SSPX statement on Covid 19 Vaccine

[diaduit]

https://sspx.org/en/news-events/news/can-catholic-good-conscience-receive-coronavirus-vaccine-62007?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=tweepsmap-SSPX.org

Ok SD buddies, trash this out for me because right now I am beyond disgusted by this statement.

[Prayerful]

It coheres with a lockdown that outdoes the diocesan efforts. They should have asked Joe Biden to add a message.

[Kaesekopf]

https://sspx.org/en/news-events/news/can-catholic-good-conscience-receive-coronavirus-vaccine-62007?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=tweepsmap-SSPX.org

Ok SD buddies, trash this out for me because right now I am beyond disgusted by this statement.

Which part?

[diaduit]

Pretty much all of it but this part in particular

One should realize that in 2020 there may be no "escape" from vaccines and treatments (including those not for Coronavirus) that have their derivatives from fetal cells.  A strict "no fetal cell" position is likely impossible for anyone taking modern therapeutics.
And this

Where there is no option to choose an alternate vaccine, one produced with fetal cells is permissible.

To be honest, unless Jesus comes down from the cross and administers the vaccine to me Himself (I say this respectfully).....I'm not taking it ever.

[Vetus Ordo]

From what I read, there's nothing in the SSPX statement that goes against Church teaching.

I don't understand the disgust here. The principle of material cooperation with evil evoked in the article is well-established and has been used in order to validate other vaccines developped from fetal cells, not just the vaccine against Covid-19.

What Should a Faithful Catholic Do?

• Where there is the option to accept a vaccine or treatment of equal effectiveness developed without fetal cells, a Catholic is obligated to choose this vaccine over one that is developed with the fetal cells. The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines seem to hold great promise, and as far as we can tell, are developed appropriately. Time will tell whether it is fully approved and widely available.


• Where there is no option to choose an alternate vaccine, one produced with fetal cells is permissible. As stated above, there is no sin in this material cooperation, and in fact, may even be recommended as prudent.


• One should realize that in 2020 there may be no "escape" from vaccines and treatments (including those not for Coronavirus) that have their derivatives from fetal cells.  A strict "no fetal cell" position is likely impossible for anyone taking modern therapeutics. Given that these fetal cells have been in use for nearly 5 decades, it is assured that academics as well as companies like Pfizer, Moderna, etc. have used fetal cells to advance their own research.  Even if this vaccine may be synthetic, the research producing it could well have used these cells. This list, produced by Children of God for Life, in itself a laudable effort, shows the Moderna vaccine as being unacceptable, even though it is a synthetic vaccine.

Conclusion

Catholics are obligated to educate themselves on these matters - hence our efforts to explain the above (in consultation with Catholic genomics experts) in a little detail on the various types of vaccines and how they provide treatment. In the process of this education, Catholics should also be prudent, and not immediately jump to hasty conclusions on what they read, follow, or watch. The misinformation surrounding this vaccine is rampant. Do not allow yourself to be easily fooled either by Protestant fundamentalist ideals which imply that any cooperation in vaccination is a sin, or on the other side by the barbaric proponents of using fetal cells at all times, for any whim. The Church has provided steadfast, prudent guidance on this issue. As a result, Catholics have a firm foundation on which to stand in the morality of vaccines.

[Daniel]

From what I read, there's nothing in the SSPX statement that goes against Church teaching.

I don't understand the disgust here. The principle of material cooperation with evil evoked in the article is well-established and has been used in order to validate other vaccines developped from fetal cells, not just the vaccine against Covid-19.

I would question the principle itself, and whether the principle falls within "Church teaching".

[Vetus Ordo]

From what I read, there's nothing in the SSPX statement that goes against Church teaching.

I don't understand the disgust here. The principle of material cooperation with evil evoked in the article is well-established and has been used in order to validate other vaccines developped from fetal cells, not just the vaccine against Covid-19.

I would question the principle itself, and whether the principle falls within "Church teaching".

That's another question altogether.

The principle, as it stands, has been accepted and used by the Church for quite some time.

[mikemac]

https://personhood.org/2020/11/17/the-unethical-testing-of-ethical-covid-vaccines/

The unethical testing of "ethical" COVID vaccines   

    11/17/2020   

By Sarah Quale — Both Pfizer and Moderna have announced major milestones in the race to get a COVID-19 vaccine candidate to market. Almost all media outlets and pro-life groups are claiming both vaccines are ethical, even though aborted fetal cells were used to test them. This is wrong, and here's why it matters.

~~~~~

Another Operation Warp Speed breakthrough hit the news yesterday. This time, it was Moderna's press release, claiming preliminary analysis of its COVID-19 vaccine candidate showed "94.5% effectiveness" in preventing symptomatic cases of COVID-19. Last week, it was Pfizer/BioNTech's "90% effectiveness" claim. The media and the stock market have been in a frenzy. Pro-life news outlets like LifeNews.com and many national pro-life organizations and leaders are tripping over themselves to spread the good news that both vaccines are "ethical."

Here's what we know for sure.

Both candidates use a technology called mRNA that has never been approved to build a coronavirus vaccine. Both candidates were designed using computer-based genetic sequencing. Both candidates were produced without the use of aborted fetal cells.

And both candidates used aborted fetal cells in the testing phase.



The Charlotte Lozier Institute (CLI) has published a comprehensive chart on the COVID-19 vaccine candidates. Click here to see it for yourself. As shown in the screenshot above, the red triangle placed in the last column indicates the lab test used to test the vaccine included "abortion-derived cell lines." Specifically, both the Pfizer and Moderna vaccine candidates used the HEK293 cell line during testing; immortalized cells from the kidney of an aborted child killed in the Netherlands in 1973.

Even though CLI's data clearly show that both vaccines were tested using aborted fetal cells, CLI is one of the organizations claiming these vaccines are ethical, because they were not produced using an aborted fetal cell line. Jeffrey Barrow of the Christian Medical & Dental Association and Jonathan Imbody of Freedom2Care and the Christian Medical Association are also claiming the vaccines are ethical, writing in a recent article for Public Discourse that the Pfizer vaccine can be received "in good conscience." So is Rev. Tadeusz Pacholczyk of the National Catholic Bioethics Center, who stated in a recent article that the connection of medical therapies to abortion is "unfortunate" but that it is "ethically permissible" to receive a therapy that is tested using aborted fetal cells.

If organizations and leaders are demanding that a vaccine be produced without the use of aborted fetal cells, then why aren't they asking that a vaccine also be tested using the same standard?

Let's come back to this inconsistency in a moment, and ask an important question we're hearing often.

What does it mean to test a vaccine using aborted fetal cells?

Animal testing is a standard protocol of vaccine development before human trials begin, so it is this stage at which we hear about aborted fetal cells being used for testing.

Here, specialized mice are "humanized," meaning mice embryos are transplanted with cells from an aborted child that have been programmed to develop into humanized lungs—the part of the body COVID-19 affects. When the mice are born, they have humanized lungs, created from the aborted fetal cell line. Researchers inject the humanized mice with the vaccine candidate and then infect them with a coronavirus that's very similar to the COVID-19 disease to test the mice's immune response to the vaccine product.

You may recall that humanized mice made the news a few years ago, when the Center for Medical Progress's undercover Planned Parenthood videos, along with evidence directly from researchers, showed that aborted baby parts were being trafficked to create humanized mice for medical research. Those babies were part of the new aborted fetal cells lines that are currently being procured for use in medical experiments. Not cell lines from the 1970s that many say are too remote to still have any ethical issues attached to them; new cell lines for next generation therapies.

This begs the next question.

Can vaccines be tested without using aborted fetal cell lines?

The answer is yes.

According to Dr. Alan Moy of the John Paul II Medical Research Institute, there are currently several other human cell lines that are ethically non-controversial and can be effectively used for testing:

    HEPG2—An immortalized human cell line from a hepatic cancer
    HeLA—An immortalized human cervical cell line
    A549—An immortalized human alveolar cell line, which would have been more appropriate to test COVID-19 because it targets the alveolar cells
    Alveolar cells derived from induced pluripotent stem cells
    Human adult stem cells

So why aren't they being tested without the use of aborted fetal cells? Because, with the exception of the Personhood Alliance and a few others, no one is calling for the testing to also be ethical. And thus, no one is exerting any pressure on these pharmaceutical companies or our own government.

Instead, the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines are being celebrated.

The time to call for a fully ethical COVID vaccine is right now

Christians must demand an end to the trafficking and commodification of aborted human beings. Period. We must not participate or accept practices that perpetuate and encourage the relationship between abortion, biomedical science, and human trafficking, no matter when that connection was initiated or how long a practice has been medically accepted.

Now is the perfect time to completely and publicly reject both unethical production and testing of these vaccines and to demand that the ethical alternatives already in the pipeline be brought to market in the US instead. In the meantime, American taxpayers are already on the hook for billions of dollars in funding—funding that continues to sustain the evil of abortion.

We must now ask ourselves: At what other time have we had such a clear, immediate opportunity to plead a consistent case for vaccine ethics?

The production and testing of vaccines that use the remains of aborted human beings, regardless of when they were killed and at what point they were used in the process, is morally unacceptable and must be consistently opposed. If not now, as new vaccines are currently being created....then when?

It is time for people of good conscience to speak the truth about these vaccines and demand that the connection between abortion, biomedical science, and human trafficking be severed. We encourage other pro-life organizations and leaders to join us in doing so.

The Personhood Alliance's official position on vaccine ethics can be found here.

To learn more about how the Personhood Alliance stands consistently against all direct assaults on human life and human dignity, subscribe to our email list.

Sarah Quale is president of Personhood Alliance Education, founder of Educe® online learning, and author of the Foundations online pro-life curriculum. She is an award-winning curriculum and instructional designer who has worked for over 20 years in corporate, academic, and ministerial environments.

Note, early in this article it mentions LifeNews.com, which is not the same as LifeSiteNews.com.

[diaduit]

From what I read, there's nothing in the SSPX statement that goes against Church teaching.

I don't understand the disgust here. The principle of material cooperation with evil evoked in the article is well-established and has been used in order to validate other vaccines developped from fetal cells, not just the vaccine against Covid-19.

I would question the principle itself, and whether the principle falls within "Church teaching".

That's another question altogether.

The principle, as it stands, has been accepted and used by the Church for quite some time.

Vatican II ??  pffft

[diaduit]

For the love of God I don't need a theology degree to know that I as a Catholic should not take a vaccine that uses aborted baby parts to host the virus.  That my vaccine increases the profits of those that use this method is also a sin.

We have situations of 'occasion of sin' which qualifies as a sin but then taking a vaccine with aborted baby tissue is not a sin!!!

[queen.saints]

In the year 304 there may have been no "escape" from worshiping false gods?

Was a strict "no demon worship" policy impossible for anyone who ate food?

"Maximian ordained that in the market-places, in the mills, in the bakers' shops, and in the taverns idols should be set up, to which every- body should show some mark of idolatrous veneration, on pain of being arrested.
"Yet, notwithstanding this wholesale butchery, never were there seen greater multitudes of Christians professing a desire to suffer and to die for Jesus Christ; so that the number of holy martyrs
amounted at that time to eight millions."

[Christe Eleison]

Diaduit,

The irony of it all, is that a Novus Ordo Bishop from Tyler Texas agrees with you.

He has been alone on many issues, contradicting liberal Bishops within the US as well.
I doubt that he will ever become a Cardinal due to his conservative views, etc.

He was positively influenced by a very well known FSSP Priest, that was in his Diocese,
and fell in love with the TLM. He is known for his processions in town, his love for Our Blessed Mother, etc.
