The Vatican Said We Don’t Have To Take A COVID19 Vaccine?

Last updated on: December 22, 2020 at 6:11 am by Henry Karlson

The Vatican Said We Don’t Have To Take A COVID19 Vaccine? 2020-12-22T06:11:10-05:00 Henry Karlson

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

No photographer named: Vaccination Syringe Injection /pixy.org

Due, in great part, to various bishops, priests, and laity suggesting Catholics (and others) must not take any of the available COVID19 vaccines, because they claimed it would be immoral to do so, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, following a long-standing tradition concerning the use of vaccines, issued a statement indicating that it is indeed morally acceptable to partake of a COVID19 vaccine. Likewise, the Congregation said that it is morally necessary for Catholics to do what they can to put an end to the COVID19 pandemic. The statement used traditional Catholic teaching concerning remote material cooperation with evil, so that even if the vaccines were not developed in the most morally acceptable ways, Catholics can still use them without thinking such use in any way affirms the methods employed in their production[1]:

In this sense, when ethically irreproachable Covid-19 vaccines are not available (e.g. in countries where vaccines without ethical problems are not made available to physicians and patients, or where their distribution is more difficult due to special storage and transport conditions, or when various types of vaccines are distributed in the same country but health authorities do not allow citizens to choose the vaccine with which to be inoculated) it is morally acceptable to receive Covid-19 vaccines that have used cell lines from aborted fetuses in their research and production process. [2]

The Congregation understood, just as some pacifists will resist any engagement with violence, so some people might have a conscience objection to using the vaccine due to the way they believe it was produced. They are not to be forced to take the vaccine, however, if they do not do so, they must do what they can to protect others from the spread of COVID19. Indeed, they have greater obligations to do so, for they put more people at risk due to the fact they will not take the vaccine:

At the same time, practical reason makes evident that vaccination is not, as a rule, a moral obligation and that, therefore, it must be voluntary. In any case, from the ethical point of view*, the morality of vaccination depends not only on the duty to protect one’s own health, but also on the duty to pursue the common good.* In the absence of other means to stop or even prevent the epidemic, the common good may recommend vaccination, especially to protect the weakest and most exposed. Those who, however, for reasons of conscience, refuse vaccines produced with cell lines from aborted fetuses, must do their utmost to avoid, by other prophylactic means and appropriate behavior, becoming vehicles for the transmission of the infectious agent. In particular, they must avoid any risk to the health of those who cannot be vaccinated for medical or other reasons, and who are the most vulnerable.[3]

To be clear, the Congregation argues first from a general principle about vaccinations. It is not normally obligatory for someone to take a vaccine. There are good reasons for this, among which, there are a few who cannot take them (due to allergies or other health concerns). This is why it cannot be seen as a universal obligation, even with the COVID19 vaccine. There are some people who cannot take it (which doctors recognize, and are already telling such patients who they are and why they cannot take it).

It would be foolish to stop reading what the Congregation said with that general rule, for they also point out another general rule which must be followed: we must work for the common good, and that means, to protect our own health and the health of our neighbors. Vaccination is often the best means to do this, and unless we have good reasons not to do so, we should receive the COVID19 vaccine when possible. However, if one has extreme conscientious objection to the use of the vaccine because of how it was produced, the Congregation says that our moral responsibility to protect our neighbor continues; we must do what we can to avoid the transmission of the virus. If we will not be vaccinated, for whatever reason, we must still work for the common good. We must make sure we do not spread the virus to others, and that means, we might find ourselves being greatly inconvenienced. Conscientious objection always comes with grave responsibilities; it is not a way out of our obligations, but rather, it must made with the greatest of moral clarity and consideration. That means, those who have some sort of conscientious objection to the use of the vaccines which are available will find themselves burdened with more, not less, responsibilities. Those who would try to use conscientious objection to vaccines as a reason to ignore their moral obligations to their neighbors disqualify themselves from using such an objection, because it is not a true moral objection. It is sophistry, for the decision does not come from a sound ethical consideration (which is why many who try to use such an objection show themselves failing to make a proper objection as they ignore and ridicule basic elements involved in creating a sound moral argument). That is indeed a major problem we have seen consistently throughout the COVID19 pandemic: many selfish people try to suggest reasons why they can ignore their responsibility to society, and in doing so, showing they reject basic moral expectations which are being put on them. Is it any surprise that those who ignore social distancing, those who ignore mask mandates, those who ignore and reject the use of lockdowns to stop the spread of the virus, are now objecting to vaccines because, as usual, they do not want to be told what to do? They say they are adults who can decide things for themselves, but their reasoning and actions are like little children.

I have seen some people talking about how the Vatican gave a “way out” for those who don’t want to take the vaccine. The problem is that those people who will use the Vatican there will ignore the full statement issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. They don’t want to hear about their moral obligation to protect not only their neighbors, but themselves, from COVID19. They must be told to listen. They must be shown the moral reasoning the Vatican had consistently used in regards the use of vaccines. The must be told that if they are unable, or unwilling, to take a COVID19 vaccine, then they must do everything else they can do to protect society from the virus. They are going to have to promote the use of masks, social distancing, and limits to the number of people who can gather together at a time. If they truly want to be shown to have a true moral claim, they must show they are moral by their actions. The must be told they can’t be against lockdowns if they are unwilling to promote vaccination. They must be told they can’t be against mask mandates if they are unwilling to promote vaccination. They must be told they can’t be against contact tracing if they are unwilling to promote vaccination. They must be told they are obligated to protect their neighbor. And if they are unwilling to use the best means to do so, they are even more obligated to promote the few options which they have left.

