Qualitative study investigates vaccine views among evangelical Christians, highlighting implications for health promotion.
Introduction Vaccine hesitancy threatens a population’s protection from preventable diseases. Religious beliefs are associated with hesitancy, though this relationship is neither uniform nor deterministic. In New Zealand (NZ), Christianity is the second largest religion, and evangelical Christians emerged as a vocal group during the COVID-19 vaccine rollout. Despite many Christian denominations supporting vaccination, Christians have shown lower vaccination rates and poorer trust in science than non-Christians. This study investigated COVID-19 vaccine views and beliefs among evangelical Christians in NZ and their implications for future vaccination.Theory Vaccine hesitancy frameworks informed the study, recognising that institutional trust, perceptions of authority, and politicisation of health measures shape vaccine decision-making. Theological values were understood as mediating frameworks rather than fixed determinants of behaviour.Method Nineteen semi-structured interviews were conducted online with self-identified evangelical Christians, purposively sampled for diversity in vaccination status, gender, ethnicity, and church role. Data were collected in 2022 and analysed using a general inductive approach with NVivo. Reporting followed the COREQ checklist.Results Six themes emerged: Christian values shaping health behaviour; church leadership tensions; media representations of faith communities; experiences of government mandates and institutional trust; vaccine safety concerns; and future vaccination intentions shaped by transparency and respectful dialogue.Discussion Vaccine decision-making reflected internal theological diversity rather than a unified religious stance. Effective public health strategies must move beyond misinformation correction. Engaging church leaders in health promotion, resourcing faith communities, and fostering conscience-sensitive dialogue could help rebuild trust in science and government, with implications beyond the evangelical context.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gorman et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: