Making Moral Vaccine Decisions - Part i: Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops

 +

JMJ

 

The Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops has a website here (link) with four documents in PDF format that are relevant to the current situation.

After a quick read of the pdfs (3 of which are reproduced below), I have happily concluded that they are consistent with the teachings of the Catholic Church.

In spite of all that the Bishops of the Catholic Church have done in the name of the "Council" and "Ecumenism" - they remain the princes of the Catholic Church.

Pray for them!

P^3

CCCB Note on Ethical Concerns Related to Currently Approved COVID-19 Vaccines

The decision to receive any COVID-19 vaccine is one of individual conscience in consultation with one’s physician or healthcare provider. Choosing to be vaccinated, particularly amid the current pandemic, can be an act of charity which recognizes the need to care for others. 

The CCCB echoes the call of the Holy See,1 by reiterating its appeal to governments to “ensure that COVID-19 vaccines that become available do not create an ethical dilemma for Canadians,”2 thus encouraging greater vaccine uptake among the general population and strengthening the common good of our Canadian society. 

The recent approvals by Health Canada of the AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson vaccines against COVID-193 have given rise to questions among Catholics about the moral permissibility of receiving vaccines whose development, production, and/or testing has involved the use of abortion-derived cell lines. These questions are important for they concern the sacredness of human life and its inherent dignity. 

The Moderna and Pfizer vaccines already approved in Canada do not use abortion-derived cell lines in their development and production of the vaccine, however in some of their final testing processes, they have used unethically-derived cell lines. These two vaccines currently available in Canada can be morally acceptable for Catholics to receive since the connection to abortion is extremely remote.  

In contrast to these vaccines, the AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson vaccines utilized abortion-derived cell lines in their development, production, and confirmatory testing.4 The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith makes the distinction between the  differing moral obligations for those who develop such vaccines and those who receive them. They have reassured Catholics that “when ethically irreproachable Covid-19 vaccines are not available . . . it is morally acceptable to receive Covid-19 vaccines that have used cell lines from aborted fetuses in their research and production process.”5   

Therefore, when provided with a choice between receiving different vaccines, the vaccine with the least connection to abortion-derived cell lines should always be preferred and chosen when possible. This means that given the currently approved vaccine options in Canada, if/when presented with the choice, one should choose to receive either the Moderna or Pfizer vaccine over the AstraZeneca or Johnson & Johnson vaccine. When no choice of vaccine is available, the AstraZeneca or Johnson & Johnson vaccine (or any other COVID-19 vaccine that may be approved) “can be used in good conscience with the certain knowledge that the use of such vaccines does not constitute formal cooperation with abortion.”6  

Consequently, if it is possible in a given area or local region to choose a vaccine, Pfizer and Moderna would be recommended at this stage. However, when a choice is not provided or it is quite difficult to have recourse to these said vaccines, given the health urgency at hand and other considerations, nothing morally prevents anyone from receiving in good conscience the AstraZeneca or Johnson & Johnson vaccines or others that may eventually be approved which will have been developed, tested and produced in a similar fashion.  

9 March 2021
                                                 

1. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Note on the morality of using some anti-Covid-19 vaccines (21 December 2020), n. 4 “Both pharmaceutical companies and governmental health agencies are therefore encouraged to produce, approve, distribute and offer ethically acceptable vaccines that do not create problems of conscience for either health care providers or the people to be vaccinated.”
2. Letter signed by the CCCB President to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau regarding ethical COVID-19 vaccines(21 May 2020).
3. https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/news/2021/02/health-canada-authorizes-astrazeneca-and-verity-pharmaceuticals-incserum-institute-of-india-covid-19-vaccines.html / https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/news/2021/03/health-canada-authorizes-janssen-covid-19-vaccine.html
4. https://lozierinstitute.org/update-covid-19-vaccine-candidates-and-abortion-derived-cell-lines/  The same would be true of any other adenovirus vector vaccines which may be approved by Health Canada in the future.

