Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Practicing prudence and gratitude in the age of COVID
Practicing prudence and gratitude in the age of COVID
Mar 20, 2026 11:49 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
Lunar Landing Marks Great Era of Discovery
Today marks the 40th Anniversary of the one of the greatest feats of human exploration, courage and innovation: man’s setting foot on the surface of the moon. Responding heroically to the challenges of the “Space Race” (while its arch-nemesis, the Soviet Union, was clearly in the lead), the United States stood proud to represent the free and enterprising West. To put the challenges of victory into perspective, America was running adrift amid pretty rough waters at the time: two great...
Relevant Radio: Rev. Sirico On Caritas in Veritate
Rev. Robert A. Sirico had two recent appearances on Relevant Radio’s Drew Mariani Show to discuss the new social encyclical from Pope Benedict XVI. His first appearance was prior to the release of the encyclical and he explained how Christians who support the free economy believe that it should not be based on greed. To have a just society, we must have just people. When money es the end of a person, and a person’s whole life is directed to...
Primacy of Culture in Caritas in Veritate
Zenit published my article on the pope’s new social encyclical: Encyclical Offers Opportunity to “Think With the Church” By Jennifer Roback Morse SAN MARCOS, California, JULY 17, 2009 (Zenit.org).- Benedict XVI’s “Caritas in Veritate” is his contribution to the course of Catholic social teaching. mentators seem to read this document as if it were a think-tank white paper, and ask whether the Pope endorses their particular policy preferences. I must say that I surprised myself by not reflexively reading it...
Caritas in Veritate: Jayabalan and Gregg Radio Interviews
Kishore Jayabalan, director of Istituto Acton (the Acton Institute’s Rome office), was interviewed by Vatican Radio concerning the authentic human development concerns of the whole person, which is a topic discussed in Caritas in Veritate. Jayabalan discussed how development schemes throughout the world should look at the aspirations of each individual person. Furthermore, in Caritas in Veritate there is a mention of a “breathing space” used a few times in the encyclical. This breathing space aspect means developing a vibrant...
Townhall: Jayabalan Talks About Caritas in Veritate
Kathryn Lopez, editor of National Review Online, has a column on Caritas in Veritate titled, “Liberal Catholics Can’t Handle the Truth.” Lopez looks at mentary on Caritas in Veritate, especially by the left, and shows why the encyclical should not be politicized. The encyclical is about truth, which can not be bent to advance a political agenda, she asserts. Kishore Jayabalan, director of Acton’s Rome office, was also quoted in Lopez’s article: Neither side . . . seems ready to...
Caritas in Veritate: Schmiesing and Jayabalan Radio Interviews
Kevin Schmiesing, research fellow at the Acton Institute, was interviewed by Ave Maria Radio recently on Caritas in Veritate. Schmiesing explains how the idea of human development and progress figure as central themes of the encyclical. It is important to remember that our ethical advancement must be ahead of material human development, and our ethics must be paired with our personal development. Furthermore, Schmiesing explains that Caritas in Veritate warns against an all passing role for the state. [audio: Kishore...
Health Care is More Important than Class Warfare, America!
“I vote for Democrats for one primary reason. They raise taxes on the rich.” So says Michael Sean Winters at In All Things, the blog of the contributors to America Magazine. Of course, most Americans, perhaps even Mr. Winter, generally need excuses to raise taxes on the rich. The hottest reason at the moment is to pay for universal health care coverage. Winter likes this reason. If passed, he says that it will be the “first outstanding example of a...
Academic Journals in the ‘Network’ Economy
John Hartley, the founder and editor of the International Journal of Cultural Studies, does for that journal something like what I did for the Journal of Markets & Morality awhile back. He takes his experience as an editor to reflect on the current state of the scholarly journal amid the challenges and opportunities in the digital age. Hartley opens his study, “Lament for a Lost Running Order? Obsolescence and Academic Journals,” by concluding that “the academic journal is obsolete,” at...
Card Check Gets Checked at the Senate’s Doors
This morning, the New York Times reported that a broad bipartisan effort of senators convinced Democratic leadership to drop provisions in the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) that would have weakened the right of workers to hold secret ballot elections to determine whether or not they would unionize. EFCA had e known by many of its opponents as the “card check bill” because of its central proposal: if over half of workers at a firm signed cards authorizing a union...
Developing the Ius Digitus
The ius gentium, or law of nations, has an important place in legal history. Variously conceived, the law of nations often referred to the code of conduct for dealing with foreign peoples according to their own local, national, or regional standards. As a form of natural law, the ius gentium has often been appealed to as a basis for determining what has been believed everywhere, always, by everyone. It’s an approach used, for instance, with some qualification by C.S. Lewis...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved