Father Spitzers Universe and animal souls

Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JoeFreedom

New member
I was watching Father Spitzer’s Universe last weekend and a caller had a question about whether animals had Souls. Father Spitzer responded the only humans had Souls and animals did not. However every Catholic book and even on Catholic answers including books from doctors of the church say animals have souls they are just not Immortal or rational. So while humans have immortal and rational Souls. Father Spitzer did not make this distinction at all and was very clear animals did not have souls and it surprised me. Father Spitzer is extremely intelligent and knowledgeable. I really like his show but I think someone possibly myself should correct him on this matter if he is wrong but I want to be certain before I email the show. Can anyone confirm for me what I have said is true? Thank you
 
Can you please provide exact references to where CA and “Catholic books” have said animals have souls?
Can you link to the article on CA that states this?

I’ve never seen or read that anywhere. I was always taught, as Fr. Spitzer said, that animals don’t have souls.
 
Last edited:
JoeFreedom said:
I was watching Father Spitzer’s Universe last weekend and a caller had a question about whether animals had Souls. Father Spitzer responded the only humans had Souls and animals did not. However every Catholic book and even on Catholic answers including books from doctors of the church say animals have souls they are just not Immortal or rational. So while humans have immortal and rational Souls. Father Spitzer did not make this distinction at all and was very clear animals did not have souls and it surprised me. Father Spitzer is extremely intelligent and knowledgeable. I really like his show but I think someone possibly myself should correct him on this matter if he is wrong but I want to be certain before I email the show. Can anyone confirm for me what I have said is true? Thank you
Click to expand...
 
Why wouldn’t they? Were they not created by God, did God not save them during the flood… took them as sacrifice before He took His Son, why wouldn’t animals have souls?
 
Last edited:
Thank you. I think this is an issue of semantics. Most Catholics I have known only use the word “soul” to mean “immortal soul”, the kind humans have. The CA article notes at the beginning that saying animals and plants have “souls” sounds very New Age-y, which it does because most Catholics outside of maybe theologians and philosophers don’t think in those terms.

Obviously animals have the life force that God breathed into them and they are living creatures with feelings and all that. But we don’t generally call that a “soul” even though the CA author did.

I think Fr. Spitzer was pitching his talk at the average audience member who thinks of a “soul” as the human soul, which gets judged, goes to Heaven or Hell etc.
 
Father Spitzer was quite clear. They have no souls, none, not even a non-rational soul. And thank you to @thistle. This is just one of the many articles and books where I’ve read this. I have always understood that all life, human, animal and plant, has a soul to animate it. The difference is simply human souls are immortal and rational. Animal and plant souls are not, they cease to exist once they die and they have no rational capabilities. But Fr. Spitzer was very clear. They have NO souls.
Tis_Bearself said:
I think Fr. Spitzer was pitching his talk at the average audience member who thinks of a “soul” as the human soul, which gets judged, goes to Heaven or Hell etc.
Click to expand...
He should have made the distinction, but he made none. To me, he should have, and it really makes it seem like he doesn’t know this. I have explained this to my children and they understand it. The caller wasn’t unintelligent, so I don’t understand why Fr. Spitzer could not have made that distinction. The caller could have understood it. But like I said, he was clear. Animals have NO souls.
 
Last edited:
None. I do not agree with him. My original post I thought was clear. I believe he is wrong, but was asking for confirmation before I went off and emailed him.
 
With all due respect, I have no idea what a “non-rational soul” is and I guarantee much of Father Spitzer’s audience has never heard of it either.

I’m not a philosopher. Soul to me is the thing humans have that involves sin and judgment. Animals don’t sin. They don’t get judged. To me they are simply living, breathing reflections of God’s greatness, stewardship, and love.

OP, I think maybe the best thing to do would be for you to just write to Fr. Spitzer. This seems to be a very important topic to you. I don’t see what’s so important about it, but I’m not you, nor am I Fr. Spitzer. He may have a whole explanation for you on this topic, with references, for all I know. I also don’t think it’s that helpful for you to come here asking for “confirmation” as none of us are Fr. Spitzer and it also appears you are not going to accept any other viewpoints or arguments.
 