 ================================

 

 CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH

Note on the morality of using some anti-Covid-19 vaccines


The question of the use of vaccines, in general, is often at the center of controversy in the forum of publicopinion. In recent months, this Congregation has received several requests for guidance regarding the use ofvaccines against the SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes Covid-19, which, in the course of research andproduction, employed cell lines drawn from tissue obtained from two abortions that occurred in the lastcentury. At the same time, diverse and sometimes conflicting pronouncements in the mass media by bishops,Catholic associations, and experts have raised questions about the morality of the use of these vaccines.

There is already an important pronouncement of the Pontifical Academy for Life on this issue, entitled “Moral reflections on vaccines prepared from cells derived from aborted human fetuses” (5 June 2005).

Further, this Congregation expressed itself on the matter with the Instruction Dignitas Personae (September8, 2008, cf. nn. 34 and 35). In 2017, the Pontifical Academy for Life returned to the topic with a Note. These documents already offer some general directive criteria.

Since the first vaccines against Covid-19 are already available for distribution and administration in various countries, this Congregation desires to offer some indications for clarification of this matter. We do not intend to judge the safety and efficacy of these vaccines, although ethically relevant and necessary, as this evaluation is the responsibility of biomedical researchers and drug agencies. Here, our objective is only to consider the moral aspects of the use of the vaccines against Covid-19 that have been developed from celllines derived from tissues obtained from two fetuses that were not spontaneously aborted.

1. As the Instruction Dignitas Personae states, in cases where cells from aborted fetuses are employed to create cell lines for use in scientific research, “there exist differing degrees of responsibility”[1] of cooperation in evil. For example,“in organizations where cell lines of illicit origin are being utilized, the responsibility of those who make the decision to use them is not the same as that of those who have no voice in such a decision”.[2]
2. In this sense, when ethically irreproachable Covid-19 vaccines are not available (e.g. in countries where vaccines without ethical problems are not made available to physicians and patients, or where their distribution is more difficult due to special storage and transport conditions, or when various types of vaccines are distributed in the same country but health authorities do not allow citizens to choose the vaccine with which to be inoculated) it is morally acceptable to receive Covid-19 vaccines that have used cell linesfrom aborted fetuses in their research and production process.
3. The fundamental reason for considering the use of these vaccines morally licit is that the kind of cooperation in evil (passive material cooperation) in the procured abortion from which these cell lines originate is, on the part of those making use of the resulting vaccines, remote. The moral duty to avoid such passive material cooperation is not obligatory if there is a grave danger, such as the otherwise uncontainable spread of a serious pathological agent[3]--in this case, the pandemic spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes Covid-19. It must therefore be considered that, in such a case, all vaccinations recognized as  clinically safe and effective can be used in good conscience with the certain knowledge that the use of such vaccines does not constitute formal cooperation with the abortion from which the cells used in production of the vaccines derive. It should be emphasized, however, that the morally licit use of these types of vaccines, in the particular conditions that make it so, does not in itself constitute a legitimation, even indirect, of the practice of abortion, and necessarily assumes the opposition to this practice by those who make use of these vaccines.
4. In fact, the licit use of such vaccines does not and should not in any way imply that there is a moral endorsement of the use of cell lines proceeding from aborted fetuses.[4] Both pharmaceutical companies and governmental health agencies are therefore encouraged to produce, approve, distribute and offer ethically acceptable vaccines that do not create problems of conscience for either health care providers or the people to be vaccinated.
5. At the same time, practical reason makes evident that vaccination is not, as a rule, a moral obligation and that, therefore, it must be voluntary. In any case, from the ethical point of view, the morality of vaccination depends not only on the duty to protect one's own health, but also on the duty to pursue the common good. In the absence of other means to stop or even prevent the epidemic, the common good may recommend vaccination, especially to protect the weakest and most exposed. Those who, however, for reasons of conscience, refuse vaccines produced with cell lines from aborted fetuses, must do their utmost to avoid, by other prophylactic means and appropriate behavior, becoming vehicles for the transmission of the infectious agent. In particular, they must avoid any risk to the health of those who cannot be vaccinated for medical or other reasons, and who are the most vulnerable.
6. Finally, there is also a moral imperative for the pharmaceutical industry, governments and international organizations to ensure that vaccines, which are effective and safe from a medical point of view, as well as ethically acceptable, are also accessible to the poorest countries in a manner that is not costly for them. The lack of access to vaccines, otherwise, would become another sign of discrimination and injustice that condemns poor countries to continue living in health, economic and social poverty.[5]

 

The Sovereign Pontiff Francis, at the Audience granted to the undersigned Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, on 17 December 2020, examined the present Note and ordered its publication.

