This is correct. If only half of Trad Catholics were to realize this, then we would be able to start resisting these evil plots now and see some results. But if we do nothing then it will not take too long before we are sitting in our prison cell, or hiding in the forest wishing we stood up against these criminals when we had a chance.

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn:

“And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have
been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make
an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to
say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as
for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire
city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror
at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase,
but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up
in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes,
hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?... The Organs would very
quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and,
notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst, the cursed machine would have
ground to a halt! If...if...We didn't love freedom enough. And even more
– we had no awareness of the real situation.... We purely and simply
deserved everything that happened afterward.”

It’s like the ‘pinch’ of incense.
Sounds like a lot of the arguments here are whether it’s a pinch, a cup or bucket of incense being offered. Why have so many forgotten it only took a ‘pinch’? Why is so much thought given to how much? Or what brand? Or the exact ingredients of? Or who gives it? And so on..

Are Fr’s Copenhagen and Wolf saying that the remote material cooperation argument is erroneous and inadmissible, because, since one who would take the vaccine implicitly wills to benefit from that ongoing theft/sin, and therefore this cooperation is actually direct and formal (not remote or material)?

I don’t recall either using the term “formal,” but that seems to be the implication of their argument.

This is a very strong argument, and I think the burden now shifts to those who are defending the permissibility of receiving abortive vaccines in reliance upon remote material cooperation in evil to explain how/why the ongoing theft of cells is not direct and formal cooperation.

Fr William Jenkins, SSPV in May 2019 rejecting the idea that Catholics can take vaccines based on fetal cell lines (first 13:30 minutes of the video):




He refers to the following testimony from Dr Plotkin:

Plotkin excerpt:

Plotkin deposition:  https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCiNzMmNUVHukXBG7ZdFzt7A/videos?disable_polymer=1

It seems like everyone of good character knows from a moral or even instinctual basis that this vaccine is bad news, but explaining why in terms of moral theology is much harder. The answer's out there for sure, but a lot of very weak explanations have been given heretofore.

And, yes, as Sean just pointed out, there is even debate on whether it is actually remote material cooperation in the case where it was one abortion 50 years ago. ...

But to me the bottom line is, if they’ve used unborn children, and they talk about ‘oh, it’s remote or whatever’, I’m not sure when you say ‘Okay; it was long enough ago when you killed this child that it doesn’t matter anymore.'  I just disagree with that.  And I know I'm in the minority, but I think we’ve all got to really think about that …I believe that part of the reason in my lifetime we haven’t made real great headway with changing hearts to believe that abortion is taking a human life is because we’re compromised in how we deal with it.