Conscientious Objection: Aborted Fetal Cell Lines

The following is taken from an email discussion concerning the rights of Christian conscience as given by God. Such rights extend far beyond human mandate and the church must always hold the line in proclaiming such truth and liberty. The bottom has a link to an exemption form if it is needed.

Just a quick note as to the moral and spiritual side of the vaccine...the abortion issue to be a bit more percise - The issue is in the usagage of aborted fetal tissue in the vaccine...meaning in any part of the vaccine, including the development of it. The vaccines did utilize fetal cell lines in various stages of development and manufacturing. Some of these were indeed from an aborted fetus. It is the usage of such tissue during any stage of the vaccine development process that (for me at least) is the issue from a conviction standpoint. I believe that this is a bit more of the heart of concern - not just if there is an aborted fetus in a vial, but is an aborted fetus being used in any way. ...

The answer to that concern and question for those who might have it is yes, the vaccine companies do utilize aborted fetus tissue (this is called fetal cell lines) in vaccine development. ...

Phizer and Moderna claim to have not used fetal tissue in their Covid-19 mRNA gene modification shot but did utilize fetal cell lines in confirmation/proof of concept test to ensure that the shot works. In their testing they specifically used line HEK293 which is Human Embryonic Kidney 293 cells grown in tissue culture taken from a female fetus in 1972. According to FDA meeting transcripts of a meeting on May 16:2001 in Gaithersburg Maryland this development was described by Dr. Van Der Eb as follows, “So the kidney material, the fetal kidney material was as follows. The kidney of the fetus was, with an unknown family history, was obtained in 1972 probably. The precise date is not known anymore. The fetus, as far as I can remember was completely normal. Nothing was wrong. The reasons for the abortion were unknown to me. I probably knew it at that time, but it got lost, all this information…”
Johnson and Johnson which you left off of your previous email used fetal cell lines in their shot development, confirmation and production. The fetal cell line that is utilized by Johnson and Johnson is PER C6. Dr. Van Der Eb describes the development of that fetus cell line in a transcribed FDA meeting on May 16, 2001 in Gaithersburg Maryland as follows, “So I isolated retina from a fetus, from a healthy fetus as far as could be seen, of 18 weeks old. There was nothing special with a family history or the pregnancy was completely normal up to the 18 weeks, and it turned out to be a socially indicated abortus – abortus provocatus, and that was simply because the woman wanted to get rid of the fetus. The father was not known not to the hospital anymore, what was written down was unknown father, and that was, in fact, the reason why the abortion was requested. There was permission, et cetera, and that was, however, was in 1985, ten years before this. This shows that the cells were isolated in October 1985, Laeiden University in my lab. At that time already ’85, I should say the cells were frozen, stored in liquid nitrogen, and in 1995 one of these was thawed for the generation of the PER.C6 cells.
There are more than just those two lines used in vaccine development. Here are a few more examples of harvested aborted embryonic cell lines:
HEK2937 — human embryonic cell line originally derived from kidney tissue obtained from a female fetus aborted in the Netherlands in 1972
MRC5 — human embryonic cell line originally derived from the lung tissue of a 14-week-old male fetus aborted in 1966
PER.C6 — human embryonic cell line originally derived from the retina of an 18-week-old male fetus aborted in the Netherlands in 1985
WI38 — human embryonic cell line originally derived from the lung tissue of a 12-week-old female fetus aborted in 1961
As to the usage of aborted fetal cell lines and the statement that nobody is using them or that they are using synthesized versions of what was collected 60 years ago. I will say, that’s not quite accurate and..exactly. You cannot say that you're not using them and then say that what you are using is derived or synthesized from it. If we root back the cell lines that are being used in the testing or proof of concept for Phizer & Moderna or for J&J the confirmation, development and production then you have aborted fetal cell lines. No matter how one tries to soften it by distance of years or progression of development, the root is still the root and no matter how long the branch, it is sourced of the root. That is the information, and there could be more information, or that information could comfort or raise flags for someone, but don’t stop short of giving all of that information or minimize what that information means. Someone can have a clear conscience with that information or they may not have a clear conscience, but that is up to them before God to decide.
Elective Termination? That term to the one who would be a conscientious objector may not give a clear picture of where their objections come from or how it is viewed. The children in the womb to the conscientious objector are lives that have a right from God to life. In truth, that fetus is an image bearer of God, they are a living blessing from God. However, rather than having that right unto life protected, they were premeditatedly murdered. I don’t say that as a judgment on anyone, nor as a dramatic term, but as a defining of terms to fully understand why someone may have a conscientious objection. To electivley terminate anothers life is by definition to premeditate (elect) murder (termination) by the law of God. As such, when one is seeking God first in an area such as health then it becomes evident that they may have the conscientious objection to taking or participating in a product or system of man that at its root contradicted and sacrificed what God called good for what they deemed as good or as an advancement. In short, evil was labeled good and good labeled evil. If I am to regard God, then why in fear should I trust a development or so called “science” that disregarded God? This is not to say that the conscientious objector does not utilize medical treatments that his/her consciousness is able to agree with before God. Rather it is that they are a people of discernment who’s wisdom is derived from and dependent upon the Spirit and Word of God above “medical advancement”. After all, the