CathInfo.com

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. 

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.

If you watch the first 13 minutes of the Fr Jenkins video (the one at the top of my post above), you will see that when he thought the vaccine was based on one abortion 50 years ago, he thought it would be remote material cooperation.  But when he learned that these vaccines need ongoing abortions in order to develop each new vaccine (which is confirmed by the research of Pamela Acker, see the link to her interview above), Fr Jenkins then changed his position and said that it would be an immoral formal cooperation with evil to take a vaccine which has been developed with aborted baby flesh.  Bishop Williamson changed his position when he heard the argument of the NO clergy who also pointed out the ongoing use of aborted baby flesh.  Fr. McKenna thinks that it was just one abortion 50 years ago so that's why he says it is remote material cooperation.  So it all depends on whether you believe these pharma corps are continuing to use new aborted baby flesh.  And we have good reason to believe they are given Project Veritas' expose of Planned Parenthood in which the PP execs admitted that the baby flesh market is lucrative.  Every clergyman who admits this ongoing baby flesh industry says that taking the baby flesh vaccine is immoral.

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. ...

.
Bishop Strickland said this: 

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.