Why do animals suffer?

[catholic1seeks]

I’m very sorry about your dog. I still would say that most of the suffering of domestic animals is our (humans) fault, but certainly not all of it, and certainly not in your dog’s case.

The quote comes from C.S. Lewis’ The Problem of Pain, which has a whole chapter on animal pain. I went back and reread it. It seems to speak directly to your thoughts:

“The problem of animal suffering is appalling . . . because the Christian explanation of human pain cannot be extended to animals. So far as we know [see quote]. At the same time, we must never allow the problem of animal suffering to become the centre of the problem of pain; not because it is unimportant–whatever furnishes plausible grounds for questioning the goodness of God is very important indeed–but because it is outside the range of our knowledge. God has given us data which enable us, in some degree, to understand our own suffering: He has given us no such data about beasts . . . From the doctrine that God is good we may confidently deduce that the appearance of Divine cruelty in the animal kingdom is an illusion–and the fact that the only suffering we know firsthand (our own) turns out not to be a cruelty will make it easier to believe.”

Lewis then tries to answer three questions:
__

1. What do animals suffer?
2. How did disease and pain enter the animal world?
3. How can an animal suffering be reconciled with the justice of God?
   __
4. In short, he says we don’t know, since we are not animals. He cautions: “It may be we who have invented the ‘sufferers’ by reading into the beasts a self for which there is no real evidence.”
5. Used to be we said the Fall, but “This is now impossible, for we have good reason to believe that animals existed long before men.” Lewis gets creative here–he suggests that Satan and fallen angels had already corrupted the animal kingdom (hence the serpent’s presence in the Garden) when man with his rational, immortal soul came on the scene. Man fell prey to Satan as well. (He’s quite clear that this is very speculative.)
6. Lewis basically says lower animals (he uses a newt as an example) do not suffer. Higher animals, especially domesticated ones, “require deeper consideration”. He puts forth another theory–that domestic animals are only fully themselves because of their connection with people. “Man is to be understood only in his relation to God. The beasts are to be understood only in their relationship to man, and through man, to God. . . it seems to me possible that certain animals may have an immortality, not in themselves, but in the immortality of their masters.” This part seem very fuzzy to me, and I’m not sure what Lewis is trying to say.

Is this at all helpful?

Thank you for this post; it is very helpful. Thanks for giving the quote from C.S. Lewis and summarizing everything. I can tell you put a lot of effort into the post.

C.S. Lewis’ thoughts do help. But as even he admitted, we haven’t been provided information on all of this. I like his ideas about animals (especially pets) being able to get to go to Heaven because of their union with humans. But I understand much of this is speculative.

The idea that the fallen angels messed with creation seems very speculative. It would seem that they would have had the power to mess with the laws of nature… I don’t think that’s a very good answer.

Do you know where I can get more info on any of this?

Thanks

 

[Jesse_Duran]

I don’t for one second believe God created any creatures intending them to someday die. I believe that He can “make all things new” and when He comes to lift the curse off this world, he will lift the curse off the animals as well. And I believe there is a place in Heaven for them. No, - no beatific vision of course, but like there are levels of Heaven for people, there can be a place for the creatures too, and we will be able to see and know they are there. How awful to suggest God creates the animals and then causes them to die. God didn’t create disease and suffering - and even if He’d wanted animals to have limited lifespans, He wouldn’t cause them pain as a way to end their lives. He’s not a cruel God and I’m tired of the arrogant people who insist that animals die “just because”.

God himself has made the human soul immortal “but he simply didn’t make animals this way” for we are the ones that worship him. I believe god puts us on earth for one big testing time (he is watching what we do every day), animals cant worship god, but they have been our friends for thousands of years. so we can hope that God will recreate our beloved animal friends’ souls when he remakes the earth again. Basically, i believe that “god has created animals to make our life on earth a little less sorrowful”.

 

[Cathoholic]

As catholic1seeks said, “we haven’t been provided information on all of this”. This is kind of the definition of a mystery.

But we have been provided some of the information on this and it is a good subject to ponder.

The argument that animals have suffered before the fall occurred – we don’t know that.

And Angels are part of God’s creation albeit immaterial creation and there was rebellion among them too. Was THAT before animals were even created? Almost certainly.

But why the problem of suffering? We don’t understand. It is above reason.

As CCC 164 teaches: . . . . Our experiences of evil and suffering, injustice and death, seem to contradict the Good News; they can shake our faith and become a temptation against it.

But Adam and Eve’s fall is integrally related to this some how in some way.

