Vatican-Covid vaccines made from aborted fetal tissue is ethical

[1Thess521]

Vatican says use of Covid vaccines made from aborted fetal tissue is ethical:​

This about faith and morals : right?

VATICAN CITY, Dec 21 (Reuters) - The Vatican told Roman Catholics on Monday that it was morally acceptable for them to use COVID-19 vaccines, even if their production employed cell lines drawn from tissues of aborted fetuses.

A note from the Vatican's doctrinal congregation, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, said the use of such vaccines was permitted as long as there were no alternatives.

 

[PeanutGallery]

That should justify abortion in order to maintain supplies for vaccines?

 

[mica]

That should justify abortion in order to maintain supplies for vaccines?

looks like it from the article I read earlier. The pope is justifying abortion for the greater good. I suspect most all women who want an abortion think that it is for their greater good also.

the alternative? don't get the vaccine.

 

[balshan]

Vatican says use of Covid vaccines made from aborted fetal tissue is ethical:​

This about faith and morals : right?

VATICAN CITY, Dec 21 (Reuters) - The Vatican told Roman Catholics on Monday that it was morally acceptable for them to use COVID-19 vaccines, even if their production employed cell lines drawn from tissues of aborted fetuses.

A note from the Vatican's doctrinal congregation, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, said the use of such vaccines was permitted as long as there were no alternatives.

So much for their hypocrisy about faith and morals. It is once again showing that they can be changed to suit them. I mean divorce is now an annulment, you can abort if you can use the cells for medical purpose. Oh yes and those religious who commit abortions are now saints.

The most detailed account is told of Ciarán of Saigir, after he rescued a nun named Bruinnech who had been abducted by a local king. “When the man of God returned to the monastery with the girl, she confessed that she was pregnant. Then the man of God, led by the zeal of justice, not wishing the serpent’s seed to quicken, pressed down on her womb with the sign of the cross and forced her womb to be emptied.” Bruinnech’s feelings about her rape, pregnancy, or abortion are not addressed, apart from her “confession



https://www.irishtimes.com/culture/...s-it-was-a-lesser-sin-than-oral-sex-1.3466881

 

[jonathan_hili]

Vatican says use of Covid vaccines made from aborted fetal tissue is ethical:​

This about faith and morals : right?

VATICAN CITY, Dec 21 (Reuters) - The Vatican told Roman Catholics on Monday that it was morally acceptable for them to use COVID-19 vaccines, even if their production employed cell lines drawn from tissues of aborted fetuses.

A note from the Vatican's doctrinal congregation, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, said the use of such vaccines was permitted as long as there were no alternatives.

That's because it's only very remote cooperation with evil.

What would be morally wrong with using vaccines that were either derived or tested on cell lines from an abortion in the 70s if (a) there were no ethically-produced alternatives and (b) the virus they were treating was deadly?

 

[1Thess521]

That's because it's only very remote cooperation with evil.

What would be morally wrong with using vaccines that were either derived or tested on cell lines from an abortion in the 70s if (a) there were no ethically-produced alternatives and (b) the virus they were treating was deadly?

Well this seems like a good example for a case study:

QUESTION--->As this is regarding faith and morals; is Vatican's statement considered infallible?

The dozen or so Cardinals and Bishops who have already stated that it is IMMORAL : are they in error?

for ex:

Bishop Schneider:
" Of course, this is already a distinction, and it is, of course, objectively less than grave, grevious the direct...Cells which are directly used. It's much more grave than only in testing, but also in testing, we cannot in not in the slightest and most remote, cooperate with these horrible crimes, even to use cells of aborted children for testing, it's already immoral. It's a horrible crime. So there are an accumulation of horrible crimes. The first horrible crime that killed a child and then to have developed his cells is also a crime, and then to make testing of these cells, it's another crime. So this accumulation of crimes, we cannot collaborate with this in no way. "

and more examples

Cardinal Janis Pujats, Metropolitan archbishop emeritus of Riga
+ Tomash Peta, Metropolitan archbishop of the archdiocese of Saint Mary in Astana
+ Jan Pawel Lenga, Archbishop/bishop emeritus of Karaganda
+ Joseph E. Strickland, Bishop of Tyler (USA)
+ Athanasius Schneider, Auxiliary bishop of the archdiocese of Saint Mary in Astana


"The crime of abortion is so monstrous that any kind of concatenation with this crime, even a very remote one, is immoral and cannot be accepted under any circumstances by a Catholic once he has become fully aware of it. One who uses these vaccines must realize that his body is benefitting from the “fruits” (although steps removed through a series of chemical processes) of one of mankind’s greatest crimes"

'Vaccines derived from the cells of cruelly murdered unborn children are clearly apocalyptic in character and may possibly foreshadow the mark of the beast (see Rev. 13:16).'

Loading…

www.lifesitenews.com

but the Vatican has declared it is ethical
but the Vatican has declared it is ethical
but the Vatican has declared it is ethical

How much proof do you need the Catholic Church is in error ?

