Florida Catholics slap down state AG by rejecting religious vaccine exemptions
Florida Catholics slap down state AG by rejecting religious vaccine exemptions
佛罗里达州天主教主教驳回州总检察长要求，拒绝提供宗教疫苗豁免
Florida’s attorney general got a fiery rebuke and some ecclesiastical schooling from the state’s Catholic bishops after he boldly threatened to block funding to Catholic schools unless the church bends to the state’s anti-vaccine policies—policies allegedly intended to uphold religious freedom. 佛罗里达州总检察长近日遭到了该州天主教主教们的严厉斥责，并被上了一堂“教会教义课”。此前，这位总检察长曾大言不惭地威胁称，除非教会屈从于该州的反疫苗政策（这些政策声称旨在维护宗教自由），否则将切断对天主教学校的资助。
On July 31, Attorney General James Uthmeier sent a questionable letter to the bishops regarding exemptions to school vaccination requirements. Florida law requires public and private schools to allow vaccination exemptions based on religious grounds. But Catholic schools in the state do not accept religious exemptions; Florida’s Catholic dioceses support vaccination and recognize no theological argument against it. The schools only accept exemptions based on medical conditions that are verified by a healthcare provider. 7月31日，总检察长詹姆斯·乌斯迈尔（James Uthmeier）向主教们发送了一封内容存疑的信函，涉及学校疫苗接种要求的豁免问题。佛罗里达州法律要求公立和私立学校必须允许基于宗教理由的疫苗豁免。然而，该州的天主教学校并不接受宗教豁免；佛罗里达州的天主教教区支持疫苗接种，并不承认任何反对疫苗的宗教神学论据。这些学校仅接受由医疗保健提供者核实的医疗状况豁免。
Uthmeier, himself a Catholic, wrote to the bishops in an open letter that, based on his own understanding of Catholicism, he saw “no legitimate religious reason to refuse granting religious exemptions.” He reviewed select theological positions regarding the use of “abortion-derived vaccines,” and suggested to the bishops that it was “morally reprehensible” that they not grant religious exemptions. Beyond sharing his personal interpretations with the bishops, Uthmeier threatened to withhold state scholarships and vouchers from Catholic school if they don’t change their position. 身为天主教徒的乌斯迈尔在给主教们的公开信中写道，根据他个人对天主教的理解，他认为“没有合法的宗教理由拒绝授予宗教豁免”。他审视了关于使用“源自堕胎疫苗”的特定神学立场，并向主教们暗示，他们不授予宗教豁免的行为是“道德上应受谴责的”。除了向主教们分享他的个人解读外，乌斯迈尔还威胁称，如果天主教学校不改变立场，他将扣留州政府提供的奖学金和教育券。
“Far from hallow” “绝非神圣”
The bishops responded with their own letter, which they made public last week. With a firm crack, they smack down Uthmeier’s legal and theological arguments, while also noting that they’re being unnecessarily nice in explaining to him why he’s wrong. “[T]he Catholic bishops in Florida do not have to justify to your office their position on Catholic teaching and their reasons for the current vaccine policies,” they write. But “out of respect,” they go on to demolish Uthmeier’s points, citing the hierarchical nature of the Catholic church, the religion clauses of the First Amendment, state laws, and previous court rulings. In all, “It is beyond cavil that the bishops, not the state, decide how to interpret and apply Catholic principles and theology.” 主教们在上周公开了他们的回信。他们以强硬的态度驳斥了乌斯迈尔的法律和神学论点，并指出他们是在“不必要地客气”地向他解释他错在哪里。他们写道：“佛罗里达州的天主教主教们无需向你的办公室证明他们在天主教教义上的立场，也无需解释当前疫苗政策的理由。”但出于“尊重”，他们随后逐一拆解了乌斯迈尔的观点，引用了天主教会的等级制度、宪法第一修正案中的宗教条款、州法律以及过往的法院判决。总之，“主教而非国家，有权决定如何解释和应用天主教原则与神学，这一点毋庸置疑。”
They write: The constitutional defect in your office’s inquiry is, therefore, not merely the conclusion it posits, but the inquiry itself. Whether Catholic doctrine requires, permits, or disfavors a particular exemption is a religious question entrusted to Catholic authorities, not state officials. The government may not decide that Church teaching is insufficiently religious, insufficiently consistent with Catholic doctrine, or insufficiently compelling to justify an ecclesiastical policy. Nor may it require Church leaders to defend their interpretation of Catholic doctrine before civil authorities as a condition of operating religious schools. 他们写道：因此，你办公室质询中的宪法缺陷，不仅在于其提出的结论，更在于质询本身。天主教教义是要求、允许还是反对某种特定的豁免，这是一个委托给天主教权威而非政府官员的宗教问题。政府无权判定教会教义是否“不够宗教化”、是否“与天主教教义不够一致”，或是否“不足以证明教会政策的合理性”。政府更不能要求教会领袖在民事当局面前为他们对教义的解读进行辩护，以此作为运营宗教学校的条件。
