It has to do with the arrogant way the topic is approached by some of the opposition to hunting.
- Status
Nope.
The word is ‘needless’
Were the word 'necessary, the CCC would say so.
Some here are mistaking needless for unnecessary.
S
severus68
Guest
If the act is unnecessary, the suffering caused to the animal by such act is needless. That is what is meant - no mistake on the use of “NECESSARY”.
Words mean things. There are subtle differences in tone and definition of the two words that make one proper in some places and the other appropriate in others.
While there are occasions in which they can be interchangeable, this is not one.
Were the word ‘unnecessary’ proper to be used there, it would have been.
B
bigfootbob
Guest
When they wrote the catechism, they didn’t just pick a word that was close.
Well, you get what you pay for.
Your free online dictionary appears to have captured very little of the nuance the word actually enjoys.
Perhaps you should look into a better dictionary.
Here are a few suggestions…
dictionary.reference.com/browse/unnecessary
merriam-webster.com/dictionary/unnecessary
dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=86798&dict=CALD
And you can then compare them
dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=53250&dict=CALD
dictionary.reference.com/browse/needless
merriam-webster.com/dictionary/needless
M
Marfran
Guest
So your point??? All pretty much says the same thing, whatever dictionary you are looking at. Needless=unnecessary=needless
C
CWBetts
Guest
The Catechism also says not to show animals the same affection as persons…
4
4elise
Guest
I just went looking for that photo and found it.
I am at a loss to understand how this image is reflective of the teaching of the Church regarding the needless suffering of animals. I’m sure of the possibility that Fr. Corapi may be smarter and holier than me but I am just at a loss to understand this in light of the CCC.
B
bigfootbob
Guest
What don’t you understand? Fr. Corapi can quote the CCC off the top of his head. Nothing he’s doing contradicts the CCC or else he probably wouldn’t be doing it.I just went looking for that photo and found it.
I am at a loss to understand how this image is reflective of the teaching of the Church regarding the needless suffering of animals. I’m sure of the possibility that Fr. Corapi may be smarter and holier than me but I am just at a loss to understand this in light of the CCC.
4
4elise
Guest
Just FYI - I’ve sent the following message to Fr. Corapi for his response: (I’ll post if I get a reply)
Fr. Corapi is an individual who has had a long and amazing path of faith. I do believe that we are all called to strive to embrace this faith and try to grow in our understanding of our Loving God and to try to reflect this love to all of creation.
Blessings,
B
bigfootbob
Guest
Great, I would love to hear his take on that verse.
D
Deacon_Ed_B
Guest
What I mean is that bear are not hunted for trophy only. The meat is also eaten by many hunters.
B
bigfootbob
Guest
Yes, but my point was that bear hunting would be considered ‘spot hunting’ by some people on this thread.
Mary_Gail_36
New member
The current Catechism of the Catholic Church is one of Pope John Paul II major endeavor, some consider it his greatest work. It was completed in 1997. The information within is* both *timeless and current. By current I mean there are issues within that did ot exhist at the time of Christ such as IVF etc.
In regards to the section on animals, it falls under the Seventh Commandment,* Thou Shall not Steal. * The placement of animal rights in this section is significant. Please note that it does not fall under the Fifth Commandment, Thou Shall not kill The fifth commandment also covers issues of wrath.
Also note that most Vatican documents are originally in the Language of the Church, Latin. It is then translated into other vernacular languges. This translation if not an easy task, especially for English, because English is not a Romance language. (a language with mostly Latin Roots). When one translates, one must take into account vocabulary, grammar and syntax. It seems that you are not sure of the meaning of the word"needless"
So let us look at the Latin text:
2418 Humanae dignitati est contrarium animalibus inutiliter dolores inferre et eorum dilapidare vitas. Indignum pariter est pro illis pecuniae expendere summas quae potius hominum miserias deberent sublevare. Animalia amare licet; affectio solis personis debita ad ea averti non deberet.
In the original Latin the word* inutiliter *is used. If we look at the meaning of the word in a Latin dictionary, we find:
The word need in latin is:
Hope that helps.
In regards to the section on animals, it falls under the Seventh Commandment,* Thou Shall not Steal. * The placement of animal rights in this section is significant. Please note that it does not fall under the Fifth Commandment, Thou Shall not kill The fifth commandment also covers issues of wrath.
Also note that most Vatican documents are originally in the Language of the Church, Latin. It is then translated into other vernacular languges. This translation if not an easy task, especially for English, because English is not a Romance language. (a language with mostly Latin Roots). When one translates, one must take into account vocabulary, grammar and syntax. It seems that you are not sure of the meaning of the word"needless"
So let us look at the Latin text:
2418 Humanae dignitati est contrarium animalibus inutiliter dolores inferre et eorum dilapidare vitas. Indignum pariter est pro illis pecuniae expendere summas quae potius hominum miserias deberent sublevare. Animalia amare licet; affectio solis personis debita ad ea averti non deberet.
In the original Latin the word* inutiliter *is used. If we look at the meaning of the word in a Latin dictionary, we find:
So while needless is used in the English translation, the meaning of needless is closer to the above.
The word need in latin is:
Note that this term does not appear in the original Latin.
Hope that helps.
4
4elise
Guest
Wow… great research!
I don’t speak Latin and do not know the subtext of specific words so must use it the way the Church has translated it into English - and read ‘need’ to mean unnecessary.
Do you find your understanding of the Latin text then allows for a requirement to use animals if it is unnecessary?
Mary_Gail_36
New member
In the original the word is “inutile” not “necessitas” which means necessary.
You aren’t required to eat meat at all.
But I understand that killing animals is allowed provided it’s “useful” So for food and clothing is allowed, for protection of humans…ie killing of disease carrying animals.
Dog fighting, killing endangered species, hitting your dog, puppy mills, those activities are wrong because they do not provide any good to us and make us base.
By the way I speak Italian, as well and the word in the Italian version is Inutile–useless.
Furthermore, while I am not a vegetarian at all, I think it’s a perfectly ethical lifestyle. If you choose to do so, maybe offering it up as a form of suffering would benefit mankind in a Spiritual sense.
4
4elise
Guest
Good point - and yes there are certainly times over the last five years when it was really an offering up because it was difficult (in fact just the other day I was faced with a similar circumstance)
But to continue your discussion of the wording used if I may:
You note that the word used is actually closer to a meaning of:
useless, unprofitable, inexpedient, disadvantageous; harmful, helpless;
So substituting the word needlessly in that text one comes up with:
It is contrary to human dignity to cause animals to suffer or die ( useless, unprofitable, inexpedient, disadvantageous; harmful, helpless ) - so these words certainly support the position of the OP that hunting for sport would be against the teaching of the Church, would you agree?
As for expanding it further to an understanding that supports a vegan diet I do see where your understanding of the word allows for more leeway than needlessly. I can take the words disadvantageous and harmful to be applied to what I’ve learned about factory farming, (impact on environment and communities) and perhaps even see a greater application of this definition in this choice.
Thanks for your help in understanding better the original text… we had a lengthy discussion on 2267 on another thread - I wonder if there is another issue of understanding of the translation *the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity "are very rare, if not practically nonexistent."68 *- but that is another thread!
Mary_Gail_36
New member
See, I am not sure what hunting for sport means after all these posts. :whacky:
If you mean shooting at animals for target practice, and leaving them. That would I guess be wrong.
But I could shoot an animal for protection.
Perhaps that was the scenario with Father Corapi and the bear could have been for protection. Some years favorable weather might cause more bears to meet and mate, and better food causing more little bear cubs. The following year the weather might change, and there isn’t a great deal of food for them to eat. From the photo it looke like a brown/grizzly bear. They are very agressive, especially when looking for food. They kill livestock too. Maybe that was the situation. Too many bears in an area near people.
And the meat could probably be donated to a zoo to feed the big cats, etc. Or be used for fertilizer. The Deacon mentioned that bear meat is fine for humans.
- Status