In the modern world, few issues are as controversial as Covid-19 vaccines. Vaccine hesitancy, particularly towards Covid-19 vaccines, is not unique to Christians, but it is certainly something that is dividing the Church in a way that is surely bringing Satan much glee. The fear of the virus has created a cult around the vaccines, and this has caused a major split in the Church. Should we take a vaccine? Should we refuse? Do we even have the right to refuse? The answers you get will be different depending upon which Christians you ask. For me, the answer is simple: Don't be pressured into taking it, don't be pressured into refusing. Do your own research, then boldly act upon your conclusions. If you want a vaccine, take it. If you don't, don't take it.
Sadly, many in the Church disagree. I responded to one such Christian not too long ago. Upon my aunt's request, I will now be responding to another. Pastor Keith Marshall, on the off chance you are reading this, I love you brother, but you have made some very egregious errors, and have done so publicly, and therefore, I will be responding publicly. It is my hope and prayer that the Church will unite again in spite of these petty differences. Let's begin.
Marshall's case summarised
Marshall's case, reproduced in full in the header image, begins with a question: Should Christians be able to claim religious exemption when public health is in jeopardy? He then frames various commands from scripture as being exemptions of their negation. He cites Philippians 2:3-4 as a reason not to put our wants above another's needs. He cites Galatians 5:13-14 as a reason to not be reckless with our liberty. He cites Matthew 25:40 as a reason to protect the vulnerable. He then concludes that his Christian faith compels him to both wear a mask and take a Covid-19 vaccination, and that Christians who use their faith to resist these things are claiming the name of the Lord in vain, and that Christians who have political views regarding these things should keep them separate from their faith.
As I am about to demonstrate, Marshall's case is riddled with some very flawed assumptions. These flawed assumptions guide him to a flawed conclusion, and it is a conclusion that is dividing the Church, and may ironically threaten the very society he wants to protect. For sake of brevity, I will henceforth be referring to those who reject vaccines as "the hesitant".
Flawed assumption 1: The hesitant are selfish
Notice the wording of Marshall's first "exemption". "Putting my wants above the needs of others". This phrasing is strange. What is it he thinks the hesitant "want", and what is the "need" of others that this conflicts with? As I demonstrated in my other article, it is absurd to accuse the hesitant of selfishness. If you are selfish, you take the thing you want when others have need of it. We all want this pandemic to end, we all want to live happy and healthy lives, so in what logical universe would a selfish person reject the path to that? If you're a selfish person who believes in the vaccines, you don't reject them, you jump to the front of the line!
Let's look at the flip side of this. With few exceptions, we've all lost things to this pandemic. Things we should never have lost. Health routines, businesses, jobs, even lives. We've had weddings cancelled, we've had funerals limited to basically no in-person attendance, we've had churches forcibly closed, we've had people arrested for daring to break Covid restrictions. Whole countries have turned into dictatorships. Look at Australia. Innocent women are being battered by the police for walking their dog in the wrong place at the wrong time. At what point can we say prolonging this nightmare is more selfish than vaccine hesitancy? In my opinion, we crossed that line after the first lockdown extension.
Flawed assumption 2: Masks actually work
I'm not as vocal about masks, but since Marshall did bring it up, and I haven't directly addressed masks on this ministry, I will address them here. Put simply, most masks do nothing against Covid-19. They're like hiding behind a street light during a mass shooting. Let me pose a hypothetical scenario to you: You're about to undergo surgery. You're lying there on the table waiting to be anesthetised, and suddenly, your doctor walks in wearing a Hello Kitty mask. Thoughts?
Personally, I'd jump off the table and recommend his medical license be revoked immediately. N-95 masks, i.e. the masks used by doctors when tending to Covid-19 patients, do work, but the silly cotton placebos we're being pressured into wearing do nothing, as multiple studies show. This, as Senator Rand Paul (a licenced physician) points out, actually makes them dangerous, as people who believe the masks provide protection are more likely to take risks while wearing one (1).
