http://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/otn.cfm?id=1074
By Phil Lawler (bio – articles – email) | Jan 30, 2015
Following an outbreak of measles that was traced back to Disneyland, public-health authorities are ramping up their campaign to persuade all American parents that their children should be vaccinated. This campaign places pressure on some parents who have moral objections to the use of certain vaccines.
We should not underestimate the vigor of the public-health campaign. Writers from RealClear Science and from Fox News— not outlets ordinarily inclined to favor the expansion of government powers—have called for mandatory vaccination of all children, and even jail time for parents who resist.
Nor should we underestimate the seriousness of some parents who are determined to resist the campaign. Some oppose vaccination on scientific grounds, claiming that it can have harmful effects. Others resist on moral grounds, because some vaccines are derived from the cells of aborted babies. It is on the latter category—the conscientious objectors—that I want to focus in this essay.
This is not an essay on the effectiveness of vaccines. I am not a scientist; I have no standing to address that issue. But before setting aside the question of public health, let me raise a simple practical question: How many vaccinations should be mandatory? Should parents be legally obligated to use every vaccine that public-health officials consider desirable? Or should some be mandatory, and others elective?
Just a few years ago, Governor Rick Perry of Texas (again, not ordinarily known for favoring government intervention in private lives) issued an executive order requiring that all 6th-grade girls in the state be vaccinated against the human papilloma virus (HPV). The Centers for Disease Control opposed that move, saying that mandatory vaccination was not warranted. More recently, some medical experts have questioned whether the vaccine, Gardasil, actually works, while others have cited serious side-effects. Were parents in Texas being unreasonable, then, when they opposed the vaccination campaign?
More to the point, since we are talking about an outbreak of measles, would it be unreasonable for parents to decide that they would like their children to be vaccinated against measles and mumps, but not against rubella? For American parents today that is nearly impossible, because Merck, the company that dominates the field, decided in 2009 that its drugs for measles, mumps, and rubella would be bundled into a single MMR vaccine. This creates a serious moral problem, because Merck’s rubella vaccine is derived from the tissue of aborted babies.
So we return to the question of conscientious objection. Can parents have their children vaccinated with the MMR vaccine without compromising their pro-life principles—without cooperating with the Culture of Death? The National Catholic Register addressed that question this week, and although I cannot find any clear error of fact in the article, I think it creates a very inaccurate impression.
Relying heavily on analysis by the National Catholic Bioethics Center (NCBC), the Register explains that parents who choose to have their children vaccinated are engaged only in “remote material cooperation” with abortion. Given the potential risks of disease, the article reports, the Vatican has stated that parents can be justified in chosing vaccination.
That’s all perfectly true. But reading the Register article, one might conclude that the Vatican has said parents should vaccinate. That’s not accurate. The Pontifical Academy for Life, in a statement released in 2005, said that parents could be justified in choosing vaccination. The statement did not say that this choice was preferable, let alone mandatory.
What the Vatican did say, with undeniable clarity, was that parents have a moral obligation to insist on vaccines that are not prepared by immoral means: vaccines not derived from fetal remains. The Pontifical Academy for Life wrote that “there remains a moral duty to continue to fight and to employ every lawful means in order to make life difficult for the pharmaceutical industries which act unscrupulously and unethically.”
That was in 2005. It was in 2009—four years later—that Merck decided to stop making available the morally untainted vaccines for measles and mumps. The Vatican had called upon American Catholics to fight for the development of morally acceptable vaccines. Sad to say—with the honorable exception of parents who resisted the immoral vaccines, and groups such as Children of God for Life that supported them—we did not fight hard enough to dissuade Merck from taking a giant step in the opposite direction.
The Register story conveys the impression that Catholic parents should vaccinate their children, but might also choose to lodge an objection against the use of morally tainted vaccines. The Vatican’s statement, in effect, tells parents the reverse: You may vaccinate, but you must object.
The Pontifical Academy for Life ended its statement this way:
To summarize, it must be confirmed that:
- there is a grave responsibility to use alternative vaccines and to make a conscientious objection with regard to those which have moral problems;
- as regards the vaccines without an alternative, the need to contest so that others may be prepared must be reaffirmed, as should be the lawfulness of using the former in the meantime insomuch as is necessary in order to avoid a serious risk not only for one’s own children but also, and perhaps more specifically, for the health conditions of the population as a whole – especially for pregnant women;
- the lawfulness of the use of these vaccines should not be misinterpreted as a declaration of the lawfulness of their production, marketing and use, but is to be understood as being a passive material cooperation and, in its mildest and remotest sense, also active, morally justified as an extrema ratio due to the necessity to provide for the good of one’s children and of the people who come in contact with the children (pregnant women) ;
- such cooperation occurs in a context of moral coercion of the conscience of parents, who are forced to choose to act against their conscience or otherwise, to put the health of their children and of the population as a whole at risk. This is an unjust alternative choice, which must be eliminated as soon as possible.
This is not a call for passive acceptance of the vaccines derived from fetal remains. (And by the way, chicken-pox vaccine falls into that category as well.) It is a clear call for action to remedy an injustice. If Catholics mobilized to demand ethical vaccines, the pharmaceutical industry would be forced to respond. If Catholics are content to say that they can be justified in using these vaccines, the injustice will continue.
Meanwhile, what about those Catholics (and other conscientious objectors) who have taken a firm stand? Some parents have decided that although they could be morally justified in vaccinating their children, they will bear witness to the dignity of human life by refusing even a remote cooperation with abortion. They deserve our support.
(Reprinted with permission)
FYI The diocese of St.Augustine in Florida mandates vaccinations in their schools.
Neighboring Duval County Public Schools offer an opt out for parents.
There are ample arguments against vaccinations including their safety, their efficacy, their morality, and the overriding concern about Public Health Policy being used by politicians to achieve complete control over the populace using fear guilt and intimidation.
It is disconcerting but not unexpected that The Church is a party to implementing such policies by forcing Catholics to put their faith in Big Pharma and Left Wing politicians in the name of Christ.
I am greatly concerned about these vaccinations and feel very at odds with this. I did not have my children vaccinated with the MMR and Varicella vaccines for these reasons. At the time of my children’s “recommended vaccination” schedule, I did not know of the Vatican statement and chose not to have my children vaccinated. My decision has come at great personal grievance between my husband and myself. He, feeling the children should be vaccinated. Ultimately, I made the final decision to not vaccinate them but am now having second thoughts based on this Vatican statement and my own personal concern about my children’s health given this new outbreak of the measles. I feel that I would be culpable of harm to my own children if something would happen to them, and am kind of looking at the Vatican statement as giving me the “ok” to go ahead and vaccinate with the understanding that I would agree to protest in writing to the companies, media, etc. against these unethical means of developing vaccines. Am I correct in interpreting this in this way? I guess I’m looking to clear my conscience to do this, but I don’t want to do the wrong thing. Can you comment on this?
Christine – It is horrible that parents should be in this position and my heart goes out to you! You are right that the Vatican gives permission under certain conditions to use or refuse the problem vaccines. They indicated it was “right to abstain if it could be done without significant risk” or that the vaccines “could be used on a temporary basis” because the duty to avoid remote material cooperation is not obligatory. They then laid out the conditions for what must be done to stop this injustice. So if a parent decides to use the vaccine, they must make a public protest through the pharmaceutical companies, government agencies and public health officials. If you have done this, then take this to prayer and do what God puts in your heart. God bless you!
Dear Christine, my heart goes out to you also. We struggled with this for sometime before we finally decided that we should use the vaccines for our children. I am at ease that my children are protected from the diseases, but not any less upset over the way these vaccines were produced. I, personally would urge you to go get the vaccines realizing that this is permitted and that measles can be very serious. It is such an upsetting situation. I will pray for you and for the safety of your children.
I think you all need to listen to this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4zumsJ_L5o&feature=em-uploademail
There is never a reason to do an evil/wrong and expect something good. St. Paul Romans3
Christine, if it were polio I would be concerned, but measles can cause an increased chance of ear infections, laryngitis, pneumonias and in one case in 1000, according to the MAyo clinic, a swelling of the brain or encephalitis. Any virus you get can also cause encephalitis in very rare cases in children. When I was working as a nurse we had a child who got encephalitis from a cold sore virus and another from a flu virus. They were both able to almost fully recover with time and therapy. There have been children who have developed the actual disease inoculated against, from the vaccine itself eg the HPV vaccine. Several girls died from it and at least one contracted venereal warts over her whole body after being vaccinated against HPV. What I’m saying is there are all kinds of diseases out there that have no vaccines at all, that can do far more damage than the Measles. I do vaccinate against Polio, Hib and the other ethical ones, but will not risk my children using the ones made from aborted fetal cell lines. We trust God, do our best and put our lives and our health in His Hands.
Why can’t the catholic medical association take the lead in making it possible to import non fetal tissue varicella and mmr vaccines from overseas? Parents like myself would appreciate it!
I want to put a bit of perspective on this current outbreak. The CDC reports as of Jan 30th that there are 102 cases. The State of CA reports as of Feb 2nd they have 92 cases. That leaves 10 cases in the remaining 12 states so someone is double counting somewhere. Also, keep in mind that in 2014 the CDC reports over 600 cases of measles – why was there no hysteria then? Its also notable that in the CA Health Dept reports, 62% of the infections were in adults over 20 years old, yet parents of unvaccinated children are being vilified? Really? Let’s take a deep breath and focus our attention where it should be – getting those moral separate doses from Merck!
Dear COG for life, it seems helpful in some small way, to reflect on the background of the current vaccine situation. This is somewhat of a failure of the government public health service (PHS), and this service began as far back as 1798, approximately. Before vaccines and antibiotics (1940s) many died in infancy and early childhood from contagious diseases. Those who lived, developed their own immunities and lived often long lives. The PHS developed the vaccine system with an objective to prevent massive public outbreaks for certain contagious diseases. The theory behind vaccines is to develop herd immunity, where 90% (the large majority) of the public develop immunity by way of immunization with a bit of the particular toxin contained in the vaccine. This is a wonderful theory. However, when vaccination became the antidote, as opposed to getting certain diseases and developing one’s own immunity, additional moral pressures have coerced scientists and pharmaceuticals to develop strains from unethical sources, as you COG have been warning and teaching us. Many of the medical and pharmaceutical consumers of these products are completely unaware of the ethical issues COG thoroughly researches. It would be truly great if medical and nursing and pharmaceutical educators are made aware. Then if 10% of the population opposes any vaccination for moral and or ethical reasons, parents and medical providers would not be coerced by the FDA and government to mandate these ‘tainted’ vaccines. Leonard Hayflick, the cell biologist scientist, is being lifted up as a ‘saint’, when most people do not know that he was involved in the business of procuring and using aborted baby cells to develop his theory and measles vaccine, if I am correct in reading the history I have from a COG publication. Again, if 10% of the population refuses, this should not be such a significant problem as we are finding, because the theory is about 90% of the population accepting these vaccines and not refusing them. Now that there are government mandates no one seems to accept or allow exemptions.
I was fine with everything you said until the LAST TWO sentences.
“Some parents have decided that although they could be morally justified in vaccinating their children, they will bear witness to the dignity of human life by refusing even a remote cooperation with abortion. They deserve our support.”
Sorry but Catholic teaching emphasizes the PARENT as decision maker. And parents who feel that their child needs to have the vaccine should not be made to feel that they are cooperating with evil. Maybe their child has health problems and measles would harm them more than would happen for an otherwise healthy child. YOU are making RASH JUDGMENT here!
We need to work for vaccines that are all licit and morally obtained! BUT in the meantime, each parent must make the decision based on their own child. Do not calumniate, even in a back door way, those parents who have decided to vaccinate their children.
I am very disappointed in you Phil!
Maryanne – the Vatican has said that the use of the aborted fetal vaccines is remote material cooperation and that it is not obligatory to avoid this sort of cooperation, which is not generally considered seriously sinful. But neither should a parent who chooses not to vaccinate be chastised if they choose to avoid even that cooperation. The author did not make any judgment – he repeated the Vatican’s statement clearly and accurately.
However, in 2005, Msgr. Jacques Suaudeau, a medical doctor and official at the Pontifical Academy for Life who helped oversee the study that led to “Moral Reflections on Vaccines Prepared From Cells Derived From Aborted Human Fetuses” is on the record as stating that “Parents who do not immunize their children against rubella would be responsible for the malformations and subsequent abortions of malformed fetuses that might result from a pregnant women being infected by the unvaccinated child…[and that]…In this case, the parent would be in “much more proximate cooperation with evil” than if he had accepted a morally questionable vaccine to begin with”. It is possible to be a healthy carrier of Rubella and so the possibility of your child passing that virus on to another person is something that needs to be considered as a decision is being made about the use of the MMR vaccine. The Italian version of “Moral Reflections of Vaccines Prepared From Cells Derived From Aborted Human Fetuses” states that Children and unborn children must not pay the price for “the licit fight against pharmaceutical companies” that produce immoral vaccines.