Yes, it can be said, the Congregation does not say we must take the vaccine. But they say we must do what we can for the common good, with the implication that for most of us, that means, we should take the vaccine when we are able to do so. And if we don’t, we must do whatever else we can to save others from the horrors of COVID19.

[1] See Congregation For the Doctrine Of The Faith, “Note On The Morality Of Using Some Anti-Covid-19 Vaccines.” Vatican translation. ¶4.

[2] Congregation For the Doctrine Of The Faith, “Note On The Morality Of Using Some Anti-Covid-19 Vaccines,” ¶2.

[3] Congregation For the Doctrine Of The Faith, “Note On The Morality Of Using Some Anti-Covid-19 Vaccines,” ¶5.

Stay in touch! Like A Little Bit of Nothing on Facebook.
If you liked what you read, please consider sharing it with your friends and family!

Previous Post

December 21, 2020

Working For Truth And Justice Requires Charity

Next Post

December 25, 2020 Christ Is Born: Let Us Glorify Him Properly

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Abortion Abraham abuse Aesthetics AI Aliens Ambrose Ancestors and Everything Andrew Angels Animals Anne Anthony Antisemitism apologetics Apophatic Apostle John Aquinas Artificial Intelligence Asanga Ascension Asceticism Assumption Atheism Attachment Augustine Authority Avarice Balthasar Baptism Beauty Biden birthright citizenship Bishops Black History Books Buddhism Bulgakov Byzantine Calendar C.S. Lewis Calcidius Catholic Catholicism Catholicism Celibacy Charity Chastity children Chrismation Christ Christmas Christology Church Climate Change Common Good Communion Confession Confirmation Conscience Constantine conventions conversion councils Covid Creation Cross Dead Death Death Penalty Debate Deception Demagogues Demons Desert Monks Desert Mothers Desire destruction development Dialogue Dignity Dionsyius Dionysius Discipline Diversity Division Doctor Who doctrine dogma Dormition Dualism Easter Easter Series Ecumenical Councils Ecumenism Education Election Empathy Environment Error Eschatology eschaton Eternity Ethics Eucharist Evangelism Eve Evil evolution Faeries Faith Fear femininity Ficino Florence Florensky Folktale Fools Forgiveness Freedom Future gender Gentile Gentiles Glory Gnostic God gods Good Samaritan Goodness Gospel Government Grace Great Fast Guns Hate healing Health Heaven Hell Hellenism Heresy Hierarchy Hildegard Hinduism History Holiness Holy Spirit Holy Week Hope Horror Human rights humanity Humility hypocrisy ICE icon icons Identification Identity Idol II Nicea Immigration incarnation Individualism Informal Reflections Inklings Intention Inter-Religious Interfaith Internet Interpretation Intrinsic evil Irenaeus Islam Israel Jacob Jerome Jesus Jews John Chrysostom John of Damascus John the Baptist Joseph Judaism justice Justification kenosis Kindnesss Kingdom of God Kingdom of Heaven Law Law of Moses Lazarus Leaf by Niggle Lent Lenten Reflection Liberation Theology Lies Life Listen Literature Liturgy locutions Logic Logos Love Marriage Martyrs Mary Mass Maximos The Confessor Meanness Meditation Mercy Middle Path Migrants Mind Miracles Miriam Morals Moses Movies Music Muslims Myths Names Nationalism Native Americans New Year Nicea Nicholas Nothing Novatian Obedience Occam's Razor Ordination Origen Original Sin Orthodox orthopraxis Pagans Palamas Palm Sunday Paradise Paschaltide Paul Peace Pentecost person Peter piety PKD Plato pluralism Plurality Poem Poetry Poiltics Politics Poor Pope Pope Francis Pope Leo XIV Post Office Prayer Pride Pro-life Prodigal Son propaganda Prophecy Prophets Providence Putin Racism Reading Reason Reflection Refugees Relationships Religion Religion Series Religious Liberty Repent Republicans Rest Resurrection Rich Rites Russia Sacraments Saints Salvation Salvian Santa Science Scripture Self-Giving Sexuality Sibyl Sick Silence Sin Singlehood Social Justice Society Sodom Solovyov Speculations Spiritual Reflection St. Cyril of Alexandria St. Justin Martyr Suffering Sunday of the Paralytic Man Sunday of the Samaritan Woman Superhero Supreme Court Teaching Technology Thanksgiving The Father the Universe Theological Reflection Theology Theosis Theotokos Thomas Timaeus Time Tolerenace Tolkien Tradition Transfiguration Trinity Trump Truth Uncategorized Unity Universities USCCB Value Vatican II Vegetarian Vices Violence Virtue Vocations War Water Welcome Wisdom Womanhood Women Work World View Worship Writing Zacchaeus

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz