what it is: a direct assault on the natural law and the Fifth Commandment.
The “Disappointment” of Apostates: A Theological Vacuum
The statement by Archbishop John Sherrington of Liverpool, lead bishop for life issues at the Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales, is a masterclass in bureaucratic hand-wringing. He expresses “deep disappointment” and labels the legislation “flawed.” “The Catholic Church opposes this bill in principle and joins with many other people of faith and none in arguing that we should not cross this watershed.” This language is revealing. The Church does not merely “oppose” bills; she condemns sin and demands that the state uphold the Law of God. The use of the term “watershed” is secular and sociological, not theological. There is no mention of mortal sin, no mention of the eternal damnation that awaits those who cooperate in this evil, and no mention of the duty of the state to recognize the Kingship of Christ.
Where is the language of Pius XI in Quas Primas? “The state is happy not by one means, and man by another; for the state is nothing else than a harmonious association of men.” A state that legalizes the killing of its most vulnerable citizens is not “happy”; it is a criminal enterprise. The bishops’ failure to invoke the social reign of Christ the King—a doctrine explicitly condemned by the Syllabus of Errors (Proposition 24: “The Church has not the power of using force, nor has she any temporal power, direct or indirect”)—demonstrates that they have internalized the very laicism Pius XI sought to combat. They protest as private citizens, not as the authorized representatives of Christ on Earth.
The Omission of the Fifth Commandment
The most glaring omission in the bishops’ response is the absence of the most fundamental teaching of the Church: Thou shalt not kill. The Fifth Commandment is not a suggestion; it is an absolute prohibition against the intentional killing of an innocent person. The Catechism of the Council of Trent teaches that this commandment extends to the protection of the life of the individual from the womb to the grave. Assisted suicide is murder—self-murder aided by another. It is a grave violation of the natural law, which is itself a participation in the Eternal Law of God.
Yet, the bishops speak of “unresolved matters” and “flaws.” This is the language of a legislative lobbyist, not a successor of the Apostles. St. Pius X, in Lamentabili sane exitu, condemned the modernist proposition that “moral laws do not stand in the need of the divine sanction” (Proposition 56). By treating the legalization of murder as a matter of “safeguards” and “regulation,” the bishops implicitly accept the modernist premise that morality is subject to human legislation rather than divine ordinance. If the law is “flawed,” it implies that a “flawless” version might be acceptable—a direct contradiction of the Church’s infallible teaching that the direct and voluntary killing of an innocent person is always gravely immoral.
The Palliative Care Diversion
Archbishop Sherrington and Welsh Archbishop Mark O’Toole of Cardiff-Menevia both call for “improvements in compassionate, high-quality palliative care and proper hospice funding.” While palliative care is a genuine good and a work of mercy, the bishops’ emphasis on it as the primary response to the assisted suicide bill is a subtle but dangerous diversion. It suggests that the problem with assisted suicide is not its intrinsic evil, but rather the lack of alternatives. This is the logic of the utilitarian, not the theologian.
The Church has always taught that suffering, while an evil in itself, can be redemptive when united to the sufferings of Christ. The denial of this supernatural perspective is a hallmark of modernism. As the Syllabus of Errors teaches, “No other forces are to be recognized except those which reside in matter” (Proposition 58). By focusing exclusively on the material comfort of the terminally ill, the bishops reduce the human person to a mere biological entity whose only value lies in the absence of physical pain. Where is the call to offer the sufferer the Last Rites? Where is the reminder that death is a passage to eternity, and that the state of the soul is infinitely more important than the state of the body? This silence is a betrayal of the pastoral office.
The “Conscience” of Medical Professionals
Archbishop Sherrington raises the concern that the bill “undermines freedom of conscience for medical professionals and care workers.” While the protection of conscience is important, the framing of this argument is revealing. It implies that the primary evil of the bill is its imposition on doctors, rather than its destruction of human life. The bishops do not declare that any doctor who participates in an assisted suicide automatically excommunicates himself and commits a mortal sin. They do not invoke the canonical penalties for cooperation in abortion or euthanasia. Instead, they speak of “freedom of conscience” in the language of secular liberalism, as if conscience were a private feeling rather than the voice of God within the soul demanding obedience to His law.
Furthermore, the assertion that the bill “requires care homes and hospices to participate in assisted suicide” is met with the weak protest that it threatens their “future existence.” The true threat is not to the institution but to the immortal souls of those who staff it. If a hospice is forced to participate in murder, it ceases to be a Catholic institution in any meaningful sense. The bishops’ failure to demand that Catholic institutions close their doors rather than comply with this evil is a scandal of epic proportions.
The Silence of the “Pope”
It is noteworthy that the article makes no mention of the “pope,” Leo XIV (Robert Prevost), or any intervention from the Vatican. This silence is deafening. When the Church was governed by true popes, such an assault on the natural law would have been met with an immediate and unequivocal condemnation, accompanied by the threat of excommunication for any Catholic who supported it. Instead, we have the “bishops” of England and Wales issuing a press release, and the “pope” remaining mute. This is the fruit of the conciliar revolution: a hierarchy that has lost its authority and its voice, reduced to the status of a mere NGO commenting on the legislative process.
The Code of Canon Law (1917), Canon 1398, states that “A person who actually procures an abortion incurs a latae sententiae excommunication.” While this canon specifically mentions abortion, the principle applies equally to euthanasia. The silence of the post-conciliar hierarchy on the automatic excommunication of those who promote or participate in assisted suicide is a tacit admission that they no longer believe in the binding force of canon law or the reality of eternal punishment.
The Call to “Prayer and Action”
Archbishop John Wilson of Southwark calls on Catholics to “pray and to campaign to stop this deadly bill from becoming law.” While prayer is always necessary, the call to “campaign” is revealing. It suggests that the fate of the bill depends on the political efforts of the faithful, rather than on the will of God and the intrinsic justice of the cause. The Church does not “campaign”; she teaches, governs, and sanctifies. The reduction of the Church’s mission to political activism is a direct consequence of the modernist heresy that the Church should be “reconciled… with progress, liberalism and modern civilization” (Syllabus of Errors, Proposition 80).
Moreover, the failure to explicitly state that any Catholic who votes for this bill, or who campaigns for its passage, commits a mortal sin and is automatically excommunication is a grave dereliction of duty. The bishops are shepherds who have lost the courage to defend the flock from the wolves. Their “disappointment” is not the righteous anger of God; it is the impotent frustration of men who have compromised with the world.
Conclusion: The Triumph of Laicism
The reintroduction of the assisted suicide bill in England and Wales is not merely a political event; it is a spiritual catastrophe. It represents the logical culmination of the secularism that Pius XI condemned in Quas Primas: the removal of Christ the King from the laws and institutions of the state. The response of the “Catholic” bishops is equally catastrophic: a weak, bureaucratic protest that fails to condemn the bill as an intrinsic evil, fails to warn the faithful of the eternal consequences of supporting it, and fails to invoke the authority of the Church to demand its rejection.
This is the fruit of the conciliar sect: a hierarchy that has abandoned its divine mandate to preach the Gospel of Life and has instead become a mere chaplain to a dying civilization. The faithful must reject these pale protests and return to the unchanging teaching of the Church: Thou shalt not kill. No “safeguard” can make this evil acceptable. No “palliative care” can substitute for the redemptive suffering offered by Christ. And no “campaign” can replace the infallible voice of the true Church, which speaks with the authority of God Himself.
Source:
Catholic Bishops of England and Wales React to Reintroduction of Assisted Suicide Bill (ncregister.com)
Date: 17.06.2026