science of all science is the study of God. This is not a prideful position, but rather one of humble dependence upon Almighty God. There is simply another layer of depth or a higher authority to the Christians process of approval beyond the CDC or civil magistrates approval. They have an individual jurisdictional right and liberty as given by God. With this liberty they have in God all that is needed to pursue the full exercise of it. To this person it doesn’t matter if it was 60 years ago or 300 years ago. They are looking at the spirit behind the development. To the believer, it is they themselves who are to test the spirit (in faithful submission to God) by the discernment of the Word of God. This is that they might know what to believe in order to know if something is from God. If it is not from God then there is only one other possible spiritual source and they don’t want to take part in it. So the root of the issue for the Christian conscientious objector, is not what is being called “science” or “experts” nor the intent or empathy of man, but the actual spirit from which something is derived. (Walk by faith not by sight) The Christian test the Spirit by the Word of God from which their conviction is formed by His Spirit. The Christian then rest in the fact that God alone is good, unchanging and the Spirit of love and truth. For the believer, their refuge is not in man and his progress but God and His goodness. Again, this is a God given liberty of man to pursue God in all such things even when your neighbor, employer or government does not like it, is offended by it, or in fear of it. Remember the pursuit of God brings liberty while the advancement of man absent from God always returns to tyranny, slavery and death.
In conclusion, abortion was just one of the issues that I saw with prior emails. I just focussed on one thing because it displays that there is much more information to be researched beyond the .gov type sites. The abortion issue helps to get to the deep root, not of wether or not to get a shot, but the root that we as a society have abandoned truth and nobody seems to know where to turn. Yes a wise man seeks counsel, as you stated in your first email, but that passage of scripture and the surrounding proverbs are speaking of the council of God not the experts of man. The Word of God is contrasting the way of the godly from the ungodly. The ungodly are wise in their own estimate, they see no need for God. The godly seek God that they might know their way. I say this not merely in regards to the abortion issue, but unto the fear, lockdown, panic, confusion and surrender of liberty that has defined the past year of society. Morality or what is right to do cannot be defined by feelings or empathy for we know from scripture that there is a way that seems right to man but in the end is death. For a society to simply operate by perceived feeling or empathy is in fact no system of operation, but rather chaos. Yet, I do agree that a godly moral society will show empathy and even greater than that, they will know grace and grace will nurture love and love cannot be divided from truth for they are both of God. Thus truth is the basis of good morals, and truth is unchanging as it comes from God. It is God who who grants unto a society a good and moral order. It is his grace which gives the revelation of truth as to what is truly good. No man will ever know what is right to do by “science” alone. Nor can man know what is right from fear, hope of comfort offered by the “experts” of man, disease, nor the cure of it…They might feel something is right, but that feeling or research as we have all seen can change in a moment. No matter how far man advances he will not in his advancement escape illness nor death. Yet, as he moves away from God, his path will be shown to lead to death. The moral law of God can be legislated amongst a people and create a blessing to society as it stands on what God deems good. The moral law of God can also be transgressed or disregarded by government legislation, of which it is still the jurisdictional responsibility for the individual Christian and the church of Christ to obey and operate in accordance with God’s law. Our nations system of laws were built as holding such moral truth and human value as coming from God, and thus as a society we have legislation that you shall not murder or steal and so forth. (Though these things are presently under attack.)However we do recognize that legislation or even the best adherence to law in society or personal conviction can make a man righteous before God. That is why we need Christ. That is where we find grace.
So then, the law has its purpose, but Christ has done what even the law displayed that it could not do being weakened by the flesh. Remember this is what the LORD has spoken, that in the fear, in the reverencing or regarding of the LORD is strong confidence: and his children shall have a place of refuge. Righteousness exalts a nation: but sin is a reproach to any people. Again that is why I began with the abortion statement because 1. It was stated as 100% factual and it is not (in the sense that it was not fully addressing the concern or having all of the information available) 2. It is a serious and weighty issue. If man even from empathy pursued something that he regarded as good, but in doing so he disregarded the moral truth of God, then it is not of godly morals and it is not good. If a Christian is given the fullness of information and finds that man's “good” contradicts God’s true good, then the Christian being bound unto God, has the God given right and calling to take refuge in God and not the “empathy” nor “wisdom” of man. This may seem foolish to the world, but this is where God makes wise the fool and fools of the wise. Let us not be deceived, as soon as God’s spirit is gone from a society or His restraint from a government, both empathy and moral good will not be far behind. The liberty and blessing of the people of that society will also crumble less they return unto God as the source of truth. Whatever one’s decision with the mRNA shot is, may all of God’s children find counsel, confidence, refuge and life in Christ Jesus our Lord alone today and always. May God’s blessing and comfort in Christ Jesus be upon you all.

The grace of the Lord Jesus be with you,

John Foster, Jr.

8/13/2021

Employee Letter Example

Updated Form:Conscientious Objection - Religious-Exemption-Form-for-COVID-19-Vaccines_v2.pdf

Original Form: Conscientious Objection - Religious-Exemption-Form-for-COVID-19-Vaccines.pdf