During the early days of the “fifteen days to stop the spread” lockdown of 2020, it became evident that the literati, ivory-tower academics, were ruling the world with their doomsday scenarios. Chief among them was Neil Ferguson whose highly inflated projected death toll from COVID prompted mindfully cautious folks to deem him a misleading prophet of doom. His exaggeration of 2.2 million American deaths along with his excessive mitigation measure of “social distancing” prompted government officials—politicians and their medical experts whose incomes have never suffered interruptions throughout the overestimated pandemic—to enforce reactionary lockdowns around the world that have imposed threats to human lives and livelihoods greater than the virus itself. Discredited Ferguson, who contracted the virus in late March, a month later resigned from his advisory role to the UK Government when it became known that he flouted his own strict “social distancing” orders that he drafted for the UK and adopted worldwide. At least twice he requested his married mistress, Antonio Staats, to travel across London to meet him at his home for sexual trysts. Piers Morgan aptly responded: “So, the government is ‘following the science’ of scientists who don’t even follow their own science. . . . And this guy’s the No. 1 ‘expert’ on whom the government is basing its entire coronavirus strategy.” Despite Ferguson’s discredited projections and the hypocritical flouting of his own mitigation rules, the whole world has continued to “follow the science” of the scientist who did not even follow his own science.
Now, a year later, Scott Gottlieb, a former head of the Food and Drug Administration, acknowledges: “This six-foot distancing requirement has probably been the single costliest mitigation tactic that we’ve employed in response to COVID . . . and it really wasn’t based on clear science. . . . We should have re-adjudicated this much earlier.” Likewise, he suggests that masks may also be safely removed. Yet, a year after the imposition of excessive mitigation measures, radio stations still run this repugnant HHS.GOV PSA that instills fear, suspicion, and even animosity toward fellow Americans as it incites citizens to persist in falling for the deceptive excesses and exaggerations that have stretched “fifteen days to stop the spread” into more than a year of suspending living.
We’ve been waiting. Waiting for COVID-19 vaccines to be developed. Now, waiting for them to get to us.
But, you can do more than wait: you have powerful ways to help slow the spread right now and protect your family and loved ones too. Here’s how:
“Watch your distance”— Stay at least 6 feet away from folks you don’t live with, and it’s risky to be indoors with them, too. And of course, avoid crowds.
Also, “Wear a mask”— CDC reports masks protect the people who wear them and the folks around them.
And “Wash your hands”— using soap and water for 20 seconds. And do it frequently.
Vaccines won’t make COVID go away overnight, but they give us a real chance to finally overcome it as long as we keep watching our distance, wearing our masks, and washing our hands.
Understandably, Christians complied with the “fifteen days to stop the spread” by closing churches as a temporary mitigation measure. However, even after it became evident that governing officials and their Ministers of Public Health were heeding false prognosticators with their wildly exaggerated predictions, many evangelical leaders succumbed to these false prophets. They refused to open church doors again for six months, not until after Labor Day. Far worse, many ministers joined Andy Stanley, of Northpointe Community Church in Atlanta, to announce in July 2020 that their churches would remain closed until after January 1, 2021. Unwarranted fear, not COVID-19, has destroyed far more than a once robust economy. The toll on human lives is incalculable.
This week, after the virus has left in its wake a survival rate of 99.9%, many evangelical pastors and leaders persist in their shameful posture, cowering under autocratic governors even as James Coates, pastor of GraceLife Church in Edmonton, Alberta, was finally released from jail after being incarcerated since February 16, with all but one charge against him dropped and his $1,500 fine covered by the time he spent in jail. His crime? GraceLife Church continued to gather for worship as normal despite an Alberta provincial dictate to restrict in-person attendance at churches to 15% capacity and to impose physical distancing and wearing of masks. Even after he was jailed, GraceLife Church has continued to congregate together for worship without observing the COVID-19 mitigation orders issued by Alberta Health Services. Coates explains:
“I realized that’s the way society is going to perceive what’s happening here. I’m simply here in obedience to Jesus Christ, and it’s my obedience to Christ that has put me at odds with the law.”
“The court is aware that I’m contesting the legitimacy of that law but please, make no mistake. . . . I’m not trying to make a point. I’m not a political revolutionary.”
Indeed, wherein human magistrates have challenged the Lordship of Jesus Christ, James Coates has steadfastly submitted to his Lord rather than to the dictates of humans who challenge our Lord’s authority. His courage in the face of defiant opposition stands in sharp contrast with so many other evangelical leadership voices who obsequiously do the bidding of earthly magistrates. Not only Christian pastors, teachers, and heads of organizations are obligated to obey the Lord Christ wherein human magistrates rival his authority, but every Christian is so obliged. This obligation extends to the various COVID-19 inoculations. Shall we or shall we not receive an injection? Does Christian love obligate us or not?
Now that President Trump’s Operation Warp Speed has achieved four different immunity “vaccines” many evangelical ministers and leaders, who from the beginning fastidiously embraced the government’s strict mitigation measures, exhort fellow Evangelicals that Christian love obligates them to receive one of the four injections, that it is their moral duty. Christians who do not comply are accused of holding a “natural resistance to government” and worse, they are scolded for harboring a “spiritual problem.” The reasoning of the chided folks is exponentially deeper and more substantive than that of politicians who openly affirmed that they would not trust any COVID vaccine that resulted from Trump’s Operation Warp Speed: Kamala Harris, Andrew Cuomo, and Joe Biden. And now, with the CDC Director’s doomsday threat of a fresh COVID-19 “surge,” avoidable only if state governors keep all the mitigation measures in place, many evangelical power brokers will doubtless intensify their pressure to constrain resistant folks to acquiesce.