Rome, from the Offices of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, on 21 December 2020, Liturgical Memorial of Saint Peter Canisius.

 

Luis F. Card. Ladaria, S.I. ,Prefect 

 

+ S.E. Mons. Giacomo Morandi, Titular Archbishop of Cerveteri,  Secretary

 

[1] Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction Dignitas Personae (8th December 2008), n. 35;AAS (100), 884.
[2] Ibid, 885.
[3] Cfr. Pontifical Academy for Life, “Moral reflections on vaccines prepared from cells derived from
aborted human foetuses”, 5th June 2005.
[4] Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruct. Dignitas Personae, n. 35: “When the illicit action is endorsed by the laws which regulate healthcare and scientific research, it is necessary to distance oneself from the evil aspects of that system in order not to give the impression of a certain toleration or tacit acceptance of actions which are gravely unjust. Any appearance of acceptance would in fact contribute to the growing indifference to, if not the approval of, such actions in certain medical and political circles”.
[5] Cfr. Francis, Address to the members of the "Banco Farmaceutico" foundation, 19 September 2020.

 

 ================================

Letter to the Prime Minister of Canada

 The Right Honourable Justin Trudeau, P.C., M.P.
Prime Minister of Canada,
Langevin Block,
Ottawa ON K1A 0A2

 

May 21, 2020
Dear Prime Minister,  

We write to thank you for the federal government’s ongoing efforts to prevent transmission of COVID-19, especially among the most vulnerable Canadians. We endorse the earliest possible development of safe, effective anti-viral vaccines and the broadest uptake of vaccination.  

We urge your government to fund the development of vaccines that do not create an ethical dilemma for many Canadians. On one hand, the wide uptake of vaccines is essential to protect citizens from the transmission of disease. On the other, a vaccine produced using abortion-derived cell lines raises conscience concerns for anyone who might be offered that vaccine and is aware of its lineage. This dilemma will emerge if there are no alternatives to vaccines developed with the use of human fetal cell lines obtained from elective abortions.  

COVID-19 vaccine candidates that are ethically unacceptable are produced using human cell lines such as PER.C6 and HEK 293, derived from elective abortions.1,2 Our ethical objections relate to the use of this abortion-derived lineage, both the destruction and the exploitation of unique human lives.3 The subsequent manufacture of vaccines using such ethically-tainted human cell lines demonstrates profound disrespect for the dignity of the human person.

 
Governments must ensure that COVID-19 vaccines that become available do not create an ethical dilemma for Canadians. Fortunately, numerous vaccines under development do not raise ethical concerns. One excellent Canadian example is being developed at the University of British Columbia by Dr. Wilfred Jefferies. His methodology uses self-amplifying mRNA, made entirely in a test tube without cells or tissues, according to email dated May 11, 2020 from David Prentice, PhD, of the Charlotte Lozier Institute (DPrentice@lozierinstitute.org).  The reference list follows the signatures on this letter.  

Please be assured of our strong support for ethically developed vaccines.  

 

References
1. Charlotte Lozier Institute [Internet]. Arlington VA: Lozier Institute; May 2020. An ethics assessment of COVID-19 vaccine programs; 2020 May [cited 2020 May 9]; Available from: https://lozierinstitute.org/an-ethics-assessment-of-covid-19-vaccine-programs  

2. Coronavirus Today [Internet]. Houston TX: Precision Vaccinations; 2020. Janssen partners with BARDA to expedite COVID-10 vaccine development [cited 2020 May 4]. Available from: https://www.coronavirustoday.com/barda-will-contribute-janssen-covid-19-vaccine-development-program
3. Anscombe Bioethics Centre [Internet]. Oxford: Anscombe Bioethics Centre; 2020.COVID-19 vaccines and use of foetal cell-lines; 2020 April 27 [cited 2020 May 4]. Available from: http://www.bioethics.org.uk/images/user/covidbriefing2.pdf

 

 

c.c.:     The Honourable Patty Hajdu, P.C., M.P.
             Minister of Health