I am not sure where you got the idea that Msgr Suaudeau said this – he did not. Here is his direct response: https://cogforlife.org/2005/08/03/vatican-official-clarifies-his-position/ What you are referring to is Footnote 15 from the original Vatican document but even that does not state that “parents would be in much more proximate cooperation with evil than if he had accepted a morally questionable vaccine to begin with.” I have the original document from which the Pontifical Academy for Life wrote their official response and that is written by Angel Rodríguez Luño, Professor of Fundamental Moral Theology, Pontifical University of the Holy Cross, Rome. Nowhere is this stated in that document either. However, one aspect that the Vatican did not address was the duty of the pregnant woman to protect herself and her unborn child if she herself has not been vaccinated or acquired natural rubella immunity through the disease, which can be done through the use of IG which is not harmful to the unborn child and will provide temporary immunity. Certainly one must weigh the risks of abstaining from the problem vaccines and act responsibly if there is an outbreak. However, if one decides to use the vaccine, the Vatican stated emphatically that there was a grave responsibility to make his/her objection known to the pharmaceutical industry and health and government officials. To not do so, notes Professor Luño, “If instead they made a habitual and pacific use – without rising any difficulty – of vaccines which production is connected to abortion and always in the supposition that there is no approbation of abortion from them, they would incur in a form of mediate material cooperation very remote, therefore very weak, as regards abortion, a mediate material cooperation as regards the commercialization of cells coming from abortions, and an immediate material cooperation as regards the commercialization of vaccines produced with such cells. Cooperation is stronger from authorities and national health systems that accept the use of vaccines. Moreover, taking into account that it is up to the right conscience citizens (parents, physicians etc.) to oppose themselves to the more and more wide spread attacks against life and to the “culture of death” that support them, the use of these vaccines without raising difficulties would constitutes a form of passive material cooperation, as regards the behaviours that we have just indicated, and it would be without any doubt a form of cultural and social cooperation, because the pacific use of vaccines contributes to create a general social consensus to the activities of the pharmaceutical industries that produce them in an immoral way.”
Dear COG for life, I am a US Army officer and pro-life Catholic. Recently, back in November, the army and I’m assuming the rest of the military gave everyone a red status on immunizations, it showed that we were no longer up to date on the mmr and vericella vaccinations. We are being told that we need to go get our blood drawn and they would test it to see whether or not you were immune to those diseases and if not then you would have to receive the vaccine. I did read the article about the Coast Guard officer in regards to the hepatitis a vaccine and that after the law suit he won and did not have to get the vaccine. Honestly, I don’t want to have to go through the pain that he probably went through for this, but I will if I have to. What do you recommend that I do?
Matt – it would depend on which diseases, if any, you are not immune to when titers are drawn. In the case of the Coast Guard officer, he was abstaining from Hepatitis-A which is spread by direct hand to mouth contact with infected fecal matter (I know, gross, wash your hands!) But even a vaccinated person could still be a carrier and infect others, even though the vaccinated person would not contract it. This is probably why he won his argument hands down: he was the only one at risk. But most other diseases are airborn transmitted so its entirely different. Military exemptions are rare if not entirely non-existent and if they did a red status, there’s a problem somewhere. If you want to discuss further, you can email me through the website Contact Us – and put my name in the subject line – Debi Vinnedge. Always an honor and a privilege to assist our fine military if possible! God bless you!
Dear COG for Life, thank you for the manner you educate, clarify, and lead these discussions for life. We are all in this together. It is not an easy task to be a mother, father, parent, school system, doctor or nurse, pharmacist, or scientist. It seems what we are trying to do now, is uncover a good deal of the deception and trickery preceeding our current dilemna. Whereas ‘Maryann’ expresses her disappointment and dismay over being forced or coerced into taking actions and making decisions she does not want to take, COG is the vehicle bringing the contrast of light, not the perpetrator of the problem preceeding them. Let us affirm one another in the pursuit of truth and going right deeds. Thank you, thank you, thank you COG for life.
