Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Practicing prudence and gratitude in the age of COVID
Practicing prudence and gratitude in the age of COVID
Apr 7, 2026 5:35 AM

Too many conservatives are rejecting the gift of the COVID vaccines out of hand, which itself is very unconservative.

Read More…

When COVID hit Italy so badly back in the winter of 2020, I recall praying hard that a vaccine could be developed, as quickly as possible, so that the kind of devastation that a worldwide pandemic can induce would be avoided. As a classical liberal who spends a lot of time trying to convince people that things are actually getting much better in general, I was indeed hopeful that our incredibly sophisticated munity could solve this problem. After all, given our globalized economy, scientists were already anticipating such an eventuality. They just needed to know the details—would it be influenza? corona?—in order to create vaccines and treatments. While there’s plenty of room for serious consternation about the healthcare market, medical advancement stands among the most astounding improvements in the quality of life over the past century.

In a recent interview, Francis Collins, head of the National Institutes of Health and a man of outspoken Christian faith, described how the COVID vaccine was developed so quickly: the relevant scientists dropped everything else they were doing, eschewed concerns over who would get credit, and put the most cutting-edge ideas through a rigorous scientific process in 11 months—five times faster than any vaccine had been developed before. The speed resulted not from cutting corners but from the all-hands-on-deck attitude of the nation’s, and indeed the world’s, scientists. Historically, bad reactions to vaccines appear within two months, so it was possible to move forward safely. These vaccines were an answer to the prayers of millions of people all over the world, not only because they worked but also because of the very speed with which they were developed.

By the time we achieved this momentous goal, however, the whole issue of COVID had e contentious and politicized. Arguments ensued over masking, the questionable legality of local and state ordinances, unfair enforcement, and economic lockdowns that destroyed small businesses. Many of these arguments were totally valid. It is not just to shut down churches while allowing casinos to stay open. It is not safer to shut down small businesses only to cram all the shoppers into Target and Walmart. It is not difficult to justify the frustration and anger of those whose life’s work or means of making a living was destroyed over the course of just a few months due to the arbitrary will of some local politician. We will be living with the (deeply unequal) consequences of these poor decisions for years e.

But something funny happened on the way to herd immunity. The association of counter-COVID measures with heavy-handed and, in some cases, simply illegal interference in the lives and businesses of citizens caused some people to turn against anything meant to address the pandemic. Some argued that the pandemic itself was some kind of hoax—a true illness, yes, but nothing worse than the annual flu. Even voluntary masking to avoid coughing or sneezing on others became a “symbol of obsequious obedience and pliance with arbitrary and ignorant authority,” according to the most libertarian among us. The new vaccines came under immediate suspicion, including conspiracy theories that Bill Gates is using them to track us, that they are the biblical “mark of the beast,” that they are actually responsible for the deaths of thousands of people, and that the panies are just out to make a buck. Although the appearance of the new variants and the need for a booster are all perfectly normal eventualities in the world of epidemiology, these developments were also treated with deep suspicion.

Then again, government messaging on all things COVID-related was a real mess. “Two weeks to stop the spread” didn’t exactly pan out; “masks aren’t necessary” turned into “masks are 100% necessary” in a confusing flip-flop; it was racist to say that the virus leaked out of a Wuhan lab or originated in Chinese “wet markets” until scientists confirmed that one of those theories is likely correct; the issue of school closings was politicized by the teachers’ unions; and many government officials claimed powers they quite straightforwardly did not have. The public quickly picked up that Dr. Fauci’s announcements served to control behavior more than municate the latest, honest updates on scientist’s understanding of the virus. All this contributed to a general atmosphere of information chaos that ginned up suspicion.

Unfortunately, the backlash has had the ironic consequence of slowing our progress toward getting life back to normal. While we need something like 85% of the nation’s population to be vaccinated in order to reach herd immunity, we have not even reached 60% as of late November 2021, although adults are at a hopeful 70%. These delays mean we can all enjoy the continuation of the arguments over lockdowns and mandates for the foreseeable future instead of returning to life as normal, a nice example of shooting oneself in the foot if I’ve ever seen one. While anti-COVID-vax ideas aren’t limited to any one demographic, the most hesitant group turns out to be those who identify as conservative. This should strike us as odd.

