Skip to main content

Making Moral Vaccine Decisions - Part F: Our Obligations

 

 +
JMJ
 
Many have protested their belief that their 'rights' have been trodden upon by the leaders of our governments.
 
What few speak about are our obligations as a Catholic and member of civil society.
 
 Our first obligation is to protect our health.  This is a serious obligation and guards against intemperance in our mortal life.  In the case of a disease, we need to weigh the risks to our personal health as discussed earlier in this series.

What many seem to have selfishly forgot in their desire to protect their 'rights' is the right that others have, namely our obligation to the common-good. The extent that people will go to explain away the common-good is saddening.  I have already discussed the general risks to society and have been saddened by those media reports where Catholic celebrities speak out, trying to cast aside hundreds of years of the development of moral theology.

I am afraid that it is a testimony to the liberalism that permeates western society when people complain loudly about wearing a mask in public (which has been demonstrated to be effective in reducing the transmission) and being vaccinated.  
 
We have an obligation to first protect our health and that of the common-good of our society.

But our obligation does not stop there. As Catholics there is much more ...

First, we have an obligation to promote untainted vaccines. Because of the social circumstances, it is not viable to simply demand the banning of tainted vaccines. There are a number of vaccines that are either untainted or only indirectly tainted by the use of morally tainted cell lines during testing. 

We need to promote their use to make them more commercially attractive than the morally tainted options.

This means that we are obliged to: 

  • Discuss with care-giver options for vaccination.
  • If available select the option that presents the least degree of taint and therefore the most remote cooperation in the evil of murder.

In addition, there are emerging untainted production technologies that hold the promise of a competitive advantage over the tainted methods. We need to lobby the Government to support the research and development of these technologies. 

Finally, we need to put our money where our mouth is by contributing financially to the private research and development of these technologies.

In short we can't just stand our virtual soap boxes ranting at the government to stop using morally tainted vaccines, we need to also tell them what TO do and make the sacrifices necessary to make it stick.

P^3



Series Links

Making Moral Vaccine Decisions - Part A: Guiding Principles

Making Moral Vaccine Decisions - Part B: Situation

Making Moral Vaccine Decisions - Part C: Moral Issues

Making Moral Vaccine Decisions - Part D: Vaccine Safety and Efficacy

Making Moral Vaccine Decisions - Part E: Vaccines In Canada

Making Moral Vaccine Decisions - Part F: Our Obligations

Making Moral Vaccine Decisions - Part G: Conclusion and Resources

Comments

  1. Really! “Select the option with less degree of taint “. Because to some degree there is less “murder”? You can’t be serious. You sound like the typical liberal that is scared of a virus that has a 99.9 % chance of survival and furthermore the wearing of mask has NOT been PROVEN to reduce the transmission of the virus or as you say “demonstrated to be effective in reducing the transmission “. Demonstrated and proven are two different things and I for one will lean on the side of a proven fact vs. a demonstration.
    I’m not an anti vaccine person but I am anti vaccine on some and this is one I am totally against! If one knowingly injects themselves and their children with a vaccine that has harmful components, not to mention stem cells.......that is the sin!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Really! “Select the option with less degree of taint “. Because to some degree there is less “murder”? You can’t be serious. You sound like the typical liberal that is scared of a virus that has a 99.9 % chance of survival and furthermore the wearing of mask has NOT been PROVEN to reduce the transmission of the virus or as you say “demonstrated to be effective in reducing the transmission “. Demonstrated and proven are two different things and I for one will lean on the side of a proven fact vs. a demonstration.
    I’m not an anti vaccine person but I am anti vaccine on some and this is one I am totally against! If one knowingly injects themselves and their children with a vaccine that has harmful components, not to mention stem cells.......that is the sin!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Rome,the SSPX and this time of Crisis - Updated

+ JMJ Obviously there's lots of events right now. First we have the April 1st - I almost thought it was April Fools - meeting between Pope Francis and Bishop Fellay.  Nothing really news worthy as this is a natural progression as Rome appears to be considering fulfilling Archbishop Lefebvre's wish to 'accept us as we are'. Second we have the April 8th publication of what will be a verbose exhortation of the Synod of the Family. I'm willing to bet that the Pope will give with one hand (unilateral regularization of SSPX) and take with the other (ambiguous document that opens the flood gates of sin further). Much to pray for. P^3

SSPX and the Resistance - A Comparison Of Ecclesiology

Shining the light of Church Teaching on the doctrinal positions of the SSPX and the Resistance. Principles are guides used to aid in decision making.  It stands to reason that bad principles will lead to bad decisions. The recent interactions between Rome and the SSPX has challenged a number of closely held cultural assumptions of people in both sides of the disagreement. This has resulted in cultural skirmishes in both Rome and the SSPX. Since it is the smaller of the two, the skirmishes have been more evident within the SSPX.  The cultural fault-line that Bishop Fellay crossed appears to be linked to two points of Catholic Doctrine: Ecclesiology and Obedience.  The cultural difference of view points is strong enough that it has resulted in the expulsion of a number of members.  It should also be noted that some other priests expelled since the beginning of the latest interactions (starting in 2000) held the same view points and have joined with the l...

Validity of new rite of episcopal consecrations - Courtesy of SSPX.org

+ JMJ In the blogosphere there are number of responses to this crisis in the Catholic Church that lead to conclusions that run counter to Catholic Doctrine and Dogmas - if taken to their logical conclusion. The validity of the New Rite of Episcopal consecrations is one such hotspot within more extreme sections of the 'traditionalist' culture. Validity of new rite of episcopal consecrations Courtesy of SSPX.org Why the new rite of episcopal consecration is valid Introduction This comprehensive study was compiled to settle a debate that has been circulating in traditional Catholic circles. Some writers have examined the new rite of episcopal consecration and concluded that it must be invalid. Since this would cause manifest problems if it were true and due to the heightened awareness of such a theory, we present a study of this question concluding that it is valid. Following the Council, in 1968 a new rite for the ordination of bishops was promulg...

Comparision of the Tridentine, Cranmer and Novus Ordo Masses

+ JMJ I downloaded the comparison that was linked in the previous article on the mass (here) . ... a very good reference! P^3 From: Whispers of Restoration (available at this link) . CHARTING LITURGICAL CHANGE Comparing the 1962 Ordinary of the Roman Mass to changes made during the Anglican Schism; Compared in turn to changes adopted in the creation of Pope Paul VI’s Mass in 1969 The chart on the reverse is a concise comparison of certain ritual differences between three historical rites for the celebration of the Catholic Mass Vetus Ordo: “Old Order,” the Roman Rite of Mass as contained in the 1962 Missal, often referred to as the “Traditional Latin Mass.”The Ordinary of this Mass is that of Pope St. Pius V (1570) following the Council of Trent (1545-63), hence the occasional moniker “Tridentine Mass.” However, Trent only consolidated and codified the Roman Rite already in use at that time; its essential form dates to Pope St. Gregory the Great (+604), in whose time the R...