Religious anti-abortion leaders support the use of COVID-19 vaccines

In a growing consensus, religious leaders at the forefront of the anti-abortion movement in the United States are telling their followers that the main vaccines available to combat COVID-19 are acceptable to take, given their remote and indirect connection to cell lines derived from aborted fetuses.

A staunch enemy of Dallas-based abortion, the pastor of the Southern Baptist mega-church, Robert Jeffress, called vaccines a “gift from God.”

“Asking God for help, but refusing the vaccine, makes no more sense than calling 911 when your house is on fire, but refusing to allow firefighters to enter,” said Jeffress in an email. “There is no legitimate reason based on faith to refuse to get the vaccine.”

Rev. Al Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, also celebrated its development.

“I will take you not only for what I hope will be in my own health, but also for others,” he said on his website.

The United States Catholic Bishops’ Conference, which states that fighting abortion is its “preeminent” priority, said last month that coronavirus vaccination “should be understood as an act of charity towards the other members of our community” , according to a statement by the presidents of its Doctrine Commission and Pro-Life Activities Commission.

The bishops said it is morally acceptable for Catholics to use either of the two vaccines approved for use in the United States – made by Pfizer and Moderna – despite a “remote connection to morally compromised cell lines”. This implied the use of fetal cell lines for laboratory tests, in order to confirm the effectiveness of vaccines.

Another major vaccine, made by AstraZeneca and approved for use in Britain and some other countries, is “more morally compromised” and should be avoided if alternatives are available, the bishops said.

Coinciding with the USCCB, four bishops in Colorado issued their own statement taking a slightly more negative stance on AstraZeneca, describing it as “a morally invalid option”.

AstraZeneca used a cell line known as HEK293 to develop its vaccine. According to the University of Oxford team that developed it, the original HEK293 cells were taken from the kidney of an aborted fetus in 1973, but the cells used are now clones of the original cells and are not the original fetal tissue.

When the first vaccines approached approval last year, some Catholic bishops warned that they may be morally unacceptable. Among them was Bishop Joseph Brennan of Fresno, California, who urged Catholics not to join the “vaccine movement”.

He later changed his stance, saying that, due to the health risks to individuals and communities, “Catholics can ethically decide, for serious reasons, to use these vaccines”.

Also questioning vaccines was Bishop Joseph Strickland of Tyler, Texas, who described any use of aborted fetuses in vaccine development as malignant and said he would not take any of the vaccines currently available.

“The Church said that, in some circumstances, receiving the vaccine is allowed and I don’t question that,” he said by email. “The Church also said that we should call vigorously for vaccines produced morally, and I urge those who get the vaccine to join this mission and demand change.”

Strickland is encouraging donations to the John Paul II Medical Research Institute, which supports research aimed at developing what he calls “ethical” cell lines – using adult stem cells – that would be used in the manufacture of vaccines and other medical therapies.

Some other openly anti-abortion bishops have adopted vaccines.

“As a Christian gets involved with the world, it is impossible, in many settings, to completely avoid cooperation with moral evil,” tweeted Bishop Thomas Tobin of Providence, Rhode Island. “The Church, at various levels, has said that it is morally acceptable to receive the vaccines that are currently available. I agree.”

Bishop Richard Stika of Knoxville, Tennessee, said he had no qualms about being vaccinated.

“I just hope they don’t implant a microchip in my arm to check when I’m cheating on my diet,” he joked on Twitter.

Among Protestant evangelical leaders, who generally have strong anti-abortion views, there has been relatively little anti-vaccine rhetoric, according to Rev. Russel Moore, who heads the public policy arm of the Southern Baptist Convention.

“I wouldn’t be able to think of an evangelical pastor saying, ‘Don’t be vaccinated,'” he said.

A more notable challenge for pastors, said Moore, is to fight baseless anti-vaccine conspiracy theories adopted by some members of their congregations or communities – for example, that vaccines would alter a recipient’s DNA or implant a microchip secretly.

On a global level, the Vatican issued guidelines very similar to those of American bishops, declaring that it is morally acceptable for Catholics to receive COVID-19 vaccines based on research that used cells derived from aborted fetuses.

One difference: he did not name or give details about specific vaccines. The Vatican plans to use the Pfizer vaccine this week for employees and their families, and Pope Francis – in an interview with an Italian broadcaster that airs this weekend – said he has an appointment to be vaccinated.

The Vatican has suggested that it is wrong to refuse a vaccine based solely on the objection to abortion, since refusal “can also result in risk to others”.

Nicanor Austriaco, a molecular biologist and Catholic priest who teaches at universities in the United States and the Philippines, said the Vatican appropriately addressed faith-based concerns about vaccines indirectly connected to research that used aborted fetal cells.

“The moral evil that is being contemplated here” occurred in the 1970s, when the original cell line was created, said Austriaco, “and it is remote”.

G. Kevin Donovan, a professor of pediatrics at Georgetown University who runs his Pellegrino Center for Clinical Bioethics, said the leaders of his Catholic faith could not have been “clearer”.

“The advantage that Catholics have is … the highest levels of authority have made it very clear that this is morally acceptable,” said Donovan.

In Indonesia, home to the world’s largest Muslim population, a Muslim clerical council has been included in that country’s vaccine procurement process to ensure that a product is halal or acceptable for use under Islamic law. In the past, the council determined that some vaccines for other diseases were unacceptable because they used gelatin of swine origin.

But on Friday the board gave its approval to the Chinese vaccine Sinovac COVID-19, paving the way for its distribution in Indonesia.