One hardly knows how to define the term conservative these days, but I always insist on returning to Russell Kirk’s wonderful idea of the “reflective conservative.” The reflective conservative is not a mere reactionary. She is not against any and all change but is rather suspicious of sudden or revolutionary change that threatens to upend hard-won customs and traditions. It is often said that the great virtue of the conservative is gratitude, because she is thankful to all those who came before her and for all we’ve inherited from them. For this reason, the conservative recognizes multiple sources of authority appropriate to the distinct parts of our lives, whether family, work, church, state, or academy. The conservative is anxious to preserve what is necessary for stability and flourishing, and so favors slow and prudent reform. Most of all, the conservative believes that there is such a thing as truth, and that discovering it is part of what makes life worth living.

Hopefully one can immediately see that to be a conservative in Kirk’s sense requires much nuance. The conservative is not an ideologue. He cannot be defined by adherence to some abstract set of principles nor does he make decisions by appeal to simplistic platitudes. Instead, the true conservative must be a person of deep practical wisdom, one who utilizes his imagination to weigh the merits of contending considerations. One reason that being a conservative is often associated with being older is that older people have enough experience in life to understand the way we must take circumstances into account to make virtuous choices.

The truth is that COVID is quite real; if pare overall deaths over the past two years to the periods just prior, we find that we recently passed the one million excess death mark. The truth is also that these vaccines work pretty well and they are not dangerous for most people. The truth is that the vast majority of those hospitalized for COVID today are unvaccinated, while breakthrough cases among the vaccinated generally result in far less serious illness. Furthermore, if Bill Gates wanted to track you, he would just do it through your phone. I also doubt that anyone will take on the mark of the beast without realizing they are doing so.

Like myself, many conservatives have been profoundly grateful for the vaccines. They see them as the divine intervention of a God who answers prayer and uses those of us who are better off in developed economies to serve our neighbors among those who are much worse off in the world. They see them as the fruit of a well-functioning munity that still manages to be motivated by mon good rather than mere money or status. They see them as the fruit of a bustling global market that has created prehensibly stunning distribution systems to get medicine to the farthest reaches of the earth. They are wise enough to distinguish between what is a truly good and praiseworthy solution on the one hand, and what is only an excuse for some to increase their power and control over others on the other hand. They distinguish wisely between the authority of medical expertise, economic expertise, and that of the state. Each of these has its place and ought not overstep its bounds.

Not all those who call themselves conservative have maintained the proper sense of gratitude or made the necessary distinctions. Some have raised ethical objections over the fact that these vaccines were developed using fetal cell lines that were taken from an aborted fetus 50 years ago. In response, the Vatican reiterated the position it has held with regard to the Rubella vaccine and many other medications that have been developed from the same fetal cell line: all people of good will should campaign for ethically developed medication, but taking the vaccine does not constitute moral cooperation with abortion. Even those conscientious objectors who persist, though, do not constitute a significant part of the conservative anti-COVID-vax movement. Instead, many are misled by the deluge of outlandish claims being made, sometimes by those who seemed trustworthy in the past. Others are simply collapsing two issues into one: the genuine problem of government overreach through lockdowns and mandates, and the medical claims around vaccine safety.