 

[jonathan_hili]

Well this seems like a good example for a case study:

QUESTION--->As this is regarding faith and morals; is Vatican's statement considered infallible?

It's not an infallible statement because it's a matter of prudential judgement, not of doctrine.

The dozen or so Cardinals and Bishops who have already stated that it is IMMORAL : are they in error?

There can be genuine disagreement on this issue. It really depends on how proximate you consider the vaccines to the evil of the abortion that happened in the 70s from which certain cell lines are derived.

for ex:

Bishop Schneider:
" Of course, this is already a distinction, and it is, of course, objectively less than grave, grevious the direct...Cells which are directly used. It's much more grave than only in testing, but also in testing, we cannot in not in the slightest and most remote, cooperate with these horrible crimes, even to use cells of aborted children for testing, it's already immoral. It's a horrible crime. So there are an accumulation of horrible crimes. The first horrible crime that killed a child and then to have developed his cells is also a crime, and then to make testing of these cells, it's another crime. So this accumulation of crimes, we cannot collaborate with this in no way. "

I think Bishop Schneider is wrong on this. Consider what he is saying: we cannot - even in a remote way - cooperate materially with evil. This means that we cannot involve ourselves with anything that materially derives from or is going towards something gravely evil. If that's the case, there is practically nothing we can do in contemporary society.

As another example, Bishop Schneider would be arguing that it would be wrong to buy a pizza from Pizza Hut knowing that the manager there will use some of your money to view pornography. These kinds of instances can be multiplied indefinitely and they would stifle any serious interaction with society.

Now, if someone wants to boycott the vaccines, that's all well and good, and ethical alternatives should be sought, but I don't see how quite remote material cooperation (especially in the case of a deadly virus like covid) can condemn the believing Christian who takes one of the tainted vaccines.

and more examples

Cardinal Janis Pujats, Metropolitan archbishop emeritus of Riga
+ Tomash Peta, Metropolitan archbishop of the archdiocese of Saint Mary in Astana
+ Jan Pawel Lenga, Archbishop/bishop emeritus of Karaganda
+ Joseph E. Strickland, Bishop of Tyler (USA)
+ Athanasius Schneider, Auxiliary bishop of the archdiocese of Saint Mary in Astana


"The crime of abortion is so monstrous that any kind of concatenation with this crime, even a very remote one, is immoral and cannot be accepted under any circumstances by a Catholic once he has become fully aware of it. One who uses these vaccines must realize that his body is benefitting from the “fruits” (although steps removed through a series of chemical processes) of one of mankind’s greatest crimes"

If he (whoever is saying this) is correct, that means that we cannot benefit from something derived in an evil way. However, many inventions and technological progresses we have in society today were a result of experimentation in warfare (e.g. some experiments the Nazis carried out).

'Vaccines derived from the cells of cruelly murdered unborn children are clearly apocalyptic in character and may possibly foreshadow the mark of the beast (see Rev. 13:16).'

That seems hyperbolic and quite nonsensical.

Loading…

www.lifesitenews.com

but the Vatican has declared it is ethical
but the Vatican has declared it is ethical
but the Vatican has declared it is ethical

How much proof do you need the Catholic Church is in error ?

According to the standard analysis of moral philosophy, it is ethical.

Can you explain what's wrong with it? On what moral principle would you say that using these vaccines is inherently wrong?

 

[1Thess521]

It's not an infallible statement because it's a matter of prudential judgement, not of doctrine.

There can be genuine disagreement on this issue. It really depends on how proximate you consider the vaccines to the evil of the abortion that happened in the 70s from which certain cell lines are derived.

I think Bishop Schneider is wrong on this. Consider what he is saying: we cannot - even in a remote way - cooperate materially with evil. This means that we cannot involve ourselves with anything that materially derives from or is going towards something gravely evil. If that's the case, there is practically nothing we can do in contemporary society.

As another example, Bishop Schneider would be arguing that it would be wrong to buy a pizza from Pizza Hut knowing that the manager there will use some of your money to view pornography. These kinds of instances can be multiplied indefinitely and they would stifle any serious interaction with society.

Now, if someone wants to boycott the vaccines, that's all well and good, and ethical alternatives should be sought, but I don't see how quite remote material cooperation (especially in the case of a deadly virus like covid) can condemn the believing Christian who takes one of the tainted vaccines.

If he (whoever is saying this) is correct, that means that we cannot benefit from something derived in an evil way. However, many inventions and technological progresses we have in society today were a result of experimentation in warfare (e.g. some experiments the Nazis carried out).

That seems hyperbolic and quite nonsensical.

According to the standard analysis of moral philosophy, it is ethical.

Can you explain what's wrong with it? On what moral principle would you say that using these vaccines is inherently wrong?

"It's not an infallible statement because it's a matter of prudential judgement, not of doctrine."
is it a statement about morals?

"That seems hyperbolic and quite nonsensical."
so the Bishops are in error that it is morally wrong?

here are three different articles with quotes to explain to you point by point why it is wrong

Bishop Schneider explains why Christians must never take abortion-tainted COVID vaccine

Bishop Schneider joins John-Henry Westen to discuss the immorality of vaccines connected to aborted baby cells, whether inside the vaccine itself or used during the testing stages.

www.lifesitenews.com

On the moral illicitness of the use of vaccines made from cells derived from aborted human fetuses

Vaccines derived from the cells of cruelly murdered unborn children are clearly apocalyptic in character and may possibly foreshadow the mark of the beast (see Rev. 13:16).

www.lifesitenews.com

and this article uses your Nazi example

Loading…

www.churchmilitant.com

 

[jonathan_hili]

"It's not an infallible statement because it's a matter of prudential judgement, not of doctrine."
is it a statement about morals?

No, it's a statement about a particular case. If the question was: "Is it moral to procure an abortion?" or "Is it moral to formally cooperate with evil?" then these would be moral statements that could, in theory, be the subject of infallibility. However, the question of whether this or that vaccine can be ethically used is not a doctrinal matter but one of applying doctrines to particular situations - it's applied ethics. As such, the judgement is prudential.

To be a bit more specific, it can be morally acceptable to cooperate materially with evil at a remote level. All moral theologians will essential agree with that. The issue is to what extent this particular case of vaccines is remote material cooperation. Some believe it's very remote, some believe it's only slightly remote. That's where the difference lies.

"That seems hyperbolic and quite nonsensical."
so the Bishops are in error that it is morally wrong?

No, the statement about it foreshadowing the mark of the beast was hyperbolic and nonsensical.

here are three different articles with quotes to explain to you point by point why it is wrong

Bishop Schneider explains why Christians must never take abortion-tainted COVID vaccine

Bishop Schneider joins John-Henry Westen to discuss the immorality of vaccines connected to aborted baby cells, whether inside the vaccine itself or used during the testing stages.

www.lifesitenews.com

On the moral illicitness of the use of vaccines made from cells derived from aborted human fetuses

Vaccines derived from the cells of cruelly murdered unborn children are clearly apocalyptic in character and may possibly foreshadow the mark of the beast (see Rev. 13:16).

www.lifesitenews.com

and this article uses your Nazi example

Loading…

www.churchmilitant.com

Yes, I know some people think it's wrong. Others think it's acceptable. This is a debatable issue. Personally, I believe it is remote enough material cooperation to be morally acceptable because of the grave risk of covid. I could be wrong, though.

 

[Bonnie]

Vatican says use of Covid vaccines made from aborted fetal tissue is ethical:​

This about faith and morals : right?

VATICAN CITY, Dec 21 (Reuters) - The Vatican told Roman Catholics on Monday that it was morally acceptable for them to use COVID-19 vaccines, even if their production employed cell lines drawn from tissues of aborted fetuses.

A note from the Vatican's doctrinal congregation, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, said the use of such vaccines was permitted as long as there were no alternatives.

Actually, I just read in the newspaper a few days ago, that the vaccine isn't made from cells grown from fetuses aborted decades ago....or at least the first couple that have become available....drat, I went back several days and cannot find it. Maybe it was in Saturday's paper....nope.

Anyway, it appears that some lines of cells derived from fetuses aborted long ago were used in animal trials, but not in actually making the vaccine.

Four Pro-Life Medical Groups Say Pfizer, Moderna COVID Vaccines Not Made With Aborted Baby Cells | LifeNews.com

 

[Beloved]

Poor People that work in Planned Parenthood offices. I envision long lines 0f women outside of all of their offices clamoring to get in for an abortion. Probably saying, "I don't want an abortion but I will sadly sacrifice this life inside me so that it will save some person that has coronavirus."

Everyone in the room can clap for them and the doctor could give them a certification of sainthood. That should keep them from having a nagging guilt trip. Our world, of people, is rapidly losing values and certainly morals. Conscience where art thou?

 

[Washed]

looks like it from the article I read earlier. The pope is justifying abortion for the greater good. I suspect most all women who want an abortion think that it is for their greater good also.

the alternative? don't get the vaccine.

I had a very interesting conversation with a Catholic who has been a champion of Right to Life, worked endlessly for Crisis pregnancy centers and the Gabrial project. I informed her that the vaccine contained aborted fetal tissue (and/or is developed using fetal tissue). She was oblivious about it. She exclaimed, "What are we supposed to do!" I responded with the obvious answer, "Don't take it" She then fell back on, well, I don't know about that. It was an interesting moment of witnessing how fear can override morality. And now her pope is further encouraging her to go against her moral compass. Generated fear is a powerful thing.

 

[Washed]

Poor People that work in Planned Parenthood offices. I envision long lines 0f women outside of all of their offices clamoring to get in for an abortion. Probably saying, "I don't want an abortion but I will sadly sacrifice this life inside me so that it will save some person that has coronavirus."

Everyone in the room can clap for them and the doctor could give them a certification of sainthood. That should keep them from having a nagging guilt trip. Our world, of people, is rapidly losing values and certainly morals. Conscience where art thou?

Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who turn darkness to light and light to darkness, who replace bitter with sweet and sweet with bitter.