The COVID-19 vaccination debate: chains of evil
LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.
April 19, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – The question of the vaccination against the ‘Corona Virus’ by foetal ‘cell-lines’ concerns the legitimacy of participation in moral evil. In the following we shall present:
I. the three relevant moral features to the practice;
II. an observation about the Magisterium; and
III. a closer analysis at the evil involved.
I. The three relevant moral features to the practice are:
a) The nature of the evil;
b) The closeness of participation in the evil;
c) The possible justification for such participation.
a) The Nature of the Evil
The evil that is typically envisaged by those who would wish to legitimise the vaccination, is the evil of abortion. The abortion is sometimes considered to be:
i) solely of a spontaneous nature (i.e. a miscarriage);
ii) of a restricted number, perhaps comprising only one;
iii) the only evil involved.
We shall look at each claim in turn.
i) The Possibility of using a Miscarriage for Vaccines
Such a possibility is non-existent for, as Dr. Gonzalo Herranz, Professor of Hystology and General Embryology at the University of Navarre, in Spain, explains: to obtain embryo cells for culture it is necessary to proceed by “dissecting it [the embryo] while still alive” (1).
ii) The Possibility that the Abortions are Few in Number
As to the number of the original abortions, we reply that they should be rather estimated in their hundreds or thousands . We refer in particular to the ‘HEK 293-line’ (3). A number of other lines have also been shown to involve multiple abortions (4).
iii) That the Only Evil behind Vaccination is the Abortion
This is untrue. The full evil involved may be described as follows: before being murdered, the child is extracted from the womb, not baptised, operated on alive without anaesthetics, parts of his body stolen, worked on, and trafficked for financial profit, and the rest of his body disposed of like common refuse. Here there is not one grave evil, but ten:
1. Extraction of a child from the womb before birth;
2. Denial of baptism, so debarring him or her from Heaven;
4. Theft of body parts;
5. Murder of the child;
6. Disposal of the rest of the body;
7. Manipulation of body parts;
8. Marketing of body parts;
9. Desecration of the child in instances (iv), (v), (vi), (vii) and (viii);
10. Violation of the child’s rights in all instances.
b) The Closeness of Participation in the Evil
Because it is claimed that the abortion is the only evil in issue and that this evil existed in the past, probably, indeed, in the distant past, it is argued that the participation 5 can only be remote and passive. We note that the term “remote” in moral theology possesses a moral sense, signifying the lack of direct moral involvement in the evil concerned.
We reply that the co-operation is not remote and passive, but proximate and active, for the evil in question in fact consists not in one single past event, but in the proximate and active participation in a process which extends from the original abortion to the very act of injection itself. This process is not simply a concatenation of discrete and isolated events, but a continuous, unbroken chain extending from the extraction of the child from the mother’s womb and culminating in the vaccination, as the last link of the chain. We call this chain a ‘chain of evil’ corresponding to the ‘cell-line’, in virtue of the moral value that supervenes upon the physical continuum.
This chain is a real entity, consisting, in scholastic terms, of both a material and a formal element: the former being the part of the child’s body, and the latter being the intention of the abortionist and / or scientist who procured and developed it for medical and mercantile ends. Furthermore, the continuity of the chain and the magnitude of the evil that it bears, renders it capable of sustaining a demonic charge over time.
Even if no part of the child’s body is any longer present in the final vaccine, as in the case of some types of product, the intentional element that we have mentioned above will still exist, and thereby still forms a chain over time, albeit of a purely spiritual nature.
As for the claim that the abortion in issue probably occurred in the distant past, in which case the co-operation would be even more remote (at least on the temporal level), we note that abortions accompanied by all the evils enumerated above are being carried out in the present, as the document “The Voice of Women…” relates (6). It points out that cell-lines have an “expiry date” and that manufacturers “have a strong incentive to create new ones”; it records that abortionists have “admitted to amending surgical procedures so as to ensure that some body parts are left intact and usable by researchers.”
c) The Justification for the Participation in the Evil
Because those that advocate vaccination hold that there is no evil to it, they do not hold that it requires moral justification, and state that its possible effects on the person vaccinated is purely “a matter of science.” But if, as we have argued, there is evil in it, then it does require a moral justification, or justa causa, and such a justification needs moreover to be proportionate to the evil in question.
The justification typically given for vaccination is the preservation of the health of the person vaccinated, or of those with whom he or she will come into contact. This justification is, however, without substance.
As to the argument concerning the health of the person vaccinated: Dr Michael Yeadon, former Vice President and Chief Science Officer for ‘Pfizer’, warns in a recent address to ‘American Frontline Doctors’: “Please warn every person not to go near top up vaccines. There is absolutely no need to use them... If someone wished to harm or kill a significant proportion of the world’s population over the next few years, the systems being put in place right now will enable it. It’s my considered view that it is entirely possible that this will be used for massive-scale depopulation (7).”
Indeed there is already much evidence of the negative effects of the vaccination. A recent letter sent to the British Medical Journal by a London based Consultant, Dr Polyakova states: “The levels of sickness after vaccination is unprecedented and staff are getting very sick and some with neurological symptoms which is having a huge impact on the health service function. Even the young and healthy are off for days, some for weeks, and some requiring medical treatment. Whole teams are being taken out as they went to get vaccinated together (8).”
As to the argument concerning the health of those with whom the person vaccinated will come into contact: it has not been scientifically established that injection prevents a person from carrying the virus. The Chief Scientist of the WHO, Dr. Soumya Swaminathan, opines: “At the moment I don’t believe we have any evidence of any of the vaccines to be confident that it’s going to prevent people from actually getting the infection and therefore being able to pass it on (9).”
Even if positive effects of the vaccine have been claimed by the media, we have seen that negative effects are undeniable, and we may say at the very least that its effects have not yet been established with scientific certainty. We conclude that vaccination cannot be justified on health grounds.
Conclusion to Critique
Our critique of vaccination for the current global virus has shown the invalidity of the three assumptions on which it rests:
- that the only relevant evil is abortion;
- that the participation in the evil in question is remote and passive;
- that vaccination may be justified for health reasons.
We conclude that vaccination cannot be justified morally. Whether it can be excused is another matter. The Church desires heroism of us, but will not condemn us if we fail to practise it. She teaches that moral responsibility in general can be lessened, or even removed, by fear, violence (including psychological pressure), or by ignorance. How indeed can we blame the elderly for taking the vaccine, believing all they see in the media, under pressure from family members, and fearful of death; or employees threatened with redundancy; or Catholics of good will docile to the recent statements of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), to the judgments of religious orders and congregations, and even to the Pope and the Queen of England?
II. The Magisterium
Some-one might object that our critique does not correspond to the Church Magisterium of the CDF in regard to vaccines, which states that it is licit to use such vaccines if no others are available and if the person vaccinated disapproves the original abortion. We would however reply with the “Women in Defence of Unborn Babies…” (op.cit.) that: “We humbly suggest that such statements... are based on an incomplete assessment of vaccination and immunology…”
If we express dissent from such CDF statements, it does not, however, mean that we reject Church Magisterium in this field. For in the past two generations divergence may be found in the Magisterium between positions which correspond more or less accurately to the Faith and to Reality and it is our duty to adopt the position that corresponds more accurately to them, both in this field and in general.
In the matter in question, the more accurate position is, we consider, that of Pope John Paul II, above all in his encyclical Evangelium Vitae, in which he takes an unconditional stand for human life in the face of what he calls the “culture of death” within modern society. Of course he does not address the question of vaccines explicitly, but nevertheless he affords us the moral principles necessary for resolving the issue. The principles are the following:
a) a) Sins against unborn life are of an extreme gravity;
b) b) They form part of “structures of sin” in society;
c) c) Catholics must make a stand in defence of human life.
a) Sins against Unborn Life are of an Extreme Gravity
The Pope’s solemn condemnation of these evils, which by its formulation appears to enjoy infallible status, reads as follows (10):
“… by the authority which Christ conferred upon Peter and his Successors, in communion with the Bishops… I declare that direct abortion, that is, abortion willed as an end or as a means, always constitutes a grave moral disorder, since it is the deliberate killing of an innocent human being. This doctrine is based upon the natural law and upon the written Word of God, is transmitted by the Church's Tradition and taught by the ordinary and universal Magisterium. No circumstance, no purpose, no law whatsoever can ever make licit an act which is intrinsically illicit, since it is contrary to the Law of God which is written in every human heart, knowable by reason itself, and proclaimed by the Church.”
“This evaluation of the morality of abortion is to be applied also to the recent forms of intervention on human embryos which… inevitably involve the killing of those embryos. This is the case with experimentation on embryos… This moral condemnation also regards procedures that exploit living human embryos and foetus… either to be used as ‘biological material’ or as providers of organs or tissue for transplants in the treatment of certain diseases. The killing of innocent human creatures, even if carried out to help others, constitutes an absolutely unacceptable act.”
b) Such Sins form Part of ‘Structures of Sin’ in Society
He speaks (11) of a “reality, which can be described as a veritable structure of sin. This reality is characterized by the emergence of a culture which denies solidarity, and in many cases takes the form of a veritable culture of death,” a culture excessively concerned with efficiency which constitutes “a war of the powerful against the weak.” In this way a kind of “conspiracy against life” is unleashed, a conspiracy which amounts to “scientifically and systematically programmed threats” against life. Amongst those implicated in this conspiracy are international institutions which promote contraception, sterilization and abortion, and the mass media which promote the same evils, as well as euthanasia, as “a mark of progress and a victory of freedom.” Enormous financial resources are invested in research into methods of abortion....
c) Catholics Must Make a Stand in Defence of Human Life
The Pope speaks in these terms: (12) “… the common outcry, which is justly made on behalf of human rights - for example the right to health, to home, to work, to the family, to culture - is false and illusory if the right to life, the most basic and fundamental right and the condition for all other personal rights, is not defended with maximum determination.”
We may apply these three principles to the case of the vaccination by saying that the treatment of unborn children in the ten ways that we have list is‘absolutely unacceptable’ that the process by which it occurs forms part of:
- “a veritable structure of sin” in society, involving:
- “international institutions which promote contraception, sterilization, and abortion, and the mass media who promote the same evils’ where ‘enormous financial resources are invested”;
- that Catholics must make a stand in defence of human life at this its most vulnerable stage. When and where, indeed, can Catholics stand up in defence of human life ‘with maximum determination’ if not here and now?
III. The Evil in Question
The evil in question, as we have said above, is the evil of a process: that of the extrication from the womb, debarment from Heaven, torture, depredation, murder, disposal, manipulation, trafficking, enfringement of rights, and desecration, of innocent and entirely defenceless children.
On account of the gravity of this evil, participation in it cannot be compared to the use of organs provided by donors, or to the cannibalism of the survivors of the Andean plane-crash; on account of the proximate and active nature of the participation, it cannot be compared either to participation in the evils of a Communist régime by the purchase of a mask made in China, as has been submitted, or to the participation in the evils of the modern state by paying taxes.
Furthermore, the evil should not be seen solely in reference to any given individual in isolation from its context, but rather, from the view-point outlined in Evangelium Vitae, as an integral part of an entire global structure of sin, promoted by Masonic, anti-life organisations such as the WHO (13), as well as by the entire industry parasitic upon abortion: not only that of vaccination for the treatment of the macabrely-named “Covid 19,” but also of more than 20 other illnesses (14); and not only the industry of vaccination, but also that of commodities such as flavour enhancement (15) or whatever else may, as we write, be being gestated in the corrupt breeding-grounds of perverse and darkened hearts.