You are a treasure Mary – thank you!
Ditto, Debbie!
I wonder if any of the cases of measles are from people who were immunized with the tainted version. I have wondered for years if people would still get sick because God cannot bless the immoral vaccine versions.
Hello Julie, what an insightful question. I will ask my sister a pediatric nurse practitioner what she thinks. However the cases that are being reported to the departments of public health are claiming they are coming from exposures to others who have the measles or have traveled somewhere, where they were exposed to the measles. The thing is, measles was nearly 100% eliminated by the year 2000 (just about zero cases reported). Now, it would seem it is very suspicious, to have all these ‘new’ outbreaks and cases coming from other countries and ‘Disneyland’….many questions can be raised…I agree..and am a nurse of many years.
Thank you so much for this website! I am honestly a mother who is in agony over these vaccines. My first 2 children were fully vaccinated as I was honestly clueless about this. But as I have become more aware and educated on the issue, my husband and I have chosen not to vaccinate our younger children with the MMR, varicella, and hep A vaccines. I try to feel at peace with our decision but then fear fills me when I hear of these outbreaks. I wish there was an easier decision for this! Thanks for all the work you do to educate us! Blessings to you all!
Dear Jen, feel the confidence and peace of your first decision to protect your younger children. You made this decision with the help of God. ‘The Lord is my light and my salvation. Whom should I fear?’ Jen take the normal public health precautions and realize the blessings you are giving to them by protecting them from components in the vaccines you have decided are wrong or harmful. Plus, some of your children are vaccinated and the younger ones are in your own domain and protection. God will protect your resistance to wrong, and I pray, give you peace and fortitude.
Please read this article! Measles is a typical childhood illness, typically mild and conveys lifelong immunity. The measles vaccine has only temporary value as it wears off.
http://www.ageofautism.com/2015/02/neil-miller-why-people-choose-not-to-vaccinate.html
Read also a very important article on this issue, and why parents should seek non-toxic means of building immunity:
http://www.westonaprice.org/health-topics/vaccinations-parents-informed-choice/
There is an alternative called Homeoprophylaxis. The first international conference will be held in Texas this October:
http://hpworldwidechoice.com
This current hysteria is a manufactured crisis with the end goal of eliminating parental discretion, religious and philosophical exemptions (now threatened in 11 states and in Congress).
Thank you, Kimberly! Alas, a voice of reason. Folks, it is measles, not Ebola. I remember the day when the pediatrician would request that we have our children exposed to other children with measles in order to get life-long immunity. Indeed, this is a manufactured crisis, just one of many, to take away our rights by the government and its entities. It will be a very sad day when parents are locked up for not getting their children vaccinated with these evil vaccines. It is quite easy to look online at what is in these vaccines. Thimerosol is in the flu vaccine, a neurotoxin, for pete’s sake. Please educate yourself to know what is being put into your children’s bodies.
This is an Fyi about measles and the 12/14-1/15 US outbreak…
measles is highly contagious, begins with a fever, cough and runny nose, conjunctivitis for 2-4 days before the rash. It’s contagious 4 days before the rash and 4 days after the rash. It’s virus lives in a room air and on surfaces for 2 hours after a contagious person has left. So you can see how quickly it can spread. Measles can cause pneumonia, encephalitis and death.
In the current outbreak 15 percent were hospitalized, 55 percent were unvaccinated, 31 percent had unknown vaccine status, 12 percent were vaccinated, of these, 2 received 1 dose, and 4 had 2 doses or more. Among the unvaccinated cases, 5/28 were underage for the vaccine. The measles b3 genotype that caused this outbreak is being linked to a large outbreak in the Philippines in 2014.
Measles was eliminated in 2000 in the US largely due to employing a 2 dose vaccine coverage. However, measles is still endemic in many parts of the world. Many young doctors are not familiar with this disease in the US. I remembered it wiping out the college sports teams and dorms in the early nineties in Boston. Can’t forget that rash and conjunctivitis.
I’ld give my kids the vaccine for protection as the Vatican indicates, but I can see your point about the origins of it using fetal tissue…need to keep hounding Merk, but kids need protection.