Last edited:
Okay, so it is clear you have not heard this either and maybe it is not dogmatic. But did you at least read the article @thistle linked to? It is a CA article. And no, I’m not going to go sort through my hundreds of Catholic books to find the exact reference where it is mentioned that animals have souls.

A non-rational soul is simple a soul that is not capable of rational thought or higher-level intelligence that allows it to think like humans. Animal souls cease to exist (therefore die, are mortal) and stop animating the physical animal at time of death and therefore would not and could not go to Heaven.
 
I’m a Thomist, but not everyone is. There’s no Catholic doctrine that all living things have souls.

And on some level people are speaking different languages. To a Thomist, a soul is the form of a living thing, but only humans have souls which persist after death. To many people a soul only refers to the rational and immortal spirit.
 
Yes, I’m also a Thomist myself and find his theory of philosophy to align much with my own (not that I’m anywhere near as intelligent or enlightened as he).
 
@Wesrock sums it up very well.

The answer to the OP’s question depends upon the theologian and theological school in question, as each tends to have different perspectives and nuances on how they understand the soul.

St Augustine taught that animals have souls, St Anthony the Great taught otherwise. It’s an area with quite a lot of diversity and difference amongst the Church Fathers.
 
Interesting.

I confess that I have little background in Catholic philosophy of any school. But the School Sisters of Notre Dame that taught at my parish Catholic grammar school and my local Catholic high school definitely taught that all living things have souls, albeit not immortal ones.
 
You can always email or contact the show another way. They often bring up emails questioning the father’s comments on previous shows. As others have said in this thread there’s no Catholic consensus on whether animals have sensitive souls and plants have vegetative souls.
 
Solomon, the son of David, was wise.
I will stand with him in this
Ecclesiastes: I said to myself, “As for the sons of men, God tests them so that they may see for themselves that they are but beasts.” For the fates of both men and beasts are the same: As one dies, so dies the other—they all have the same breath. Man has no advantage over the animals, since everything is futile. All go to one place; all come from dust, and all return to dust. Who knows if the spirit of man rises upward and the spirit of the animal descends into the earth?
Click to expand...
Who dares to say yes or no when Solomon refuses to say?

Also, I think of Balaam’s donkey. The LORD opened its mouth (vocal chords?) And there was reasoning in that animal to make use of this added capacity of speech. Just a story?.. Was Balaam really a prophet, or is the LORD just a story?

John Martin
 
Last edited:
Human souls and animal souls are different. Our souls were originally given to Adam as a life spirit and capable to download other spirits, be it evil or holy. So we have the so called free will to decide the destiny of our souls, animals don’t; but we may be able to see them in paradise, if God decides so.
 
Last edited:
A soul is the animating principle of a living being. It used to be said that animals have a material soul and human beings have a spiritual soul. A spiritual soul persists forever, a material soul does not survive the death of the body.
 
I am convinced that animals do indeed have souls, and are capable of greater understanding than most people will admit. Too many things in my life point to this fact for me to even consider denying it.
I asked a protestant priest, “Will there be animals in heaven?”
His response, “I can’t imagine a heaven without them.” I agree totally. (Do animals praise jesus, repent, and get to heaven as people are supposed to? Probably not. Will they be there, I am convinced, yes they will. Being that heaven is eternal, my belief that animals have souls, and they will be there seals it for me.)
I asked a Catholic priest if there will be animals in heaven. His answer was, “Heaven will include everything we need to be happy.” (For me that would most definitely include animals. Heaven eternal, animals there eternal, me there too, all eternal.)
Dominus vobiscum
 
Last edited:
Yes. I think I will do that. It would have been nice had Father expressed that the answer he gave was his opinion and there is no Church consensus and others such as some of the doctors of the church believe animals have souls but we are free to believe they do not.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top