Animals have souls?!?

[kittyo]

In a group discussion at confirmation class, I had mentioned that humans, unlike other animals, have souls. One of the group leaders asked to talk with me later. He later told me that I was wrong and that other animals do have souls and that they all go straight to heaven when they die. I wasn’t quite sure what to say- I was put on the spot. However, I’d like to get back to him on that subject. How/what should I do/say?

Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum,

~Kittyo~
​

A room without books is like a body without a soul.

Christianity has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and not tried.

Courage is almost a contradiction in terms. It means a strong desire to live taking the form of readiness to die.

I regard golf as an expensive way of playing marbles.

-G. K. Chesterton

 

[fermat]

Every living thing has a soul, you, an animal, plants, everything. The soul is what gives life. But, we are the only ones with immortal souls. When a non-human dies, so does it’s soul. You can find a more through treatment here.

 

[1ke]

In a group discussion at confirmation class, I had mentioned that humans, unlike other animals, have souls. One of the group leaders asked to talk with me later. He later told me that I was wrong and that other animals do have souls

Animals have material souls, the animating principle of the body (the thing that distinguishes something that is alive from something that is inanimate or dead). Plants have material souls too. They cease to exist when they die.

Humans have spiritual souls. Spiritual souls alone are immortal and made in the image and likeness of God. So, when using the term “soul” to mean “spiritual soul” you are correct. See the Catechsim here to see the discussion on the soul. You are not wrong in what you are trying to convey. You were only wrong in a very technical sense of the difference between “spirit” and “soul”.

I recommend Frank Sheed’s book Theology for Beginners for you.

and that they all go straight to heaven when they die.

This is not Church teaching.

I wasn’t quite sure what to say- I was put on the spot.

Can he provide proof that this is the Church’s teaching? No he cannot.

However, you can provide Church teaching to the contrary. From the Catechism:

356 Of all visible creatures only man is “able to know and love his creator”.219 He is “the only creature on earth that God has willed for its own sake”,220 and he alone is called to share, by knowledge and love, in God’s own life.

God’s own life is the Beatific Vision (heaven).

However, I’d like to get back to him on that subject. How/what should I do/say?

Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum,

Well, sharing the Catechism section linked to above is a start as well as:

ewtn.com/expert/answers/pets_in_heaven.htm

newadvent.org/cathen/14153a.htm

 

[Tietjen]

As both Fermat and 1ke have already stated, all living creatures have souls. However not all souls are immortal. The souls of animals and plants cease to exist upon death while man’s soul continues. Many people find this to be troubling and I believe that your instructor wanted to avoid causing the pain that others in your class may have experienced had they been confronted with the knowledge that a beloved pet would not be with them in Heaven. Just my assumption however.

 

[promethius]

In a group discussion at confirmation class, I had mentioned that humans, unlike other animals, have souls.

Just to point out one mistake:

You refered to humans in the sense of “unlike OTHER animals”… We are not animals. We are humans. You should have left the word “other” out of that statement.

 

[Catholic90]

We will know once we die where the animals are! Until then, it is all opinion and speculation.

God created ALL CREATURES, and I am confident that GOD has a plan for ALL OF HIS CREATURES.

Keep in mind animals cannot sin and cannot reject God, unlike humans, so animals may have a direct path straight to animal heaven! We really do not know. I rest secure in the comfort that God takes care of everything.

 

[1ke]

Many people find this to be troubling and I believe that your instructor wanted to avoid causing the pain that others in your class

However, the OP is not in a class of 5 year olds. The OP is in a confirmation class.

The instructor, if indeed attempting to avoid uncomfortable conversations, chose the wrong path. Proposing something that is not true as a way to avoid such conversations can do spiritual harm to people who later find out those in a position of teaching authority were either mistaken or purposely lieing.

Also, at the current age of confirmation (8th grade or above) the discussion of the unique nature of the human soul vis-a-vis animal souls **should **be discussed. Young adults this age are fully capable of understanding this, and it is important that they do understand correct Catholic teaching on the matter.

 

[chipeto]

I rest secure in the comfort that God takes care of everything.

The best attitude that one can have!

 

[Ahimsa]

356 Of all visible creatures only man is “able to know and love his creator”.219 He is “the only creature on earth that God has willed for its own sake”,220 and he alone is called to share, by knowledge and love, in God’s own life.

I notice that this statement could be interpreted to mean that, though humans alone are able to “know and love” God, that animals are able to simply “love” God with knowing God in the way that humans know God.

In any event, the denial of animals in heaven is not a dogmatic teaching.

 

[1ke]

I notice that this statement could be interpreted to mean that, though humans alone are able to “know and love” God, that animals are able to simply “love” God with knowing God in the way that humans know God.

This is not correct.

The two principles of the immortal soul are intellect and will, knowing and loving. Animals possess neither principle of a spirtual soul.

In any event, the denial of animals in heaven is not a dogmatic teaching.

“Sharing in God’s own life” is heaven. The Church teaches that man “alone is called to share, by knowledge and love, in God’s own life.”

 

[twopekinguys]

Aren’t there horses mentioned in Revelations?

 

[Ahimsa]

This is not correct.

The two principles of the immortal soul are intellect and will, knowing and loving. Animals possess neither principle of a spirtual soul.

It doesn’t logically follow that animals are incapable of love, if animals lack an immortal soul. At most, lack of an immortal soul would mean lack of the ability to both know and love.

“Sharing in God’s own life” is heaven. The Church teaches that man “alone is called to share, by knowledge and love, in God’s own life.”