The particular Priest from the FSSP was also against vaccines & preached about it.

"So sad...even with Covid-19 we are still debating the use of aborted fetal tissue for medical research...let me go on record...if a vaccine for this virus is only attainable if we use body parts of aborted children then I will refuse the vaccine...I will not kill children to live" Bishop J. Strickland 

Pretty much all of it but this part in particular

One should realize that in 2020 there may be no "escape" from vaccines and treatments (including those not for Coronavirus) that have their derivatives from fetal cells.  A strict "no fetal cell" position is likely impossible for anyone taking modern therapeutics.
And this

Where there is no option to choose an alternate vaccine, one produced with fetal cells is permissible.

To be honest, unless Jesus comes down from the cross and administers the vaccine to me Himself (I say this respectfully).....I'm not taking it ever.

Thanks for the thread, Diaduit. And may God Bless you!

[Miriam_M]

I appreciate that the discussion here is centered around aborted fetal cells, and I do not intend to derail the discussion but to broaden it.  There are other issues of decision-making involved.  I'm speaking of the option to take or not take any vaccine, regardless of how it was derived and what it contains.

I have become utterly disillusioned by American policy-making since this catastrophe of reactionary government has been put on full display in 2020.  U.S. policy has never been this knee-jerk, and it is not justified now, but I do not understand the lack of awareness and lack of resolve among public officials and the American people who are not questioning the basis of policy.

Not every virus is automatically "a public health crisis."  If Covid is a public health crisis, then so is the flu, and so is pneumonia, and so are the non-novel coronaviruses, such as colds.  Yet (except in Massachusetts, apparently), flu vaccines are not mandatory, nor is the pneumonia vaccine.  When my doctor speaks to me about vaccinations, she never once says that I "must" get vaccinated for flu or pneumonia.  She asks me if I have been vaccinated, and now and then she will recommend that I get one of them, but she herself knows that neither disease qualifies as a public health crisis, and therefore, insisting, even as just my doctor, that I get vaccinated is not something within her jurisdiction to demand.  Even less, then, does some superficially educated "public health official" qualify as having jurisdiction over my body.  This point was brought up on cable news this week, when someone mentioned that the Left, so supposedly protective about "a woman's body being her own, and all decisions thereof" now suddenly cannot wait to take over the bodies of 331M Americans.

There is insufficient outrage everywhere against this human rights violation.  Insufficient in the Church and insufficient in secular society and insufficient among elected and appointed government officials.

End of rant.

[nmoerbeek]

What is poor about the article in my opinion is that it fails to state that there are 3 criteria for judging material cooperation with evil

Quoting here from a moral manual:

• The action of him who cooperates must be good in itself or at least indifferent, for of course, if it is evil, it is not lawful.
  The intention of him who cooperates must be good
  There must be a reason for the cooperation proportionate to the gravity of the sin which will be committed by others, to the proximity and necessity of the cooperation, and to the obligation which one hasof preventing the sin of others.

https://archive.org/details/MN5034ucmf_1/page/n1/mode/2up

The action of course would be taking the vaccine.
The intention would be I assume to comply either with law or because one thought vaccines where effective against disease.

This last one is very difficult as using organs from murdered babies is human sacrifice to false gods is a great evil.  Are they going to argue that the only cooperation would be purchase of human remains for medical experiments is the actual evil of cooperation, not the actual abortion that caused the remains to exist? 

[Christe Eleison]

Bishop J. Strickland

Ordained 4th Bishop of Tyler, November 28, 2012, Host of The Bishop Strickland Hour on
@VMPRadio
@Bishopoftyler

Nov 16
I'm glad many are questioning vaccines and whether they are morally produced. The best information I've found is at Children of God for Life

cogforlife.org

https://cogforlife.org/

**************************************************************

Fr. Michael Copenhagen: Immorality of Receiving Vaccines Derived From Abortion
OCTOBER 16, 2019
Read the article here: https://cogforlife.org/wp-content/uploads/VaccineFrCopenhagen.pdf
***************************************************************