As CCC 400 states: The harmony in which they (Adam and Eve) had found themselves, thanks to original justice, is now (due to Original Sin) destroyed: the control of the soul’s spiritual faculties over the body is shattered; the union of man and woman becomes subject to tensions, their relations henceforth marked by lust and domination. Harmony with creation is broken: visible creation has become alien and hostile to man. Because of man, creation is now subject “to its bondage to decay”. Finally, the consequence explicitly foretold for this disobedience will come true: man will “return to the ground”, for out of it he was taken. Death makes its entrance into human history. (underline of “creation” mine)

But the angelic rebellion figures into this equation very mysteriously too.

As CCC 413 states: “God did not make death, and he does not delight in the death of the living. . . It was through the devil’s envy that death entered the world” (Wis 1:13; 2:24).

Take creation into consideration to be sure, but realize there are other immaterial aspects which we can not fully enter into.

Mankind is the pinnacle of God’s material creation. Genesis talks about multiple things God made being “good”. When God made man it was “very good”.

When God’s creation rebels against God, all of creation in a certain sense is involved. That’s why it was such a big deal for Adam and Eve when they committed the original sin (with the “assistance” of a fallen angel too). That’s why it’s such a big deal when some of the angels rebelled. But it’s a big deal for us too. A sort of “spiritual nuclear fallout.” Yes we sin but the fallout from Adam and Eve effects us too.

Recall the Passover. Perhaps that’s one of the teachings God wanted us to meditate upon – that sin has consequences for the extended body of creation. Even the firstborn ANIMALS were subject to the curse that Pharaoh brought upon them as well as Egyptians who may have thought “Please just let them go!” Yet the fallout occurred even to the Israelites themselves! That’s one of the reasons WHY they had to sprinkle the blood on the doorposts and the lintel with a hyssop branch and partake of the Paschal Lamb of God – to bypass that inevitable fallout. If the Israelites didn’t – they would wake up to their first-born dead.

Not only for us and for animals but also for ALL of the cosmos, all of material creation goes from a state of order, tending toward a state of disorder. You can observe this very universally in creation. Metal even rusts. The proverbial shockwaves from sin has huge consequences.

A sin against a “little god” would have “little” consequences. A sin against a “big god” would have “big” consequences. But a sin against an “infinite God” will have . . . . ?

The majesty of God should be meditated upon to obtain a better (not complete) understanding of this. I think that is the key to all of this – a key we could never fully comprehend. And if you could understand it – you’d know your “god” isn’t infinite.

Jesus through His work and grace we receive is putting that disorder back into order that will be beyond my mere description. God so loved THE WORLD that He gave his only begotton Son. A new Heavens and a New Earth some day. A glorified new body some day as well. But most sublime and indescribable – the Beatific Vision of God. None of this is deserved by us either.

And some people have and will reject it just like the fallen angels did.

All of this is a mystery as well – but it is worth pondering.

 

[Good_Fella]

Thanks for this response. But it doesn’t get to the core of my problem. Why do they suffer? They didn’t cause their suffering by sin like we did at the Fall. And our Fall didn’t cause their suffering because animals have died/suffered before then (dinosaurs, predators, etc.). Animals don’t go to Heaven (at least there’s no teaching on this. So it seems animals come into existence, can suffer, and die… Why?

In consequence of a created order that is “journeying towards ultimate perfection” [CCC#310]. God willed to create an imperfect world in which absolute goodness is lacking: evil.

In his wisdom and goodness, God permits evil (the absence or lack of absolute goodness) to exist for the sake of a greater good. We’ll understand the mind of God much better when we behold the Beatific Vision.

 

[Good_Fella]

That seems to contradict others on this thread who hold that “Animals suffer strictly by necessity of nature as a consequence of the Fall”. Which is why I prefaced my question by stipulating* prelapsarian* animal suffering.

**Anyways, for the sake of argument, let’s assume you are correct, that animals did indeed suffer and die before the fall. My next question then is what about archaic hominids?

Surely Neanderthals died. Surely homo floresiensis died (they became extinct only 12,000 years ago). Homo sapiens has been around for 200,000 years. If none of these hominids died, why do we have their fossils?**

I’m straying though. Back to animal suffering. Here’s some valuable insights from Andrew Linzey, director of the Oxford Centre for Animal Ethics

humboldt.edu/~essays/linzey.html

oxfordanimalethics.com/who-we-are/director/

“So far as we know beasts are incapable either of sin or of virtue; therefore they can neither deserve pain nor be improved by it.” C.S. Lewis

Here’s a link worth considering: bringyou.to/apologetics/p87.htm