To the threat of withholding educational scholarships and other funding, the bishops call it “far from hallow and legally incorrect.” “The state cannot disqualify Catholic schools from the scholarship program merely because a state official’s views differ from the bishops’ views.” 对于扣留教育奖学金和其他资金的威胁，主教们称其“绝非神圣，且在法律上是错误的”。“州政府不能仅仅因为某位州官员的观点与主教们的观点不同，就取消天主教学校参与奖学金计划的资格。”
Vaccine and the common good 疫苗与公共利益
As to their position on vaccines, the bishops explain their policy by first addressing a common religion-tinged criticism of vaccines: that the production of some of them involves using cell cultures that were originally developed from fetuses aborted in the 1960s. With the cell lines still in use, no new fetal cells or abortions are involved, and vaccines are purified so that no fetal tissue is in immunizations. Some, like Uthmeier, claim that use of such vaccines goes against the church’s belief in the sanctity of life. But the church has repeatedly made clear that this is not the case. 关于疫苗立场，主教们首先回应了一个常见的带有宗教色彩的批评：即部分疫苗的生产涉及使用最初从20世纪60年代堕胎胎儿中提取的细胞培养物。由于这些细胞系仍在沿用，并不涉及新的胎儿细胞或堕胎，且疫苗经过纯化，接种剂中不含任何胎儿组织。一些人（如乌斯迈尔）声称使用此类疫苗违背了教会关于生命神圣性的信仰。但教会已多次明确表示事实并非如此。
The Florida bishops reference a 2017 document from the Pontifical Academy for Life and the Italian Bishops’ Conference that getting vaccinated “does not signify some sort of cooperation with voluntary abortion” and can be done “with a clear conscience.” The Florida bishops further clarify that it is “morally permissible” for parents to have their children vaccinated for the same reason. The bishops say that some parents may still disagree, and for those parents, they “are free to choose a different educational path for their children. Catholic virtual schooling and home schooling are among them,” the bishops write. 佛罗里达州的主教们引用了宗座生命科学院和意大利主教团2017年的一份文件，指出接种疫苗“并不意味着与自愿堕胎有任何形式的合作”，并且可以“问心无愧地”进行。佛罗里达州的主教们进一步澄清，出于同样的原因，父母让孩子接种疫苗在“道德上是允许的”。主教们表示，如果有些家长仍持不同意见，他们“可以自由选择其他的教育途径。天主教虚拟学校和家庭教育都在选择之列，”主教们写道。
Their vaccine policy is “rooted in the desire to protect the common good and to encourage the proportional benefits of utilizing vaccines,” the bishops write. “This position is rooted in our Catechism: ‘Life and physical health are precious gifts entrusted to us by God. We must take reasonable care of them, taking into account the needs of others and the common good.’” The bishops note the vaccines not only protect healthy children, but also vulnerable groups in their schools, including children who cannot be vaccinated due to medical conditions, expectant teachers, and elderly parents and grandparents. 主教们写道，他们的疫苗政策“植根于保护公共利益和鼓励利用疫苗所带来的比例收益的愿望”。“这一立场植根于我们的教理：‘生命和身体健康是上帝托付给我们的宝贵礼物。我们必须妥善照料它们，同时考虑到他人的需求和公共利益。’”主教们指出，疫苗不仅保护了健康的孩子，还保护了学校里的弱势群体，包括因医疗状况无法接种疫苗的儿童、怀孕的教师以及年迈的父母和祖父母。
State context 州政府背景
The bishops’ stand against Uthmeier comes as Florida’s Republican leaders continue to attack life-saving vaccines and vaccination requirements. Last year, Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo announced that the state planned to end all vaccination requirements, including those for school children. He dramatically claimed that every vaccine requirement “drips with disdain and slavery.” On Monday, the state proposed a rule to remove requirements that children get vaccinated against chickenpox, hepatitis B, Haemophilus influenzae type B, and pneumococcal to enter school. The rule would also expand religious exemptions. The bishops’ letter highlights a fallacy often used by anti-vaccine advocates: that undermining vaccines and dismantling vaccination requirements upholds religious freedom, when in fact it can be an attack on that freedom. 主教们对乌斯迈尔的立场反击，正值佛罗里达州共和党领导人持续攻击救命疫苗和疫苗接种要求之际。去年，佛罗里达州卫生局局长约瑟夫·拉达波（Joseph Ladapo）宣布，该州计划取消所有疫苗接种要求，包括针对在校学生的接种要求。他夸张地声称，每一项疫苗要求都“滴着蔑视和奴役的血”。周一，该州提议制定一项规则，取消儿童入学前必须接种水痘、乙肝、B型流感嗜血杆菌和肺炎球菌疫苗的要求。该规则还将扩大宗教豁免范围。主教们的信凸显了反疫苗倡导者经常使用的一个谬论：即破坏疫苗和废除疫苗接种要求是在维护宗教自由，而事实上，这反而可能是在攻击这种自由。