S
Salvatore123
Guest
ti8er,
Take it up with this guy . . . you don’t believe anything I have said. Dr. Richard Geraghty is a professor of philosophy and teaches at St. Joseph’s House of Studies, the college-level facility of the Franciscan Missionaries of the Eternal Word, at EWTN. Prior to going to EWTN, Dr. Geraghty taught philosophy for 18 years at the University of Dayton, Providence College, and St. John’s College Seminary. Dr. Geraghty earned his BA in philosophy at the University of Dayton, an MA in English from Ohio State University, and his MA and PhD in philosophy from the University of Toronto, where his thesis was entitled “The Object of Moral Philosophy According to St. Thomas Aquinas.”
"the Catechism of the Catholic Church does not directly address this question. But it does hold principles which lead us in the direction of an answer.
One principle is that all living things have a soul. Here soul is defined as what makes an organic body live. Now when any living thing dies, its soul is separated from its body. In the case of plants and animals the soul goes out of existence. But in the case of man, the soul remains in existence because it is a spiritual or immaterial thing. Consequently, it differs from the souls of animals in two important respects. First, it is the seat of intelligence or reason. For this reason a man is held responsible for his actions in a way that animals are not.*** Secondly, the [human] soul is immortal.*** A thing which has no physical parts cannot fall apart or be poisoned or be crushed or be put out of existence. For this reason the souls of the saved will always be aware of themselves as enjoying the vision of God for all eternity. This enjoyment will be the result of having chosen to act on earth in such a way that one did the will of God rather than one’s own will. And the souls of the damned will be aware of themselves as never attaining this vision of God because they have shown by their lives on earth that they did not wish this vision but instead preferred their own will.
In the light of this essential difference between human beings and animals, it would seem that we would not see the souls of our pets in heaven for the simple reason that they do not have immortal souls and are not responsible for their actions. They do not have the intelligence which allows them to choose either God’s will or their own will. There is, then, an incomparable distance, say, between the soul of the sorriest human being who ever lived and the most noble brute animal that ever walked the earth.
Now a child might be heartbroken at the thought that he will never see his pet again. He cannot yet understand this explanation about the difference between the human and the animal soul. I suppose that one could tell the child that when he hopefully gets to heaven, he could ask God to see his old pets if he still wished to. There would be no harm in that. For we know that when a person finally sees God, he will not be concerned with seeing old pets or favorite places but rather will be captured in the complete fulfillment of the joy of which old pets and favorite places are but little signs. We adults know that, even if the child does not.
For more information on how the Church sees animals in the lives of human beings, check the Catechism of the Catholic Church 2415-2418. You will learn, for example, that the Church, while it condemns cruelty to animals as an offense against the dignity of man, allow experiments on animals if done in a reasonable way. Again, you will learn of the tremendous difference that the Church sees between the lowliest of human beings and the most noble of the animals. It will allow animals to be used for food or clothing, but will defend the right of an innocent human being to live against Kings and Nations. The Church will demand that animals be respected as part of creation while at the same time insisting that the dignity owed a human being should never be given to an animal."
EVERYTHING I have written about this subject on this thread is supported by the likes of the doctor I quoted above, St. Thomas Aquinas, Frank Sheed, and others.
And this is a direct quote from you:
“however, do u realize that the theological basis for your argument is also very human centered?”
LOL - well of course it is “human centered”. What was the point of God creating man? So that God could share his love with man and we would love God. Without man, the “point” of creation would be meaningless.
You and others seem to forget that God did not NEED to create anything in order to be satisfied (to borrow a human feeling). God created man SOLELY out of love so that he could share his love with man.
Take it up with this guy . . . you don’t believe anything I have said. Dr. Richard Geraghty is a professor of philosophy and teaches at St. Joseph’s House of Studies, the college-level facility of the Franciscan Missionaries of the Eternal Word, at EWTN. Prior to going to EWTN, Dr. Geraghty taught philosophy for 18 years at the University of Dayton, Providence College, and St. John’s College Seminary. Dr. Geraghty earned his BA in philosophy at the University of Dayton, an MA in English from Ohio State University, and his MA and PhD in philosophy from the University of Toronto, where his thesis was entitled “The Object of Moral Philosophy According to St. Thomas Aquinas.”
"the Catechism of the Catholic Church does not directly address this question. But it does hold principles which lead us in the direction of an answer.
One principle is that all living things have a soul. Here soul is defined as what makes an organic body live. Now when any living thing dies, its soul is separated from its body. In the case of plants and animals the soul goes out of existence. But in the case of man, the soul remains in existence because it is a spiritual or immaterial thing. Consequently, it differs from the souls of animals in two important respects. First, it is the seat of intelligence or reason. For this reason a man is held responsible for his actions in a way that animals are not.*** Secondly, the [human] soul is immortal.*** A thing which has no physical parts cannot fall apart or be poisoned or be crushed or be put out of existence. For this reason the souls of the saved will always be aware of themselves as enjoying the vision of God for all eternity. This enjoyment will be the result of having chosen to act on earth in such a way that one did the will of God rather than one’s own will. And the souls of the damned will be aware of themselves as never attaining this vision of God because they have shown by their lives on earth that they did not wish this vision but instead preferred their own will.
In the light of this essential difference between human beings and animals, it would seem that we would not see the souls of our pets in heaven for the simple reason that they do not have immortal souls and are not responsible for their actions. They do not have the intelligence which allows them to choose either God’s will or their own will. There is, then, an incomparable distance, say, between the soul of the sorriest human being who ever lived and the most noble brute animal that ever walked the earth.
Now a child might be heartbroken at the thought that he will never see his pet again. He cannot yet understand this explanation about the difference between the human and the animal soul. I suppose that one could tell the child that when he hopefully gets to heaven, he could ask God to see his old pets if he still wished to. There would be no harm in that. For we know that when a person finally sees God, he will not be concerned with seeing old pets or favorite places but rather will be captured in the complete fulfillment of the joy of which old pets and favorite places are but little signs. We adults know that, even if the child does not.
For more information on how the Church sees animals in the lives of human beings, check the Catechism of the Catholic Church 2415-2418. You will learn, for example, that the Church, while it condemns cruelty to animals as an offense against the dignity of man, allow experiments on animals if done in a reasonable way. Again, you will learn of the tremendous difference that the Church sees between the lowliest of human beings and the most noble of the animals. It will allow animals to be used for food or clothing, but will defend the right of an innocent human being to live against Kings and Nations. The Church will demand that animals be respected as part of creation while at the same time insisting that the dignity owed a human being should never be given to an animal."
EVERYTHING I have written about this subject on this thread is supported by the likes of the doctor I quoted above, St. Thomas Aquinas, Frank Sheed, and others.
And this is a direct quote from you:
“however, do u realize that the theological basis for your argument is also very human centered?”
LOL - well of course it is “human centered”. What was the point of God creating man? So that God could share his love with man and we would love God. Without man, the “point” of creation would be meaningless.
You and others seem to forget that God did not NEED to create anything in order to be satisfied (to borrow a human feeling). God created man SOLELY out of love so that he could share his love with man.