Why religious conservatives say J&J vaccine can be OK
Image: Logos World
The authorization of Johnson & Johnson’s COVID-19 vaccine has resulted in hesitancy among some who oppose abortion, but leaders of several groups have said there can be circumstances where taking the Johnson & Johnson vaccine is morally right, even if they believe abortion is not.
Neither Pfizer nor Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine involved cells derived from aborted fetal tissue, although cells originally derived from aborted fetal tissue were used in preliminary laboratory testing.
In contrast, cell lines originating from aborted fetal tissue were used in the actual development and production of the Johnson and Johnson vaccine.
The Catholic Diocese of Memphis has received many calls from parishioners asking whether it is acceptable to take the vaccine, said Rick Ouellette, spokesperson for the diocese.
“Receiving one of the COVID-19 vaccines should be understood as an act of charity toward other members of our West Tennessee community,” Ouellette said. “Being vaccinated safely against COVID-19 should be considered an act of love of our neighbor and part of our moral responsibility for the common good.”
Because of the many questions, the diocese earlier this month shared with parishioners a news release from the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops about the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, saying it “raises questions about the moral permissibility of using vaccines developed, tested, and/or produced with the help of abortion-derived cell lines.”
“The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has judged 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,’” the release read.
However, it said that “if one has the ability to choose a vaccine, Pfizer or Moderna’s vaccines should be chosen over Johnson & Johnson’s.”
“While we should continue to insist that pharmaceutical companies stop using abortion-derived cell lines, given the world-wide suffering that this pandemic is causing, we affirm again that being vaccinated can be an act of charity that serves the common good.”
Shelby County has not yet received its allocation of the Johnson & Johnson vaccine. It will not receive any next week, according to Doug McGowen, chief operating officer with the City of Memphis.
A theological exercise or a health initiative?
Also in Memphis, members of the Church of God in Christ are grappling with questions of how their opposition to abortion ties into support of live-saving vaccines.
Bishop David Hall, prelate of the Tennessee Headquarters of the Church of God in Christ, said people need to consider that the cell lines used in the development of the Johnson & Johnson vaccine originate from an abortion that occurred years ago — not abortions actively occurring.
“What are we doing today, are we doing a theological exercise or are we doing a health initiative that will impact people who are being impacted by this dread disease?” Hall asked. “There are always complications in modern medicine, there are always things in modern medicine you could raise theological objections to. Not to be overly critical, but sometimes you just have to keep your faith and know that science is a part of something God endeavored to give humankind so we have benefited from it.”
If it bothers a person’s conscience, then they should take a different vaccine, Hall said. Otherwise, Johnson & Johnson can be fine.
Health officials have said that the Johnson & Johnson vaccine can play an important role in combating COVID-19 because it only requires a single dose, removing the hassle of scheduling follow-up appointments and reducing the amount of paperwork for vaccinating agencies. It also does not require the same level of cold storage as the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines.
Those conditions make it ideal for remote and rural areas far from hospitals which might not have the types of freezers necessary to store the vaccines, said Dr. Steve Threlkeld, co-chair of the infection control program at Baptist Memorial Hospital-Memphis.
“It also will be of great advantage to give to folks that you can’t really guarantee are going to come back,” Threlkeld said. “In some of our homeless population, it can be a tremendous challenge to make sure we can get a second dose of vaccine to folks in that population.”
The one-shot regimen could also make it easier to ensure people who are homebound or do not have reliable transportation are able to be fully vaccinated.
Hall said those things need to be considered by anyone looking at the ethics of vaccines: how to protect the most vulnerable from COVID-19.
If you write off all vaccines remotely related to cell lines that come from aborted fetal tissue and more people die of COVID-19, “What good is that going to do now?” Hall said. “Taking the COVID vaccine is morally right“.
Southern Baptists, too, have discussed the implications of taking the Johnson & Johnson vaccine.
Russell Moore, president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention wrote on his website that it “is important to note that although the cell lines potentially originated from abortions, no cells remain from the original fetal tissue in these cloned cells, and the cell lines no longer contain fetal tissue or body parts.”
He also wrote that people should not have conscience objections to the Johnson & Johnson vaccine.
“Opposing unethical means of research does not mean that people must shun medical treatments that are discovered through these means,” Moore wrote. “Again, I am not suggesting that every vaccine necessarily might involve unethical aspects of research, but simply that, even if some do, that fact does not mean that a Christian inoculated from disease by such a vaccine would be sinning to do so. Taking the COVID vaccine is morally right.”
See more here: ampproject.org
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Expose The Lies About COVID19
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Trackback from your site.
Itsme
| #
Yeah, I’m sure it’s quite safe too, why not practise a few vaccines on babies under six months old, like the others are doing, and don’t forget to throw a free bottle of your favourite baby talc in with each jab.
Reply
Herb Rose
| #
Put your faith in God and Bill Gates.
Reply
Matty
| #
QUOTE: “Opposing unethical means of research does not mean that people must shun medical treatments that are discovered through these means,” Moore wrote.
What a stinking pile of tripe! To hell with “Conscientious Objection” then, right?
Well, remember all the “medical” experiments done on the Jews by Mengele? They were all scrapped and banned from further advancement and use! Even the lamps with human flesh and other ghoulish artefacts were destroyed and banned from resale, left only to shock museum patrons for the horror they represent! The very idea that we should now ignore and abandon our consciences, as Christians, is abhorrent. What is left of value in these so-called Christian churches, I cannot fathom!
Reply
Wisenox
| #
The article centers on the use of aborted fetal cells, which is not the concern with mRNA therapies. I find it more alarming that CRISPR is being used.
“CRISPR gene drive has recently been proposed as a promising technology for population management, including in conservation genetics. The technique would consist in releasing genetically engineered individuals that are designed to rapidly propagate a desired mutation or transgene into wild populations”
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10592-019-01165-5This doesn’t sound temporary to me, and if infertility occurs, it will pass to the child. Common people will have to seek medical assistance to have children. I’m also more concerned that CRISPR mutates multiple genes at the same time. They can inhibit brain development, behavior, and fertility quite easily and there is zero reason to believe that they won’t. There is much more to be concerned with than fetal cells, and the J&J poison is no different from the others. Vaccine for a virus that has yet to be isolated, exists only under patent, and requires an inaccurate test to know you have it? Foolish.
Reply