Help, Help, HELP.... Please!

[PJM]

I recently heard a priest say that “everything has a soul; a blade of grass, a dog and a human.” (His examples of everything."

What the heck is he really saying, and where can I find evidence of the RCC position on this issue?

Rairely but utterly confused:blush:

Sure would appreciate some help on this one.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

I recently heard a priest say that “everything has a soul; a blade of grass, a dog and a human.” (His examples of everything."

What the heck is he really saying, and where can I find evidence of the RCC position on this issue?

Rairely but utterly confused:blush:

Sure would appreciate some help on this one.

I’m no expert so don’t take my word as final but I think this is some sort of Catholic-Platonic theology of souls.

The basic idea is that everything has a soul (i.e., a spiritual dimension) but only human souls survive death to be reunited with body at the resurrection. (I’ve heard it explained that God might recreate your dog for you in heaven but it’s not a case of a persistent soul.)

 

[terrysa]

I wonder if he believes in pantheism, which is a heresy condemned by the Catholic church. Pantheism is the belief that God actually is all things, as opposed to the idea that He is in all things. Catholics believe that God is both immanent (working through nature) and transcendant (outside of nature, the personhood of God.)

 

[valueperson]

I suggest asking the priest for clarification.

 

[yppop]

I recently heard a priest say that “everything has a soul; a blade of grass, a dog and a human.” (His examples of everything."

What the heck is he really saying, and where can I find evidence of the RCC position on this issue?

Rairely but utterly confused:blush:

Sure would appreciate some help on this one.

Perhaps he was referring to the philosophy of Teilhard de Chardin. Here is a quote from his book, The Phenomenon of Man:

“It is impossible to deny that, deep within ourselves, an ‘interior’ appears at the heart of beings, as it were seen through a rent. This is enough to ensure that, in one degree or another, this ‘interior’ should obtrude itself as existing everywhere in nature from all time. Since, the stuff of the universe has an inner aspect at one point of itself, there is necessarily a double aspect to its structure, that is to say in every region of space and time – in the same way, for instance, as it is granular – co-extensive with their Without, there is a Within to things”

What Teilhard is saying is that since we are composed of matter and that we have an “interior” (spiritual part), then all matter must have a spiritual component. God infuses all being. The word that describes this philosophy is panentheism not pantheism.

YPPOP

 

[greylorn]

Ask the priest for his definition of “soul.”

[edited]

Then ask yourself for your own definition of soul. Write it down and examine it in the light of day… Is it a functional, meaningful definition of the sort that can exclude things which are not “soul?”

If not, then your notions of soul are at the same level as those of the new-age priest, which are pretty much the same as everyone’s. “Soul” is perhaps the most vague, poorly defined word in the English language.

 

[Mike_Dye]

Ask the priest for his definition of “soul.”

[edited]

Then ask yourself for your own definition of soul. Write it down and examine it in the light of day… Is it a functional, meaningful definition of the sort that can exclude things which are not “soul?”

If not, then your notions of soul are at the same level as those of the new-age priest, which are pretty much the same as everyone’s. “Soul” is perhaps the most vague, poorly defined word in the English language.

I respectfully disagree, I think all living things have a kind of life force that can be called a soul. Th question is weather that soul is eternal or not. Human souls are of course eternal. That canbe proved in Sacred Scripture. So I guess the question is does the rest of creation have eternal souls. Well Scripture doesn’t really address that other than saying that “There will be a New Heaven and A New Earth”.
Anyhow there is nothing that says that animals “past pets” cant be in heaven. I know that there will be those that will disagree but I need you to provide proof that you are right or I will blow you off with all of the other sticklers.

 

[greylorn]

I respectfully disagree, I think all living things have a kind of life force that can be called a soul. Th question is weather that soul is eternal or not. Human souls are of course eternal. That canbe proved in Sacred Scripture. So I guess the question is does the rest of creation have eternal souls. Well Scripture doesn’t really address that other than saying that “There will be a New Heaven and A New Earth”.
Anyhow there is nothing that says that animals “past pets” cant be in heaven. I know that there will be those that will disagree but I need you to provide proof that you are right or I will blow you off with all of the other sticklers.

In order for us to have an intelligent conversation about this, you will need to define exactly what you mean by “soul.”

Perhaps that request defines me, in your mind, as a “Stickler.” I don’t particularly care. I see no point in discussing a concept so vaguely defined that you or any other religionist can say whatever you want to say about it, then declare that the Bible proves that whatever you say is true.

Give me a rigorous definition of the soul in terms of functionality (i.e. what can the soul do, what is its relationship to a human body or anything else, why does it exist) or go argue religious trivia with your dogs and cats.

Thank you.

 

[ready]

I recently heard a priest say that “everything has a soul; a blade of grass, a dog and a human.” (His examples of everything."

What the heck is he really saying, and where can I find evidence of the RCC position on this issue?

Rairely but utterly confused:blush:

Sure would appreciate some help on this one.

Everything does have a soul, but only man has a soul unto life eternal. Man’s soul is unique to man and is much different than the soul found in a blade of grass. The priest was right in saying that everything has a soul. What you should know is that things other than humans have souls but do not have the same type of soul as humans do. The Church teaches this.

 

[cpayne]

I recently heard a priest say that “everything has a soul; a blade of grass, a dog and a human.” (His examples of everything."

What the heck is he really saying, and where can I find evidence of the RCC position on this issue?

Rairely but utterly confused:blush:

Sure would appreciate some help on this one.

Probably what the priest was referring to was Thomas Aquinas’s Aristotelian position on “vegetative, animal, and human” souls. Depending on what specifically is meant by “soul,” this is accepted by the CC. Soul in this context just means that which makes something live and makes it what it is. Thus, grass lives and is vegetation because it has the vegetative “soul” (which basically just means it is alive and grows).

(Edit) I guess I just repeated what the previous post said.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

I recently heard a priest say that “everything has a soul; a blade of grass, a dog and a human.” (His examples of everything."

What the heck is he really saying, and where can I find evidence of the RCC position on this issue?

Rairely but utterly confused:blush:

Sure would appreciate some help on this one.

To be** alive** &** corporeal** is, by definition, to have a soul - the soul is the principle of life. Trees live, therefore, trees have souls. Angels are alive, but are incorporeal - they are created spirits, but don’t have spirits. Getting back to trees: it does not follow that they are self-aware, nor that they are capable of communion with God, nor that they are moral beings, nor that they are persons, nor that they can or will have eternal life. A blade of grass has a soul proper to it, & although it is conceivable that a man can “sin against a blade of grass” (in the words of the priest in Orca: Killer Whale),it does not follow that the blade of grass is also morally responsible. Men have a capacity for eternal blessedness - grass, so far as is known, does not.​

This is not pantheism - it’s orthodox Catholicism. Dante has a long exposition of ensoulment in the Purgatorio, which is well worth comparing to what is troubling you.

As for what the priest was “really saying” - you’ll have to tell us the context of his words, since we were not present, & AFAIK none of us is a mind-reader. So far as his words go, he said nothing wrong.

 

[PJM]

Dear friends,

Thank you so very much.

I was pretty sure that is what he meant, and now I know:thumbsup:

God bless you!

Pat