This is attached as a PDF file for those wishing to download it.
by Fr . Edward F. MacDonald
The Colorado Catholic Bishops (USA), the Australian Catholic Medical Association, the National Catholic Bioethics Center (USA), Fr. Selegny (SSPX) and other Catholics, some traditional, are saying that we can have a conscience objection to the vaccine. These are the points and explanation from the NCBC.
- Vaccination is not morally obligatory in principle and so must be voluntary.
- There is a general moral duty to refuse the use of medical products, including certain vaccines, that are produced using human cells lines derived from direct abortions. It is permissible to use such vaccines only under certain case-specific conditions, based on a judgment of conscience.
- A person’s informed judgments about the proportionality of medical interventions are to be respected unless they contradict authoritative Catholic moral teachings.
- A person is morally required to obey his or her sure conscience, even if it errs.
An individual Catholic may invoke Church teaching to refuse a vaccine developed or produced using abortion derived cell lines. More generally a Catholic might refuse a vaccine based on the Church’s teaching concerning therapeutic proportionality. Therapeutic proportionality is an assessment of whether the benefits of a medical intervention outweigh the undesirable side-effects and burdens in light of the integral good of the person, including spiritual, psychological, and bodily goods. It can also extend to the good of others and the common good, which likewise entail spiritual and moral dimensions and are not reducible to public health. The judgment of therapeutic proportionality must be made by the person who is the potential recipient of the intervention in the concrete circumstances, not by public health authorities or by other individuals who might judge differently in their own situations.
At the core of the Church’s teaching are the first and last points listed above; vaccination is not a universal obligation and a person must obey the judgment of his or her own informed and certain conscience. In fact, the Catechism of the Catholic Church instructs that following one’s conscience is following Christ Himself.” (Bold added).
Fr. Selegny (SSPX) concurs with this teaching:
“It should be remembered here that, like any concrete human act, being vaccinated is a matter of personal prudence, even family caution if it involves children. That is to say, it is up to each individual to make this decision, according to the light given to him and the precise circumstances in which he finds himself.
Indeed, any human act requires taking into account the moral object, the end and the circumstances - in particular those of time, place and means. However, inevitably, these circumstances vary infinitely according to everyone’s particular situation: each one is thus brought to decide for himself, according to his circumstances and point of view the possible risks to which his action exposes him and those around him.”
“However, since receiving the vaccination is an individual choice and a matter of personal prudence, it is important not to make it a dogmatic or theological question. Everyone should be left to his own prudence, and charity should be the law which regulates exchanges on this question, as on any other.
Let each apply himself to enlightening his judgment with whatever help he may obtain, and in the first place in the supernatural order, by prayer and recourse to the Holy Ghost.
This will allow him to take his responsibilities before God and thus make up his own mind in complete freedom.
Further, his neighbor should have at heart to respect this choice and to tolerate a decision other than his own, whether it is to be vaccinated or not.” (Bold added).
What these clerics are advocating is the modern notion that morality is not absolute but depends on particular circumstances and the individual’s situation. Traditionally we have absolute rules, e.g., Thou shall not commit adultery. The Church always taught and the faithful understood that adultery was a grave sin no matter what the circumstances. Adulterers whether public or secret knew that they could not receive Holy Communion. Now with situation ethics Conciliarists and modernists justify adultery in circumstances. For example it is widely known that when a priest refused Communion to a public adulteress in Argentina that she phoned Pope Francis who ruled that in her circumstances adultery was permitted and she could receive Communion.
These clerics are imitating Pope Francis. Instead of giving clear guidance they are placing the burden on the individual to make a prudent decision whether to be vaccinated or not based on his “circumstances” and the “situation” he finds himself in. The SSPX in the person of Fr. Selegny also demands that we practice the sin of “tolerance” in regard to evil choices made by others. We cannot condemn their decisions. Morality is individual and situational and there are no absolute rules. It is up to me to determine whether my action is sinful or not. The NCBC has the audacity to add that my decision is ratified by Christ. If Peter decides that it is sinful to take the vaccination then Christ agrees with that decision. If Paul decides that it is not a sin to take the vaccination then Christ agrees with that. They make Christ a “reed blowing in the wind.”
These arguments have been shown to be false by others and I strongly recommend what two laymen have written: Michael Baker https://www.superflumina.org/commentary-on-fr-selegnys-sspx-paper.html and an anonymous Catholic Doctor https://tradidi.com/articles/reply-to-fr-selegnys-considerations-on-vaccination-against-covid-19/ Archbishop Vigano and other priests have also spoken clearly on this issue.
These authors clearly show that we cannot receive abortion tainted “vaccines” under any circumstances. It is a grave sin for everyone to do so no matter what their circumstances or in what situation they find themselves. Thus we must take up the cross of being considered an outcast in society. Men are losing their jobs and the means to support their families. In Sydney already today we cannot go to shops. Most probably we will not be able to use public transportation.
St. Paul taught us on the XXth Sunday after Pentecost: “See therefore, brethren, how you walk circumspectly: not as unwise, But as wise: redeeming the time, because the days are evil. Wherefore become not unwise, but understanding what is the will of God.” Circumspectly means to look all around. Many people today do not heed St. Paul’s admonishment. They do not want to know about the evils of our day. The SSPX has taken this position with regard to Conciliar Rome. The Pope teaches get vaccinated. Thus, the SSPX, not wanting to know that he is wrong, makes a pitiful attempt to justify the vaccination. They have become unwise as have all the modernists in Rome and those wanting to leave it to individual choice to be vaccinated or not. We must be circumspect and wise and not follow the politicians, the media, and unwise clerics in these evil days. We must understand what is the will of God and follow it.