Ruadhán Jones
As Catholics, we have a responsibility to vaccinate, writes Ruadhán Jones
The question of vaccination comes up around this time every year, but never before with such force. We are all awaiting the results of the various tests underway for a vaccine for Covid-19 with bated breath. Some 240 vaccines are in early development, with 40 in clinical trials and nine already in the final stage of testing on thousands of people, as of September 25.
However, running alongside our desire for the vaccine is an increasing scepticism regarding the safety of vaccines. There is a consensus, however, that vaccines are not only safe, but actively promote good health. For example, vaccines for polio and measles have proven the most effective way of largely eradicating these illnesses. WHO credits vaccines with preventing two to three million deaths a year.
In a general sense, the Catholic Church teaches that we have a “moral responsibility” to get vaccinated due to our commitment to the common good of all around us. A 2017 document on vaccination from the Pontifical Academy for Life explains that our responsibility to vaccinate is “in order to avoid serious health risks for children and the general population”.
Theologian and bioethicist from Mary Immaculate College, Dr Tom Finnegan says that Catholic teaching on the matter is “nuanced”.
“If the vaccination is for a serious illness that is seriously affecting the community, then there’s a general obligation on Catholics to get the vaccine,” he told The Irish Catholic. “That doesn’t mean it’s an absolute duty and it doesn’t mean that a Catholic can’t in good conscience refuse to receive a vaccine.
“There’s a huge context dependence in this and a full answer couldn’t be given until you have input all lots of the specific facts particular to the situation. But there is a general obligation to receive the vaccine if it’s a safe vaccine for a serious illness that’s affecting the community. In this case, the more people that get the vaccine, the more the community can be protected.”
Stem cells
For Catholics debates regarding the reception of vaccines rarely focuses on the perceived health threat or safeness of a vaccine. Instead, Catholic concerns tend to have a more legitimate grounding with regard to the origin of the vaccine. In some cases, the vaccine may be developed using stem cell lines derived from aborted children, clearly a grave matter for consideration.
This matter is of some urgency for Catholics as some Covid-19 vaccines currently being developed are derived from such cell lines. The Vatican has given this matter a great deal of thought in the past, with three documents providing guidance – two releases from the Pontifical Academy for Life and one from the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith (CDF).
All three reach the same conclusion, which is that “in general it can be permissible and still even be an obligation for Catholics to receive vaccine if the circumstances are right even if that vaccine was made possible by tissue material from an aborted baby,” said Dr Finnegan.
David Mullins, an Irish bioethics commentator, explained that the Vatican’s ruling came after controversy surrounding a vaccine for rubella. This vaccine was developed from stem lines derived from aborted foetuses and the question arose whether Catholics could receive it.
“The Vatican are clear and say, look – you could still receive the rubella vaccine in good conscience, there wasn’t a compelling reason that you couldn’t take it because of the common good, and because the person receiving it wasn’t directly involved in the manufacture or procurement of the vaccine,” Mr Mullins said. “There’s all these levels of moral cooperation, but the Vatican eventually said that you could receive the rubella vaccine because people didn’t have immediate cooperation with the act itself.“
Vatican
As Dr Finnegan said, Church teaching on the matter is subtle and relies on “differing degrees of responsibility”, according to the CDF’s 2008 document Dignitatis Personae.
The CDF found that “in organisations where cell lines of illicit origin are being utilised, 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”.
At the same time, said the CDF instruction, “danger to the health of children could permit parents to use a vaccine which was developed using cell lines of illicit origin, while keeping in mind that everyone has the duty to make known their disagreement and to ask that their healthcare system make other types of vaccines available.”
This was further clarified in the Academy for Life’s 2017 document on the same matter. The academy said that “while the commitment to ensuring that every vaccine has no connection in its preparation to any material originating from an abortion, the moral responsibility to vaccinate is reiterated in order to avoid serious health risks for children and the general population”.
Vatican teaching is clear, then, that we have a duty to oppose the production of vaccines through illicit stem lines and to seek out alternative means where they are available. But in situations of serious health risks to ourselves or vulnerable members of our community and where no alternative is available, we are not only allowed, but have a responsibility to take part in a vaccination programme.
In the meantime, while a vaccine has yet to be created, we should support motions that call for ethical production. When a vaccine is offered, we should do all in our power – even where it is inconvenient for those who provide vaccines – to seek out ethical alternatives where they are available. Even when a vaccine is in use and we have used it ourselves, we should continue to argue for the presence of an ethical alternative until it is produced. In doing this, we uphold our dual responsibilities – the protection of life as such and our commitment to the common good of the vulnerable.