These are strange times, and conservatives ought to lead the charge against false claims, irrational fear, sloppy thinking, and those who sow seeds of distrust in the body politic. The true conservative knows that trust in institutional stability is fragile yet deeply necessary. Like the old story from church about the drowning man who won’t take the raft, the boat, or the helicopter that God sends, awaiting a “miracle,” some so-called conservatives seem to appreciate neither the seriousness of our situation nor the solution on offer. And that is a failure to practice the virtues of prudence and of gratitude—the very virtues distinct to the conservative mind.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Religion drives charitable giving in America
“In study after study,” says Karl Zinsmeister, “religious practice is the behavioral variable with the strongest and most consistent association with generous giving.” In his article for Philanthropy, Zinsmeister examines a range of data to show how America’s religiosity is connected to our charitable giving. Here are a few highlights from her report: • Among Americans who attend services weekly and pray daily, 45 percent had done volunteer work during the previous week. Among all other Americans, only 27 percent...
‘Social justice’ as a postmodern religion
Has “social justice” e a new religion in what many believe to be an irreligious age? Andrew Sullivan recently reflected on the decline of Christianity and the rise of “personal spiritualties” and “political religions,” noting the weaknesses of our modern orthodoxies. “We’re mistaken if we believe that the collapse of Christianity in America has led to a decline in religion,”Sullivan wrote. “It has merely led to religious impulses being expressed by political cults.” On the right, we see the over-elevation...
5 facts about Susan B. Anthony
Today is the 199th anniversary of the birth of Susan B. Anthony. In honor of her legacy, here are five facts you should know about the great American social reformer: 1. Anthony was born in Massachusetts in 1820 to a family of devout, radical Quakers. Her parents raised her and her siblings to have a passion for social reform, and stressed the importance of issues such as prison reform and the abolishment of slavery.Although she continued to describe herself as...
Sometimes enlightened love just ain’t enough
“What is love?” This question perhaps was most famously posed by the mononymous 1990s philosopher-poet, Haddaway. Among the ponderers of this question, Enlightenment philosophers such as Hume, Rousseau, Smith, and Kant are not as easily remembered, lacking as they did Haddaway’s infectious hook. That Adam Smith might be considered a philosopher of love is surprising given that he was a lifelong bachelor who seems not to have had a romantic bone in his body. And Kant derided romantic love as...
New Elinor Ostrom Women in Economics video
Over at Marginal Revolution University they have kicked off a new series of videos on Women in Economics: Women in Economics highlights the groundbreaking and inspiring work of female economists — not only to recognize the important work they’ve done but to also share their inspirational journeys. The first video features NobelLaureate Elinor Ostrom previously profiled by Sarah Stanley in Religion and Liberty: Elinor Ostrom was a professor at Indiana University and the senior research director of the Vincent and...
Which is a real dystopia, the U.S. or Venezuela?
As Americans contemplate a “Green New Deal” and British schoolchildren skip school by the thousand to demand (more) government action on climate change, a little-noticed op-ed gives us a glimpse into a genuine dystopia. The author warns that this nightmare scenario will not unfold “The Day After Tomorrow” but has already taken place, for years, in the squalid homes and empty stores of socialist Venezuela. In the West, the stereotype of a Christian crackpot warning “The End is Near” on...
Are tariffs the best tool to solve economic and social problems of globalization?
President Trump said in a press conference Tuesday that he may postpone the March 1st deadline for the extension of tariffs on Chinese goods as US trade representatives are in China working on a trade agreement. Trump promoted tariffs in his campaign and has argued that tariffs will help strengthen the US economy and bring back factory jobs to American workers. The first round of tariffs on started last year with a 25% tariff on over 800 different Chinese goods....
Valentine’s Day: Rosy economics?
Alright, I’ll confess: I am often accused of being a miser on St. Valentine’s Day. This is because I usually buy three roses for my Italian wife. Never a dozen like everyone else. While devoted to the Trinity, accepting the number 3 as a true sign of God’s perfect unity and love, and while I get a pass from my religious-minded and economically sensitive spouse, my wee rose acquisition is not just a test of love but it is also...
The Reverend Edmund A. Opitz, a precursor in the defense of religion and liberty
Today marks 13 years since the passing of the Reverend Edmund A. Opitz, pastor, author, and great supporter of the Acton Institute’s mission. On February 1, 1999, Rev. Opitz sent a letter to Leonard P. Liggio (1933-2014) and to me. We were both founding trustees of Acton, which at the time was not yet ten years old. Many friends in the freedom movement, including Father Robert Sirico, Acton’s co-founder, started attending programs conducted by Ed Opitz at the Foundation for...
Who are ‘our poor’ in the immigration debate?
At First Things last week,in his essay “Our Poor,” economist Andrew M. Yuengert reflected upon his 2004 Acton monograph Inhabiting the Land, questioning whether his economic analysis (that immigration is a net gain for both immigrants and natives) needs more nuance in the light of our current political climate: In Inhabiting the Land I concluded that we could only argue against immigration if we were willing to “weigh the wage decrease for native unskilled workers more heavily than the significant...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved