{"id":763668,"date":"2021-05-04T07:40:15","date_gmt":"2021-05-04T11:40:15","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/animalrightswatch.us\/?p=763668"},"modified":"2021-05-04T08:10:45","modified_gmt":"2021-05-04T12:10:45","slug":"the-boy-the-lamb-and-the-lion-gods-plan-for-animals-is-a-theology-that-we-can-all-understand","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/animalrightswatch.us\/?p=763668","title":{"rendered":"THE LION AND THE LAMB: God\u2019s plan for animals is a theology that we can all understand"},"content":{"rendered":"\t
\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t

God reveals through Scripture a design for what theologians call a 'peaceable kingdom,' one that includes nonviolent relationships between human beings and nonhuman animals.<\/p>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t<\/blockquote>\n\n

CHARLES C. CAMOSY:<\/strong> Over the past decade in Christian theological circles, there\u2019s been an explosion of concern for nonhuman animals… While much of theology is by its very nature rather abstract, this one is relatable: Large majorities of us have animal companions, for instance. We all eat, and many of us think, talk and even obsess over what we eat more than we do over, say, God. And how we treat animals has a lot to do with what we put in our bodies \u2014 and not just to eat.<\/p>\n

In addition, the debate over nonhuman animals features some fireworks. Catholic theologian John Berkman, a brave light in the darkness on this issue, has chosen to focus his work on animals despite threats from his bosses at the Catholic University of America that they would deny him tenure. Berkman now teaches moral theology at Regis College at the University of Toronto…<\/p>\n

There are other pioneering figures in this space: Andrew Linzey, to name one, and David Clough, another. Clough, perhaps the most important voice in the field in the last decade, set the standard for theological scholarship with his 2018 two-volume book.<\/p>\n

Celia Deane-Drummond, previously a moral theologian at the University of Notre Dame, has started the Laudato Si\u2019 Research Institute at the University of Oxford in the United Kingdom… The Rev. Christopher Steck of Georgetown University published \u201cAll God\u2019s Animals: A Catholic Theological Framework for Animal Ethics,\u201d cementing the topic as absolutely essential to Catholic moral theology…<\/p>\n

Nearly all theologians now agree that the biblical dominion God has given human beings over creation is not a license to use and dominate, but rather a command to be caretakers and stewards… But it is the real-world, public work that is putting the issue of the treatment and dignity of animals in play. Clough\u2019s Farm Forward project is really exciting and unparalleled.<\/p>\n

A few months ago, I got a note from the Nonhuman Rights Project, asking if I\u2019d be interested in helping organize an amicus brief from Catholic theologians in support of the project\u2019s legal attempts to free Happy the Elephant from captivity in the Bronx Zoo. I was delighted, and the brief \u2014 signed by Berkman, Covey, Deane-Drummond, Steck and me \u2014 was published and sent to the New York Court of Appeals this past February.<\/p>\n

In it, we made the general argument that, especially in the biblical tradition shared both by Jews and Christians, God\u2019s creation is not made for human beings… We are akin to viceroys ruling on behalf of a sovereign and according to that sovereign\u2019s wishes. God, sovereign of the universe, reveals through Scripture a design for what theologians call a \u201cpeaceable kingdom,\u201d one that includes nonviolent relationships between human beings and nonhuman animals.<\/p>\n

And then we applied that general argument to Happy, a 49-year-old pachyderm, who is not a thing for us to confine, use and put on display in a zoo (even in an attempt to produce a good outcome), but rather a particular kind of creature whom God made to flourish.<\/p>\n

Happy cannot flourish as this kind of creature while captive in the Bronx Zoo. She would be significantly better able to become the kind of creature God made her to be in a sanctuary. Nonhuman animals like Happy have been created to fit into a particular place within the order of God\u2019s creation, an order that human beings are bound to respect…<\/p>\n

In a virtual meeting with the National Academy of Sciences\u2019 committee, I argued that the leading voices in animal ethics today \u2014 religious and secular \u2014 reject the idea that nonhuman animals are mere tools. With their own inherent value quite apart from whatever good might come from our use of them, animals ought to be treated as the kinds of creatures they are. No matter its benefits, research that grows cells in other animals is an obvious violation of our duties…<\/p>\n

The fate of humans also depends on how we treat animals. There is simply no way we will ever reverse global climate change without dismantling the massive factory-farms that treat animals as \u201cprotein units per square foot\u201d rather than as animals with their own inherent dignity. These farms are one of the most significant contributors to global climate change… So, yes, respecting God\u2019s plan for nonhuman animals is more relevant than it has ever been. The very fate of our species depends on it.\u00a0 SOURCE…<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

RELATED VIDEOS:<\/strong><\/p>\n