M
Melanilove
Guest
Hi! I wasn’t too sure where to post this, but I would love some information on this subject… thank you. 
- Status
H
houston1
Guest
My thinking is that it is not a sin because animals were not created in God’s image and do not have a soul. We kill and eat animals all the time which would obviously be a sin if we did the same sort of thing to humans. I just spayed my dog and this same thought came across my mind, too. Since my dog is an animal, I think spaying her should be okay. I would be interested in hearing if the Church has an official teaching on this.
E
ESMDHokie77
Guest
We’re to be stewards of Creation, part of that is managing animal populations.
N
newyorkcatholic
Guest
The Church does not have an official teaching to my knowledge, but it’s clearly ok. The reasons sterilization are immoral in human beings do not at all apply to animals.
L
Luna_Lovecraft
Guest
What Church teaching would lead you to think that spaying and neutering are sinful?Hi! I wasn’t too sure where to post this, but I would love some information on this subject… thank you.
Luna
E
ExGratia
Guest
Animals do have souls. They have mortal souls as opposed to humans and angels with immortal souls.
We have dominion over animals, so spaying/neutering (or eating them) is not sinful. It’s actually responsible as others have said.
1
1ke
Guest
What commandment would you be breaking? Think thorugh this, please.
M
m134e5
Guest
Please, unless they are show animals or you use and breed them for hunting or other work, spay/neuter your pets. There are way too many feral dogs and cats in the world.
N
NeedsMercy
Guest
No, it’s not wrong to spay/neuter our pets; it is, in my opinion, absolutely necessary. That being said, my husband and I took in some feral cats a few months ago and one was about 30 days pregnant (total gestation time is 60 days). In my head, I know it was OK and not immoral to spay her, BUT…I still felt really horrible about killing unborn kittens. Isn’t that weird? Maybe it’s because I’m one of those crazy cat ladies…:whacky:
E
Et_Cetera
Guest
No, it’s part of being a responsible pet owner.
F
Fiasco
Guest
Yep. And the animals have a better, longer life when they`re neutered.
An un-desexed tomcat is a horror: apart from having half of its fur ripped off, it stinks…and has other undesirable traits.
C
CB_Catholic
Guest
There is nothing more unpleasant than having to go out on your porch at 4am and douse the local tomcats, who are busily spraying your house and caterwauling at the top of their lungs because you have an unspayed female in the house.
Do yourself and the neighbors a favor and have the animals spayed and neutered.
P
PaddyMac
Guest
I’m going to be the dissenter from popular opinion by saying that yes, I believe sterilizing an animal is a sin. Perhaps it is not as serious a sin as the sterilization of human beings, but it is wrong nonetheless. The Catechism says little about animals, so read paragraphs 2415-2418 at vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a7.htm Though the Catechism not not mention sterilization spcifically, it does say “It is contrary to human dignity to cause animals to suffer or die needlessly.” And though I admit this is merely my opinion, mutilation, which is often used by the Church to describe sterilization, would fall under the prohibition of causing animals to “suffer…needlessly.” We also have Leviticus 22:24 which states (from the Douay-Rheims) “You shall not offer to the Lord any beast that hath the testicles bruised, or crushed, or cut and taken away: neither shall you do any such thing in your land.” The second clause was interpreted by the rabbis as a prohibition of sterlizing male animals specifically, and the Jews also teach that the steriliziation of females is prohibited. See jewfaq.org/animals.htm From Keil and Delitzsch Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament: ““And in your land ye shall not make,” sc., וגו מעוּך, i.e., castrated animals, that is to say, “not castrate animals.” This explanation, which is the one given by Josephus (Ant. iv. 8, 40) and all the Rabbins, is required by the expression “in your land,” which does not at all suit the interpretation adopted by Clericus and Knobel, who understand by עשׂה the preparation of sacrifices, for sacrifices were never prepared outside the land. The castration of animals is a mutilation of God’s creation, and the prohibition of it was based upon the same principle as that of mixing heterogeneous things in Leviticus 19:19.”
M
maltmom
Guest
The shelter where I live took in 702 dogs and cats in July. Of those 546 were euthanized. I see this as a heartbreaking statistic. I respect your opinion. I see the other side of it. I wish everyone would have their pets spayed/neutered.
My ex-husband wouldn’t have his 2 fixed. By the time I got rid of him the lab was too old to have spayed. I had to have her put to sleep about a month ago. She probably had uterine cancer. She was bleeding out from her uterus. She may have lived a couple of more happy years had he not been so stubborn.
P
PaddyMac
Guest
If I were to make but one reply, it would be this: Each and every one of the arguments in favor of sterilizing animals are, quite eerily, the exact same arguments used in favor of contraception, sterilization, and abortion for people - reducing disease, reducing the “unwanted population,” etc. Could it be that “normalizing” it for animals was simply a step toward “normalizing” it for people?
E
ESMDHokie77
Guest
Sheep Farmers have been neutering sheep for a long time. And other animals. I don’t think that led to the “recent” acceptance of human contraception/sterilization.
T
tabycat
Guest
I want to understand your point clearly. We do not have animal sacferfice any more but we are to live according to Old Testament rules covering that sacerfice? How about dogs, cats, and other pets? Are you willing to take csre of their unwanted offspring?
T
tabycat
Guest
So,somebody who gets their pet ‘fixxed’, is for the same thing for humans? are you saying, like somep roabort people that a human is nonthing more then an aminai?
P
PaddyMac
Guest
Tabycat: You are correct in saying that we no longer have animal sacrifice. However, the moral law is still in effect. There are two clauses in Leviticus 22:24. The first is “You shall not offer to the Lord any beast that hath the testicles bruised, or crushed, or cut and taken away.” This is a stipulation regarding animal sacrifice. The second clause is “neither shall you do any such thing in your land.” The rabbis interpreted this as a general prohibition of the mutilation of the genitals of animals and human beings. To paraphrase a bit, God seems to be saying “The pagans mutilate the genitals of human beings and of animals. You shall not be like the pagans. Therefore you shall not do any such thing.” It was not to human beings only that God said “Be fruitful and multiply” but to all the animals as well. Psalm 24:1 states “The earth is the Lord’s and the fulness thereof: the world, and all they that dwell therein.” Humanity was given dominion over creation, including the animals, and they were created for our benefit. However, we do not own creation. It belongs to God. We are stewards - not owners. Therefore God has entrusted us to care for creation - not to mutilate it.
I am certainly not asserting that human beings are nothing more than animals. Luke 12:6-7 “Are not five sparrows sold for two farthings, and not one of them is forgotten before God? Yea, the very hairs of your head are all numbered. Fear not therefore: you are of more value than many sparrows.” Indeed, human beings are more important animals, but “not one of them (the animals) is forgotten before God.” Though of lesser value than human beings, animals do have value; they are not worthless. Consider the words of Luke 11:42 “But woe to you, Pharisees, because you tithe mint and rue and every herb; and pass over judgment, and the charity of God. Now these things you ought to have done, and not to leave the other undone.” God is perfect. He does what he ought to do (care for human beings) without leaving the other undone (caring for the animals). Therefore also should we. It is a fallacy in thinking that one must choose one and only one good and neglect the other.
You also ask “Are you willing to take care of their unwanted offspring?” Again, this is exactly what I was saying earlier - every argument I hear in favor of sterilizing (and euthanizing) animals is exactly the same as the arguments I hear in favor of contraception, sterilization, abortion, and euthanasia for human beings. When I speak about the evil of contraception in regard to human beings, one reply I often hear from those who promote contraception for people is “Are you willing to take care of the unwanted offspring?” Do you not find the parallel striking? Human beings are far superior to animals, and therefore the sin is greater with human beings who are created in the image and likeness of God than it is with animals which are not. However (and this is my point by drawing a parallel between sterilizing animals and humans), when we accept a lesser evil such as sterilizing animals and accept it as normal, it desensitizes us and we become more willing to accept it for humans as well. It poisons our minds with certain concepts which become attributable to people. In other words, if we don’t treat animals with the dgnity proper to them, how will we treat human beings with the dignity proper to them? Luke 16:10 “He who is faithful in a very little thing is faithful also in much; and he who is unrighteous in a very little thing is unrighteous also in much.” Proverbs 12:10 “A righteous man has regard for the life of his animal, But even the compassion of the wicked is cruel.”
I am certainly not asserting that human beings are nothing more than animals. Luke 12:6-7 “Are not five sparrows sold for two farthings, and not one of them is forgotten before God? Yea, the very hairs of your head are all numbered. Fear not therefore: you are of more value than many sparrows.” Indeed, human beings are more important animals, but “not one of them (the animals) is forgotten before God.” Though of lesser value than human beings, animals do have value; they are not worthless. Consider the words of Luke 11:42 “But woe to you, Pharisees, because you tithe mint and rue and every herb; and pass over judgment, and the charity of God. Now these things you ought to have done, and not to leave the other undone.” God is perfect. He does what he ought to do (care for human beings) without leaving the other undone (caring for the animals). Therefore also should we. It is a fallacy in thinking that one must choose one and only one good and neglect the other.
You also ask “Are you willing to take care of their unwanted offspring?” Again, this is exactly what I was saying earlier - every argument I hear in favor of sterilizing (and euthanizing) animals is exactly the same as the arguments I hear in favor of contraception, sterilization, abortion, and euthanasia for human beings. When I speak about the evil of contraception in regard to human beings, one reply I often hear from those who promote contraception for people is “Are you willing to take care of the unwanted offspring?” Do you not find the parallel striking? Human beings are far superior to animals, and therefore the sin is greater with human beings who are created in the image and likeness of God than it is with animals which are not. However (and this is my point by drawing a parallel between sterilizing animals and humans), when we accept a lesser evil such as sterilizing animals and accept it as normal, it desensitizes us and we become more willing to accept it for humans as well. It poisons our minds with certain concepts which become attributable to people. In other words, if we don’t treat animals with the dgnity proper to them, how will we treat human beings with the dignity proper to them? Luke 16:10 “He who is faithful in a very little thing is faithful also in much; and he who is unrighteous in a very little thing is unrighteous also in much.” Proverbs 12:10 “A righteous man has regard for the life of his animal, But even the compassion of the wicked is cruel.”
L
Le_Cracquere
Guest
As humans, we have a truckload of both privileges and responsibilities that are ours alone, and of which animals know nothing. Our souls have a different and a higher destiny, but the trade-off is that we labor under all number of special restrictions and burdens. Debates about birth control, euthanasia, abortion, &c., aren’t applicable to animals, just as questions of their eternal destiny as the Bride of Christ aren’t.
Note: I take a middle ground in the whole “do animals have souls debate”: I don’t believe they have souls in the precise sense that humans do … animals aren’t saved or damned in the sense that we may be. Nonetheless, they certainly have personae–the higher animals are unquestionably individuals, and have what we’d call “personalities.” And there’s no reason to doubt that if God wills it, they might well persist as created individuals. After all, they’re part of the Edenic order that God has always intended to redeem—not supersede.
Note: I take a middle ground in the whole “do animals have souls debate”: I don’t believe they have souls in the precise sense that humans do … animals aren’t saved or damned in the sense that we may be. Nonetheless, they certainly have personae–the higher animals are unquestionably individuals, and have what we’d call “personalities.” And there’s no reason to doubt that if God wills it, they might well persist as created individuals. After all, they’re part of the Edenic order that God has always intended to redeem—not supersede.
- Status