On Christians and Vaccines
Writing about vaccines is going somewhere that angels fear to tread. Last year’s mask controversies pale in comparison to the vaccine discussions going on now. It is a mistake to see this as a Christian vs. secular controversy, or even as a politically conservative vs. progressive issue. After all, it’s Trump’s vaccine that we are talking about, and there are plenty of left-wingers that are opposed to vaccines.
Like it or not, the discussion has come to us as pastors—not because we want to enter into the fray, but because we are getting calls from church members asking for a “religious exemption.” This demands a response.
Four reasons people refuse
There are four reasons people are refusing the vaccine today—and most hold to some sort of combination of these four reasons. They do not trust the vaccine and fear it could be damaging to their health. Even some nurses, doctors, and other health workers are among this number.
Some are refusing just because they do not want to be forced into getting a medical procedure. It’s traditional libertarian thinking.
Others believe they do not need the vaccine because they have already had Covid-19 and therefore see it as an unnecessary risk. It seems that every day some study comes out on one side or another of this thinking.
The last group opposes the vaccine because fetal stem cells were used in the development or testing of the vaccines. This group has major qualms about personally benefitting from anything that resulted from abortion, even if it was many years ago.
Two reasonable responses.
There are two reasonable responses to the vaccine question—refuse it based upon one of the above reasons or get the vaccine because you believe it is best for your personal health or those around you.
Christians have faced the moral issue regarding fetal stem cells and come down on both sides of the issue. This argument applies to nearly ALL vaccines, not just the Covid-19 shots. Some want nothing to do with anything tied to abortion in any way. Others argue that the stem cells in question came from an abortion that happened over 50 years ago and are not related in any way to abortions today. They would liken getting a vaccine to getting an organ transplant from a murder victim. Getting the transplant in no way makes the recipient complicit in the murder and God can even bring good things from evil circumstances. For a more in-depth explanation of this position, you can find it here. My purpose here is not to make an argument one way or the other.
This situation is a modern-day application of the meats offered to idols issue that Paul addresses in Romans 14:13-23. Everyone has to be convinced in his or her own mind and act according to his or her own conscience.
However, there are a few things that you must not do as you face vaccine choices.
Do not stand in judgment over one another.
Paul said it clearly in a context almost identical to what we face today.
But he who doubts is condemned if he eats because he does not eat from faith; for whatever is not from faith is sin (Romans 14:23).
We are Baptists. We believe in individual soul liberty and responsibility. Because of that, we believe that individual convictions do not have to be church-held convictions to be valid. If it is sin to you, do not do it. You do not need your church to institutionally validate it.
Therefore, let us not judge one another anymore, but rather resolve this, not to put a stumbling block or a cause to fall in our brother’s way (Romans 14:13).
However, be careful that, in the defense of your personally held conviction, you do not condemn a believer who holds a different view. If you get the vaccine, do not accuse other believers who have conscience issues about it of being unloving or ignorant. If you refuse it, do not accuse your brothers who get it as sell-outs, or somehow complicit in causing abortions 50 years ago.
Do not use a religious exemption out of personal convenience.
Many who are asking their pastors to endorse their religious exemptions do not really have a religious objection. They do not want the vaccine for personal health reasons. If your real reason is your health, you do not really have a religious exemption claim. Most churches do not have an official position on vaccines, and wisely so. The best a pastor can do is testify that, to the best of his knowledge, your religious objection is genuinely held. To use a church to claim a religious exemption that you do not really hold is –well—fraud.
There is nothing wrong with having an objection for health reasons. It is just wrong to try to use your faith to get out of the consequences of that choice.
Avoid social media debates over vaccines and other issues like this.
Such discussions lead to division rather than understanding. These discussions also display conflict among believers for an unbelieving world to witness. These are not private confrontations. Paul instructed the Corinthian church to keep such conflicts private (I Corinthians 6:1-2).
We will not change the hearts of the world on such things as abortion, gender, and other hot-button issues through social media. In John 13:35 and in many other passages in the New Testament, biblical writers make the case that our message must be delivered in the context of a loving, righteous, and God-honoring personal testimony. That personal testimony can only be demonstrated through personal relationships with the people we are trying to reach. Paul encouraged Timothy to continue in the faith on the strength of Paul’s solid biblical teaching combined with the genuineness of his personal testimony (2 Timothy 3:10-15). Social media crusades leave the personal relationship aspect out almost altogether.
Many lost people read the social media posts of a few zealous believers and assume that they represent all believers—which is never true.
Every person reading this has already had to decide on getting vaccinated or will be forced to do so in the near future. May God give us all the wisdom to please Him.
If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all liberally and without reproach, and it will be given to him (James 1:5).
Excellent, brother. Thank you.
Thanks Kevin for the well stated, loving presentation of the issue. Sometimes we have to walk where even angels would be fearful to go. Because we have received such a great privilege in salvation we also have such a great responsibility in reconciliation.
So I guess I would have to ask this question, Kevin. Would you sign that religious waiver for your brother or sister if they sincerely believed the vaccine was not in their best interest, violating their conscience and possibly doing damage to their body? Or, would you, as a Baptist, simply tell that person, “We are Baptists, we don’t believe in exemptions for vaccinations”, as was told to me by my Pastor in my Baptist church?
Overall, I agree with your article although eating unclean food in Romans 14 is not quite the same thing as being mandated to inject an unknown substance into your body. Both do have in common the conscience of the individual and not judging others where those matters are concerned, particularly when it doesn’t involve sin.
I believe where the conscience is involved or being violated, it is a religious matter for the believer because their (the believers) conscience is intertwined with the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. (See Paul in Romans 9:1) I believe it is a matter for the church to weigh in on at that point and sign a waiver if needed for that individual. Just because most churches do not hold an official position on the issue of vaccines (and, I agree it’s unwise to do so) does not mean they shouldn’t be involved or support an individual who believes their conscience is being violated by government or employer edicts in this matter, especially when religion is protected under our Constitution, the highest Law in this land.
Michael, I am going to differ with my friend Kevin, slightly, on the points he made. The difference is on what is at issue in Romans 14. In stating the difference, please note that many commentaries side with Kevin’s view and not mine.
The thing is, Romans 14 is not about clean/unclean food. It isn’t about food offered to idols. It’s about whether someone has scruples about eating meat at all. In other words, strict vegetarianism vs. the conscience that is free to eat meat or vegetables, the “omnivore” diet. There are some Jewish allusions in the chapter that lead commentators to assume that the meat in question is meat offered to idols. They are also heavily influenced by Paul’s arguments in 1 Cor 8-10, where Paul clearly teaches about meat offered to idols. There isn’t space to go into the argument here, but I think I may have written on this somewhere else on our site. Can’t remember exactly where, however. The key point to note is what the text says is the issue: Rm 14.2 One person has faith that he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats vegetables only. (NASB) Quite clearly, this is a matter of indifference. Neither side is seen to be “in sin” in any way.
That is the point, and I think it makes Kevin’s point stronger. Vaccine or no vaccine, neither position is “in sin.” Therefore, we shouldn’t judge one another about either decision.
I will let Kevin know about your comment, so he can answer your other questions for himself.
For my part, I wouldn’t give someone a religious exemption against taking a vaccine. Giving that exemption would be a statement from me that such an exemption is legitimate. It isn’t the conscience of the person wanting the exemption that is the issue. He may be very sincere in thinking he has a religious conviction about it. However, if I am putting my name to something, I am making a statement that approves or commends the legitimacy of such exemptions. Personally, I couldn’t do that. That would violate my conscience, I would be making a statement I didn’t think was true. I am fine with people refusing vaccines. That’s up to them. But I can’t be forced to violate my conscience to satisfy the desires of someone else. That would defeat the whole point! In other words, I claim a religious exemption against giving religious exemptions!
I hope that helps. As I say, I’ll let Kevin know about this exchange. He may or may not comment further. If he does, he may disagree with my disagreement. That is ok, it is an issue much discussed over the years and we have not yet come to a consensus on it.
Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3
There is a difference between a constitutional right, a wisdom issue, and biblical obedience. I would not sign the waiver if the reasoning is only health-related. To me, that does not rise to the level of being a sin issue, even if it is an important issue. If a person believes that strongly that it will harm their health, they need to be willing to give up their job or seek a health exemption from their doctor. Most situations allow for health exemptions. Their appeal should be to their doctor for health exemption and not to me.
I think we endanger our religious freedom when we play that card outside of reasonable bounds. I do believe that there is a very good constitutional case for not forcing medical procedures upon people, but I am not sure I can make a biblical case.
Our governmental leaders have been really foolish with this. If they had been more honest and open with facts about the pandemic, vaccines, masks, etc, then they would not be facing such distrust and opposition now. This is an interesting read. https://www.realclearpolicy.com/articles/2021/09/22/biden_falls_into_the_trust_trap_795414.html
Thanks for the comment. This is a discussion that we need to have.
Agreed! “This situation is a modern-day application of the meats offered to idols issue that Paul addresses in Romans 14:13-23. Everyone has to be convinced in his or her own mind and act according to his or her own conscience.”