Page 45 - Vaccines

Key principles of Catholic moral theology

even if passive and indirect, where the immoral
origins were known and approved of or where the
cooperators had no scruple about these origins (this
would be formal and not merely material coopera-
tion, whether active or passive).
As already noted, the more proximate cooperation is the
more it requires a serious or grave reason to justify it.
compared to a more remote cooperation.
The explanation of the difference between active and
passive, positive and negative cooperation outlined here
is very helpful. As with all of the categories mentioned
above, any cooperation in the immoral act of another
becomes immoral if the cooperator approves of the wrong
done, wills it, helps deliberately to bring it about or could
not care about its immoral nature (such acts are then acts
of formal cooperation, which is always immoral).
However, it appears to me that there is a need to make
a further distinction of considerable relevance to the
question of merely material cooperation, also in regard
to the question of the moral legitimacy or otherwise of
making use of vaccines derived from the cells of deliber-
ately aborted human foetuses. This additional distinction
contrasts antecedent (merely material) cooperation,
namely prior to the immoral act of the person who sins
(who here commits the abortion or causes it to be com-
mitted) and subsequent cooperation, where such coop-
eration occurs after the abortion (makes use of the cells
of the aborted foetus for other purposes, even for pur-
poses otherwise morally good in themselves, such as
doing research on such cells, for example in order to
produce, distribute, or sell a vaccine, or to use it upon
other people to protect them from a disease). Once again,
engaging in such acts knowing and approving of, or with
wilful disregard for, the immoral act(s) involved is

33