In a word, we are speaking of a social and universal structure of sin: that of the treatment of man as an object to be used, abused, and disposed of at will. This structure, which is the materialistic, hedonist legacy of the “self-deifying atheism” of the present age, is being built, like some defiant monster of modern architecture, on the ruins of what was once that resplendent mansion of holy matrimony, established by Christ Himself to perpetuate His love for the Church in Christian couples, for the procreation and sanctification of children.
Of this mansion there now remains little more than the sexual instinct, together with its delicate, fragile, and ever more rarely blossoming flower of human life: both increasingly channelled to inhuman, heinous abuse. It is to protect this inchoate human life and to rebuild holy matrimony to its former glory that we must stand up, strong in the Faith and in the trust in Divine Providence (16): to break the world free from the “money-changers of dead bodies” (17) and from the paralysing chains of Satan.
+ Don Pietro Leone, on the Feast of St. Hermenegildus, King and Martyr
Don Leone is a Catholic priest of the Roman Rite in full communion with Rome. He holds degrees in humanities and philosophy, which he has taught at university and seminary level, both in America and in Europe. He has authored The Family under Attack, a presentation of catholic ethical and theological teaching on marriage and abortion, with a critique of respective Modernist theories, and The Destruction of the Roman Rite, a summary of the destruction of the Roman rite and the substation of the modern rite (Novus ordo) in its place.
1. In Italian scientist Pietro Croce’s book ‘Vivisection or Science?’, 1991
2. Taken from LifeSiteNews, Feb. 1st 2021
3. '… and that doesn't mean that there were 293 abortions, but for 293 experiments you need far more than one abortion. And we're talking about probably 100’s of abortions'. LifeSiteNews, Feb. 19th 2021
4. The WI-38 came from the 32nd abortion; WI-26 from the 20th; WI-44 cell from the 38th; The MRC-5 line required 5 abortions; WALVAX2, the most recent aborted foetal cell line, came from the 9th; RA273 from the 27th abortion, which led to 40 subsequent abortions. LifeSiteNews, ibid.
5. or ‘co-operation’ which is the term typically used in the debate. But co-operation in the original evil by performing a later act is of course logically impossible, since co-operation entails simultaneity.
6. ‘The Voice of Women in Defence of Unborn Babies and in Opposition to Abortion-tainted Vaccines’ https://edwardpentin.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/STATEMENT-The-Voice-of-Women-in-Defense-of-Unborn-Babies-and-in-Opposition-to-Abortion-tainted-Vaccines-WORD-DOC.pdf
7. https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/former-pfizer-vp-to-aflds-entirely-possible-this-will-be-used-for-massive-scale-depopulation. In this connection we mention a dictum of the celebrated media magnate Mr. Bill Gates in 2010: “If we really get to work on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health service, we could lower that [world population] by perhaps 10 or 15 %.”
10. Evangelium Vitae, part I
12. In Christifideles Laici 38, quoted by Cardinal Pujats of Riga in his ‘Statement on Vaccine Immorality’ of December 12th 2020, signed by four other distinguished prelates
13. The ‘WHO’ has a history of anti-life machinations through vaccination: 'in 2015, Vatican Radio charged that the UN organisations 'WHO' and 'UNICEF' were again executing vast international programs of depopulating the earth by using vaccines to surreptitiously sterilise women in Third World countries…The 'WHO' innoculated more than 130 million women in 52 countries with this vaccine, permanently sterilising some very large percentage of them without their knowledge or consent.' https://www.unz.com/lromanoff/a-cautionary-tale-about-the-who/
14. including chicken-pox, heart-problems, measles, mumps, hepatitis, cancer, and typhoid, cf. Children of God for life https://cogforlife.org/wp-content/uploads/vaccineListOrigFormat.pdf
16. How could God not provide for his children who refused to co-operate in this evil? 'Faith fears no famine' says Tertullian, On Idolatry ch.12). Or how, by contrast, could a Catholic present it as a health remedy or safeguard, in other words as an act of Divine Providence?
17. Aeschylus, Agamemnon 437