Why do animals suffer?

[That_one_guy]

thanks bro, I liked this thread too. I’ll be back. PM me if you need anything in the mean time… Going home…

:aok: How about a philly cheese steak made with whole wheat bread, vital wheat gluten based fake steak and soy-cheese?

 

[cathybramble]

Sounds like mormonism to me.

it sounds a little like heaven is about our earthly wants and desires not about God at all.

i was brought up with the teaching that animals don’t go to heaven, but it was explained to me that once we are with God, we will want and need nothing more - God’s perfect love fulfills every desire of our hearts in ways that nothing on earth possibly can.

of course, that could mean that in His perfect love, he lets us see our puppies and kittehs again. i don’t know and to be honest… in a way i kind of look forward to dying so i get to read the chapter that explains everything in the book that i didn’t “get” when i was here. you know kind of like an agatha christie novel or an m. night shyamalan movie

 

[That_one_guy]

it sounds a little like heaven is about our earthly wants and desires not about God at all.

i was brought up with the teaching that animals don’t go to heaven, but it was explained to me that once we are with God, we will want and need nothing more - God’s perfect love fulfills every desire of our hearts in ways that nothing on earth possibly can.

of course, that could mean that in His perfect love, he lets us see our puppies and kittehs again. i don’t know and to be honest… in a way i kind of look forward to dying so i get to read the chapter that explains everything in the book that i didn’t “get” when i was here. you know kind of like an agatha christie novel or an m. night shyamalan movie

'sides,…Matthew 22:30 says,"For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven.

Who’s to say that our bets won’t be either?

 

[CatsAndDogs]

Fr. Benedict Groeschel said “anything that is good and beautiful and gives you joy on this earth will be with you in heaven.”

And I also believe that if one should want to have their pet(s) when in heaven that one shall have their pet(s) in heaven.

But the pets will be in heaven what they were on earth. Non-persons. And non-persons do not have immortal souls such as are acceptable for entry into heaven as individuals.

There always has to be someone who casts a damper on the love of God’s creatures in threads that deal with animals.

And there will always be those whose sentimentality for non-human companionship which they mistake for “personal love” (from animals) will insist that animals are “people (persons) too!”.

This substitution of “animal companionship” for “true companionship” dilutes the true meaning of “the person”, as CCC 2415-2418 warns us of:

Respect for the integrity of creation

2415 The seventh commandment enjoins respect for the integrity of creation. Animals, like plants and inanimate beings, are by nature destined for the common good of past, present, and future humanity. Use of the mineral, vegetable, and animal resources of the universe cannot be divorced from respect for moral imperatives. Man’s dominion over inanimate and other living beings granted by the Creator is not absolute; it is limited by concern for the quality of life of his neighbor, including generations to come; it requires a religious respect for the integrity of creation.

2416 Animals are God’s creatures. He surrounds them with his providential care. By their mere existence they bless him and give him glory. Thus men owe them kindness. We should recall the gentleness with which saints like St. Francis of Assisi or St. Philip Neri treated animals.

2417 God entrusted animals to the stewardship of those whom he created in his own image. Hence it is legitimate to use animals for food and clothing. They may be domesticated to help man in his work and leisure. Medical and scientific experimentation on animals is a morally acceptable practice if it remains within reasonable limits and contributes to caring for or saving human lives.

2418 It is contrary to human dignity to cause animals to suffer or die needlessly. It is likewise unworthy to spend money on them that should as a priority go to the relief of human misery. One can love animals; one should not direct to them the affection due only to persons.

“One can love animals; one should not direct to them the affection due only to persons.”

Animals are not persons. Only persons have souls fit for heaven.

“Animals, like plants and inanimate beings, are by nature destined for the common good of past, present, and future humanity.”

Animals are here for our benefit. If animals had souls (as we persons have souls) then this certainly could not be said.

:shamrock2:

 

[CatsAndDogs]

Catholic teaching is all lving things have a soul including plants. The soul is what animates the living.

The difference is man has an immortal soul. Plants and animals have mortal souls.

We agree then!

And mortal souls do not go to heaven, otherwise, what does “mortal” mean in the phrase “mortal soul”. Are we agreed?

:shamrock2:

 

[That_one_guy]

And I also believe that if one should want to have their pet(s) when in heaven that one shall have their pet(s) in heaven.

But the pets will be in heaven what they were on earth. Non-persons. And non-persons do not have immortal souls such as are acceptable for entry into heaven as individuals.

And there will always be those whose sentimentality for non-human companionship which they mistake for “personal love” (from animals) will insist that animals are “people (persons) too!”.

This substitution of “animal companionship” for “true companionship” dilutes the true meaning of “the person”, as CCC 2415-2418 warns us of:

Respect for the integrity of creation

2415 The seventh commandment enjoins respect for the integrity of creation. Animals, like plants and inanimate beings, are by nature destined for the common good of past, present, and future humanity. Use of the mineral, vegetable, and animal resources of the universe cannot be divorced from respect for moral imperatives. Man’s dominion over inanimate and other living beings granted by the Creator is not absolute; it is limited by concern for the quality of life of his neighbor, including generations to come; it requires a religious respect for the integrity of creation.

