Vaccination and Grave Cause
On everyone’s mind — or at least many of our minds — is the issue of the experimental vaccinations that are sweeping the globe. It is now the one-year anniversary of the descent of the demonic fog that is the coronavirus hysteria. Seriousness of the illness notwithstanding, the lasting changes that have been shoved down the throats of unwitting citizens are remarkable.
Where I live, even though there is no evidence of any ‘pandemic’ — other than the barrage of propaganda — we are still living in a dystopian reality of restrictions applied to every single aspect of our lives. Our politicians seem more and more like either ineffective and effeminate pylons — parroting tired narratives like automated robots — or demonically possessed sociopaths who take pleasure in suffocating civilization.
At any rate, along with this ‘pandemic’ has come the questionable vaccination. It is not my intention to wade into the tumultuous waters of vaccine efficacy or the scientific questions, as this is ‘above my paygrade.’ I do have my own opinion, but I instead urge readers to watch or listen to our recent interview with Pamela Acker — a true expert in the field — on the subject of inoculation, and what that means for Catholics. In this interview, Ms. Acker dispels a lot of the falsities or partial truths about the vaccine debate. She also makes it clear that the question of abortion is not a distant consideration regarding vaccination; it is sadly an integral part of the process in most cases.
Now, for the sake of this article, let us agree on some basic principles so that we can proceed fruitfully. First, it is possible to debate medical efficacy, and Catholics can in good conscience disagree on the application of certain medicines. This is not sinful. If, for example, vaccines were always made ethically, Catholics could still disagree on whether or not it is good to utilize them, for strictly medical reason. This is a prudential decision. Second, just because something has been created or received immorally does not necessarily make it immoral to benefit from. That being said, as with all moral questions, there are certain sins that are more grave than others; thus, greater caution and cause must be considered.
I think we can all easily agree on the first principle, but it is the second that is causing the major ethical considerations. Also, it can be argued that intentionally harming oneself, even with experimental medication, can be sinful if there is no justified reason. Putting ourselves at great risk of bodily harm for insufficient reason can be sinful. Thus, if, for example, the experimental vaccines were demonstrated to be of great risk to our health — even if ethically derived — that must be taken into account.
The main issue is that virtually all the vaccination options for the coronavirus are derived from or tested on fetal cell lines, since the manufacturers utilize abortion in some fashion for their purposes. Does this mean that it is intrinsically evil to hypothetically benefit from one of these vaccinations?
This is not an absolute moral principle (for all circumstances and in all cases). Therefore, technically speaking, we would say, “No, it is not intrinsically evil.” As an example, the rabies vaccine has been clearly shown to work, and that disease is fatal almost 100% of the time. It is possible to find an ethically-developed rabies vaccine, but it would not be sinful to utilize that medication if the only option was an unethically-derived version.
This brings up the question of grave cause.
If you have been bitten by a diseased animal and contracted rabies, you will almost surely die. Thus, the situation is grave indeed. Note, it is not that one ‘might die’ or one is ‘scared of dying’ or that talking heads say one ‘could die.’ Rather, the extremely high probability of death is based on human experience and uncontested evidence (well-documented and long-standing). In such a case, benefitting from a medicine with a nefarious derivation would nonetheless be acceptable – that is, if it was your only reasonable option.
Another hypothetical situation would be if a harlot were to give a famished homeless man the money to buy food. Of course, the harlot has committed and fomented hellish behavior. Let’s even presume that specific money has been acquired in a disgusting and immoral manner. Yet, man needs food to live, and so it is not immoral for him to accept this act of charity.
It does not seem like there is a grave physical cause for the coronavirus vaccines, as happily, the disease has turned out to be much less serious than advertised. Perhaps some elderly people may be quite worried; but even amongst the elderly crowd, the risks are overstated by dubious statistical manipulation. So, the physical risk does not seem to warrant taking a vaccine with such ghastly origins, especially considering it is experimental and perhaps more deadly than the disease itself for the general population.
So, what could constitute a grave cause to receive it?
With the continuing march of ‘public health’ dictatorships, many are being threatened with grave inconveniences if they refuse the vaccine. For some this could mean loss of livelihood, restriction on travel, and even restriction of access to some stores. This is sadly taking place already in Israel, although it is not clear if it is for all stores; but it is happening nonetheless. It might even be possible that evil governments, such as my own, could restrict access to church buildings without proof of vaccination; I would not put it past them.
Do these scenarios constitute grave cause to be vaccinated?
It could be so, and I cannot make this judgment for anyone but myself and my family.
But if I might add something for consideration; grave cause means grave, and not just that something might be difficult. For example, if we might lose our job for refusing vaccination, would this be grave? Well, even here the matter depends on various factors. Is there other work you could find? Do you think if your place of work says ‘take the poke or you’re fired’ that they will not also make you compromise on other morals? If your place of work is demanding that you comply with the remote cooperation with evil — in a very personal and bodily manner — there is not much else they won’t ask you to do.
If you are a pastor and the government says your congregation must be vaccinated in order to attend, do you think this is justified? They have already told you to wear a mask, that your parishioners should be muzzled, and that you can only have as many people in God’s House as Caesar permits. It will not stop with a vaccination, just like it did not stop with two weeks, or two months, or one year, or one mask.
We are living through a diabolical oppression and the State is the Devil’s minion in most jurisdictions worldwide. The trajectory of this time in history is that of other times of persecution, and the vaccination will undoubtedly be used as a tool to ostracize and divide — as most of the corona-measures have already done.
There is an expression: the only way forward is through. Well, the hour has come to consider what difficulties we are willing to go through for our principles and convictions. It is time to decide what hill is worth dying on and, if necessary, suffer greatly in order to stay united to God.
May God have mercy on us, and may we all find the courage to lock our gaze upon the Cross, and to face the wolves.