There are many reasons why Christians resist receiving any of the four anti-COVID injections. Any evangelical minister or leader who pressures fellow Christians that it is their moral duty to accept an anti-virus injection violates their own ministerial calling. Christian ministers and theologians are bound by the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ not only to honor the consciences of God’s people but to articulate for fellow Christians the eternal sanctity and crucial role of the conscience in life’s decisions.
One outspoken evangelical leader who demonstrates a poor grasp concerning the sanctity of the Christian’s conscience and its role in the matter of COVID injections is Russell Moore. He attempts to assuage Evangelicals and Catholics alike who have concerns whether accepting any of the various injections would somehow incriminate them “in abortion or embryonic stem-cell research or in any way the taking of a human life.” Moore attempts to alleviate concerns:
The issue is the use of cell lines, which were originally derived from abortions, in either the development stage (Moderna and Pfizer) or production stage (Johnson & Johnson) of the vaccines. It is important to note that although the cell lines potentially originated from abortions, no cells remain from the original fetal tissue in these cloned cells, and the cell lines no longer contain fetal tissue or body parts.
Concerning the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, Moore should have asked, “Is the serum itself evil?” The correct answer is negative. However, Moore asks the wrong question, “Does taking it involve moral cooperation with abortion?” When he attempts to answer this question, he reveals how poorly he understands Scripture’s teaching concerning the freedom of the Christian conscience. He offers this:
Most people asking me this question aren’t asking me if they should violate their conscientious objection to the Johnson & Johnson vaccine. To them, I would turn to Romans 14:23 and say, with the bishops, seek out one of the other vaccines. But most people asking me this question don’t have conscience objections to taking the Johnson & Johnson, but wonder if they should have such objections. Short answer: no.
Opposing unethical means of research does not mean that people must shun medical treatments that are discovered through these means.
Because he poses the wrong question, his answer is also incorrect. When Moore assures us, “Taking the COVID vaccine is morally right,” he exceeds what is proper for him to assert. Why? It is because he fails to account for the need of every individual Christian to act in faith, yes, even whether to submit to vaccines, for every human decision entails the moral dimension. What Moore should have affirmed is this: Properly evaluated and considered, all the COVID inoculations are morally indifferent in themselves. But he claims much more than this. He goes beyond what Scripture authorizes him to say because he does not address the faith or the conscience of those to whom he makes his unwarranted claim. He improperly asserts that the act itself of receiving a COVID inoculation is unequivocally moral. The Apostle Paul admonishes us quite differently. Any act that does not arise from faith is a sin even if the thing acted upon is not evil in itself (Romans 14:23).
Christian leaders need to be more pastorally cautious and caring lest we induce fellow believers to sin by acting contrary to belief. We have an ongoing responsibility to provide biblical instruction for parishioners concerning the roles of the conscience and of belief because Christians need to be prepared to know how to act in any given situation. Thus, the issue is not whether individuals hold a “conscientious objection” to any of the COVID injections or if they wonder whether they should have a “conscientious objection” to them. Nor can we make a blanket assertion that “Taking the COVID vaccine is morally right.” Every decision, every act entails the conscience, because what one believes about an issue matters. To act contrary to one’s beliefs is to sin (Romans 14:23). In other words, one Christian, who is “strong in faith” concerning the COVID inoculations by believing that they are not evil in themselves is free either to receive or to reject the vaccine. Another Christian, who is “weak in faith” with regard to the COVID serums by being uncertain whether they are evil in themselves is not free to receive a vaccine and would sin by being injected.
Every Christian is obligated to be fully convinced in one’s own mind (Romans 14:5). Therefore, Christian pastors and teachers are required to provide gospel instruction to assist their hearers to attain the desirable posture, “strong in faith” with a conscience free from humanly imposed constraints either to receive or to reject an inoculation. As the Apostle Paul expresses these matters in his Letter to the Romans, only the Christian whose “faith is strong” is free either to act or not to act concerning things that God has not forbidden. Or, as he expresses similar matters in his Letter the Corinthians, only the Christian whose conscience is free from external restraints exacted by fellow humans can glorify God either by acting or restraining from action with regard to matters on which God issued no prohibitions (1 Corinthians 8-10). Yes, this includes vaccinations, for the Apostle states, “So whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God” (1 Corinthians 10:31).
God’s providence has granted humans extraordinary knowledge and ingenuity. That four different drug companies have each produced inoculations against COVID-19 is remarkable. Even so, no Christian can morally proceed to receive an injection as if to do so is morally indifferent. Indeed, the serum itself is morally indifferent, but to receive or not to receive the injection of the serum is not morally indifferent. Thus, because the serum is morally indifferent no one is obligated either to receive a vaccine or to reject it. To receive or to reject a vaccine apart from belief is to commit a sin. No human act is morally neutral.
_____________________
This blog installment expanded much more quickly than I anticipated. Hence, a fuller exposition of the Apostle Paul’s discussion of these issues awaits at least one if not more subsequent postings.