2416 Animals are God’s creatures. He surrounds them with his providential care. By their mere existence they bless him and give him glory. Thus men owe them kindness. We should recall the gentleness with which saints like St. Francis of Assisi or St. Philip Neri treated animals.

2417 God entrusted animals to the stewardship of those whom he created in his own image. Hence it is legitimate to use animals for food and clothing. They may be domesticated to help man in his work and leisure. Medical and scientific experimentation on animals is a morally acceptable practice if it remains within reasonable limits and contributes to caring for or saving human lives.

2418 It is contrary to human dignity to cause animals to suffer or die needlessly. It is likewise unworthy to spend money on them that should as a priority go to the relief of human misery. One can love animals; one should not direct to them the affection due only to persons.

“One can love animals; one should not direct to them the affection due only to persons.”

Animals are not persons. Only persons have souls fit for heaven.

“Animals, like plants and inanimate beings, are by nature destined for the common good of past, present, and future humanity.”

Animals are here for our benefit. If animals had souls (as we persons have souls) then this certainly could not be said.

:shamrock2:

:yawn:

ya know…?There is a certain tone in your posts that is such a bummer.It’s almost as if you wish us to think our pets are nothing more than some sort of house hold ornament or status symbol or even, perhaps, toys.
:dts:
no wonder people are having a hard time warming up to you…

 

[That_one_guy]

We agree then!

And mortal souls do not go to heaven, otherwise, what does “mortal” mean in the phrase “mortal soul”. Are we agreed?

:shamrock2:

:
bigyikes:
Wait a minute!
I thought humans have IMmortal souls?

 

[CatsAndDogs]

i always thought heaven was about being with God, and that is how we will find supreme and eternal joy.

If heaven is simply about being with God, then you won’t be needing any pets, will you?

That is why I said that IF I should want to have my pets with me in heaven I shall most likely be allowed to have them with me when I want them with me.

not about receiving gifts that allow us to re-construct realities from our previous and incomplete existence on earth with mechanical dogs.

I certainly have no idea of what being in heaven will be like.

But the only beings that will be in heaven are those who have immortal souls, belonging only to persons (angels and humans), and animals, just as with rocks, trees and bacteria, not being persons, will not be there except as it suits God to allow their inclusion for the benefit of one of His created persons.

If dogs have immortal (heaven/hell bound) souls, then so must bacteria.

Can no one else see the evil in considering bacteria as “persons”?

:shamrock2:

 

[CatsAndDogs]

of course, that could mean that in His perfect love, he lets us see our puppies and kittens again. i don’t know and to be honest… in a way i kind of look forward to dying so i get to read the chapter that explains everything in the book that i didn’t “get” when i was here.

Hear hear! Me too.

While we are supposed to be kind to animals, and take care of ALL of our environment for the maximum benefit and enjoyability of humanity, the answer to “cruelty” is not to “personify” animals.

That’s just paganism impinging on the truth, yet again.

The answer is to do as God says. Don’t be cruel and do be care-full!

:shamrock2:

 

[That_one_guy]

If heaven is simply about being with God, then you won’t be needing any pets, will you?

That is why I said that IF I should want to have my pets with me in heaven I shall most likely be allowed to have them with me when I want them with me.

I certainly have no idea of what being in heaven will be like.

But the only beings that will be in heaven are those who have immortal souls, belonging only to persons (angels and humans), and animals, just as with rocks, trees and bacteria, not being persons, will not be there except as it suits God to allow their inclusion for the benefit of one of His created persons.

If dogs have immortal (heaven/hell bound) souls, then so must bacteria.

Can no one else see the evil in considering bacteria as “persons”?

:shamrock2:

I really hate to admit it.But, some of this actually makes sense!
But,for the sake of argument,…there are beneficial strains of bacteria.(It sounds absurd to me,too)BUT,…what if the good ones go up and the bad ones go down?

 

[twb1621]

:aok: How about a philly cheese steak made with whole wheat bread, vital wheat gluten based fake steak and soy-cheese?

eeeeeehh, I’ll pass for now…Thanks

 

[cathybramble]

If heaven is simply about being with God, then you won’t be needing any pets, will you?

That is why I said that IF I should want to have my pets with me in heaven I shall most likely be allowed to have them with me when I want them with me.

I certainly have no idea of what being in heaven will be like.

But the only beings that will be in heaven are those who have immortal souls, belonging only to persons (angels and humans), and animals, just as with rocks, trees and bacteria, not being persons, will not be there except as it suits God to allow their inclusion for the benefit of one of His created persons.

If dogs have immortal (heaven/hell bound) souls, then so must bacteria.

Can no one else see the evil in considering bacteria as “persons”?