Flawed assumption 3: Religious exemption doesn't apply to medical treatments
Both of these lead us to the question of whether or not we can, because of our faith, be exempt from certain medical treatments, such as vaccines? As I have pointed out before, Romans 14 compels us to say that actually, if you are unsure about the vaccines, not only are you exempt from taking one, but you are actually required to reject them. According to Romans 14:23, whatever does not come from faith is sin. I'll repeat, whatever does not come from faith is sin. So, if taking the vaccine does not come from faith, what is taking the vaccine? I'm not saying everyone who has taken the vaccine is sinning. I'm saying if you are not fully convinced in your own mind that taking the vaccine is the right thing to do, you are sinning. Pastor Keith Marshall believes taking the vaccine is a good, Christian thing to do, and therefore he is not sinning by taking it. I, by contrast, am not fully convinced in my own mind, and so it would actually be a sin for me to do so. Here is Marshall's sin: Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand.
Flawed assumption 4: The hesitant haven't considered any of this
Pastor Marshall begins his opinion piece with the words "Religious Exemption is a term I have heard more in the past three months than the rest of my life combined!" He then has the audacity to conclude by saying that we may have our political views, but we are actually claiming the name of the Lord in vain, and are therefore sinning, if we say we have a religious exemption. I don't believe he said this in malice, but it is by far the most grievous of his flawed assumptions.
I say I don't believe he said this in malice because I can see why he believes masks and vaccines are the Christian thing to do. He believes that by wearing a mask and taking a vaccine, he is protecting the vulnerable and placing the needs of others above his own desires. In my opinion, he is wrong, but he believes these things. The problem is, he doesn't afford me the same benefit of the doubt. He doesn't know my reasons for rejecting the vaccine, and in fact does not even know me. I doubt he knows very many vaccine hesitant people in general. But we do have our reasons. And yes, some of them are religious.
I've shown one of them above. As I said, because I do not have full faith in the vaccines (and the more I research, the more that faith decreases), I would be sinning if I took one anyway. This one in particular could be said to be the ultimate religious reason, because the verse doesn't list exceptions. It doesn't say your other reasons for rejecting the vaccine all have to be directly religious. In other words, a political reason is a religious reason if you sit it on the pillar of Romans 14. Put simply, a religious exemption means you cannot be compelled to violate your conscience.
Let us point out one more irony. Whether you like it or not, Covid-19 is a political issue. It is a public health hazard around which legal policy is formed. If you have a view on the pandemic, it is a political view. Pastor Keith Marshall, therefore, has a political view, and he is using his religious views to justify them, just as the hesitant do. Marshall is therefore being very hypocritical. Why should he have a monopoly on God? Is God our puppet? "I have this political view, and here are the scriptures that prove he agrees with me". Find me a scripture about vaccines, Marshall! They don't exist, because vaccines themselves didn't exist until relatively recently. That makes this an issue on which Christians can really afford to differ. I would not dare judge Christians who take a vaccine, or wear masks. I certainly wouldn't tell them they are taking the Lord's name in vain. By the same token, you should not dare judge those who refuse. You may not be taking the name of the Lord in vain, but you are presumptuously speaking in His name.
Stop. Being. Bullies.
It is high time people grew up, both outside the Church, and within. Stop demonising the unvaccinated! We are not selfish. We are not reckless. We are certainly not taking the Lord's name in vain. We are normal people, as you would have recognised before the pandemic and the hype behind it. We have different opinions on a medical treatment, that does not make us evil, and so it is time to go back to uniting under God. If you're a Christian who wants a vaccine, you have a God-given right to get vaccinated, and no one has the right to judge you. If you're a Christian who doesn't want to get vaccinated, push on, you have the absolute God-given right to refuse. Woe betide those who judge you.
References
1. Paul, Senator Rand, It Is Time For Unfiltered News, Rumble, August 3rd 2021 (link)