Right, man alone can both “know and love”. This says nothing about those who are able to love but not able to know.

 

[1ke]

It doesn’t logically follow that animals are incapable of love, if animals lack an immortal soul. At most, lack of an immortal soul would mean lack of the ability to both know and love.

this is not correct.

The principles of a spiritual soul that distinguish it from a material soul are intellect and will. These are the two fundamental properties of a spiritual soul. They cannot be separated.

Animals possess neither.

Right, man alone can both “know and love”. This says nothing about those who are able to love but not able to know.

Animals can do neither.

It is important to have a correct understanding of the soul and what it means to be in the image and likeness of God. I see you reference yourself as “Jesus Buddhist”, whatever that means. Eastern thought on the nature of the soul, reincarnation, nirvana, enlightenment, etc, is not compatible with Christian doctrine. It is in error regarding the soul.

It is really important to understand what it means to be made in the image and likeness of God and what it does NOT mean. I really encourage you to read Theology for Beginners by Frank Sheed if you are seeking a Christian understanding of these things.

 

[Ghosty]

Just to point out one mistake:

You refered to humans in the sense of “unlike OTHER animals”… We are not animals. We are humans. You should have left the word “other” out of that statement.

We certainly are animals, but we are rational animals and have an immortal soul. From the CCC:

**1951 **Law is a rule of conduct enacted by competent authority for the sake of the common good. The moral law presupposes the rational order, established among creatures for their good and to serve their final end, by the power, wisdom, and goodness of the Creator. All law finds its first and ultimate truth in the eternal law. Law is declared and established by reason as a participation in the providence of the living God, Creator and Redeemer of all. “Such an ordinance of reason is what one calls law.”
Alone among all animate beings, man can boast of having been counted worthy to receive a law from God: as an animal endowed with reason, capable of understanding and discernment, he is to govern his conduct by using his freedom and reason, in obedience to the One who has entrusted everything to him.

I’m not sure how the modern denial of the definition “animal” to humans came about, but it runs completely contrary to all of Catholic philosophical tradition. We are not brute animals, but rather ***rational ***animals; the distinction is in the kind of soul, not the genus of creature.

Peace and God bless!

 

[Ahimsa]

It doesn’t logically follow that animals are incapable of love, if animals lack an immortal soul. At most, lack of an immortal soul would mean lack of the ability to both know and

So you’re saying that animals lack the ability to love?

 

[TheDoctor]

In a group discussion at confirmation class, I had mentioned that humans, unlike other animals, have souls. One of the group leaders asked to talk with me later. He later told me that I was wrong and that other animals do have souls and that they all go straight to heaven when they die. I wasn’t quite sure what to say- I was put on the spot. However, I’d like to get back to him on that subject. How/what should I do/say? Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum, ~Kittyo~

As a confirmation teacher, I can tell you that this comes up every year, usually around the time one of the kids loses a pet and we go into the “do all dogs go to Heaven” question.

As has been mentioned, all living things (plant, non-human animal, humans) do have souls, however it is only human soul that has the ability to know and love God and eventually, if we get it right, enter into Heaven with him.

If you think about this, suppose non-human animals did have spiritual souls. Could I not make a strong case that whenever we murder an animal to eat it, we have violated the commandment? Does anyone want to meet all of the pigs, chickens, steer, etc. that we have eaten in Heaven (I freak my kids out by asking them to imagine being before the Lord in particular judgement and having every ant, spider and roach you ever stepped on testifying against you ). And then, could I not make the case since a plant also has a soul, it should too go to Heaven? I am NOT being sent to Hell for forgetting to water my houseplants!

So I end it up by saying that yes, non-human animals do have souls but they don’t go to Heaven. Your confirmation teacher should have used this as a teaching moment in class.

P.S. - the following is just my $0.02, not Church teaching: Given what I have said, I also believe that God wants me to be happy and once I am (God willing) in Heaven and have the beautific vision I will want nothing else, however if in some way known only to God it would make me happy to see my beloved pets in Heaven I know they will be there waiting for me (and in all honesty, I wouild love to be walking with my dog again like when I was young).

 

[1ke]

So you’re saying that animals lack the ability to love?

Yes, that is exactly what I am saying.

They do not possess intellect or will.

 

[Ahimsa]

Yes, that is exactly what I am saying.

They do not possess intellect or will.

So, animals (of any kind) lack the emotion of love, they lack the ability to reason (intellect), and they lack the ability to choose a course of action (will)?

 

[1ke]

So, animals (of any kind) lack the emotion of love, they lack the ability to reason (intellect), and they lack the ability to choose a course of action (will)?

Correct.

Human beings are the only physical creature that possesses intellect and will-- the properties of a spiritual soul.

Angels, of course, possess these properties too. But they are pure spirit, not having a body.

 

[Tietjen]

However, the OP is not in a class of 5 year olds. The OP is in a confirmation class.

The instructor, if indeed attempting to avoid uncomfortable conversations, chose the wrong path. Proposing something that is not true as a way to avoid such conversations can do spiritual harm to people who later find out those in a position of teaching authority were either mistaken or purposely lieing.

Also, at the current age of confirmation (8th grade or above) the discussion of the unique nature of the human soul vis-a-vis animal souls **should **be discussed. Young adults this age are fully capable of understanding this, and it is important that they do understand correct Catholic teaching on the matter.

Preaching to the choir 1ke. The fact that I didn’t spell it out should NOT be considered an endorsement on my part of the class instructor’s actions.