:shamrock2:

the distinction is the immortal soul, we are agreed there, also, yes - i was always told we won’t feel the need for our beloved pets in heaven because God’s love is perfect and provides all.

i do not think OVER attachment to anything on this earth is healthy for the soul… however… i am very adamant about (directly or indirectly) causing other living things the least amount of suffering that i can. doesn’t mean i don’t cause suffering, only that i try to avoid it.

except my fiance, because after we’re married it will be my job to torment him, and i want to make sure i’m good at it. :yup:

 

[twb1621]

This is not a response to anyone but a consideration I am bringing to awareness of all. Yesterday I expressed my opinion that I didn’t necessarily believe animals had souls but that they certainly did have some form of being. I thought if they couldn’t sin it would not be a “soul”. After going over this since then I have come to the conclusion I was very wrong. A blessing as we all should be aware is a bestowing of grace on the receiving soul. As in the sacraments or a blessing from a priest. A mark is left on the soul by the blessing and it is considered according to the Church a portion of our inheritance in heaven. When God created the animals, according to His Word in Genesis, He declared them good, very good… AND HE BLESSED THEM. Considering this and the position of the Catholic Church, God would not bless something he created if it had no soul to receive the benefits. Based on all of this, I am now of the opinion that they must in fact have a soul regardless of what the type is of which I am not privy to that information. But if He bestowed grace upon them, that is a bestowal of a portion of heaven according to the gift transmitted by a blessing. The amount of grace in our case is Dependant upon what you are open to receiving based on your holiness. An animal cannot commit sin however. I am open to any reasonable thoughts on this but I would suggest being very kind to your pets.?

 

[cathybramble]

This is not a response to anyone but a consideration I am bringing to awareness of all. Yesterday I expressed my opinion that I didn’t necessarily believe animals had souls but that they certainly did have some form of being. I thought if they couldn’t sin it would not be a “soul”. After going over this since then I have come to the conclusion I was very wrong. A blessing as we all should be aware is a bestowing of grace on the receiving soul. As in the sacraments or a blessing from a priest. A mark is left on the soul by the blessing and it is considered according to the Church a portion of our inheritance in heaven. When God created the animals, according to His Word in Genesis, He declared them good, very good… AND HE BLESSED THEM. Considering this and the position of the Catholic Church, God would not bless something he created if it had no soul to receive the benefits. Based on all of this, I am now of the opinion that they must in fact have a soul regardless of what the type is of which I am not privy to that information. But if He bestowed grace upon them, that is a bestowal of a portion of heaven according to the gift transmitted by a blessing. The amount of grace in our case is Dependant upon what you are open to receiving based on your holiness. An animal cannot commit sin however. I am open to any reasonable thoughts on this but I would suggest being very kind to your pets.?

i never thought of it like that but by golly… that’s beautiful :angel1:

 

[twb1621]

i never thought of it like that but by golly… that’s beautiful :angel1:

Thank God… He’s awesome…

 

[That_one_guy]

the distinction is the immortal soul, we are agreed there, also, yes - i was always told we won’t feel the need for our beloved pets in heaven because God’s love is perfect and provides all.

i do not think OVER attachment to anything on this earth is healthy for the soul… however… i am very adamant about (directly or indirectly) causing other living things the least amount of suffering that i can. doesn’t mean i don’t cause suffering, only that i try to avoid it.

except my fiance, because after we’re married it will be my job to torment him, and i want to make sure i’m good at it. :yup:

:frighten:

Oh,great.That’s just great!


:yup: That’s me everyone!

 

[CatsAndDogs]

…however… i am very adamant about (directly or indirectly) causing other living things the least amount of suffering that i can. doesn’t mean i don’t cause suffering, only that i try to avoid it.

Me too! Me too!

Less suffering > More suffering
(on the “gooder” scale)

actual-nothing > me > nasty-evil-torturer-type-person
(on the “not causing suffering” scale)

except my fiance, because after we’re married it will be my job to torment him, and i want to make sure I’m good at it. :yup:

Hmmm,… then practice practice PRACTICE!

:juggle:

:shamrock2:

 

[cathybramble]

:frighten:

Oh,great.That’s just great!


:yup: That’s me everyone!

giggle j/k.

love you!!!

 

[CatsAndDogs]

God would not bless something he created if it had no soul to receive the benefits.

It’s more like the “blessing of the Tsar” in Fiddler on the Roof:

“May God bless and keep the Tsar… far away from us!”

…except in reverse:

“May God bless and keep the pets… near and dear to us!”

Just as I can have my car blessed, it is not for the benefit of the car, but for the benefit of the persons associated WITH the car.

Same with pets.

:shamrock2:

 

[cathybramble]

Me too! Me too!

Less suffering > More suffering
(on the “gooder” scale)

actual-nothing > me > nasty-evil-torturer-type-person
(on the “not causing suffering” scale)

i think most of us do the best we can

Hmmm,… then practice practice PRACTICE!

:juggle:

:shamrock2:

muhahahahaha