[vc_row][vc_column width=”1/1″][vc_column_text]Pope Francis recently sparked a renewed consideration on the question of animal souls when he said, “This marvelous plan cannot but involve everything that surrounds us.”  His words, for many, were reminiscent of Pope Paul VI’s even clearer, earlier decree, “One day we will again see our animals in the eternity of Christ.”   The response to both quotes is a reminder that the condition of animals is still under debate.

Animal lovers are often quick to accept to the notion that our four legged (and two winged) companions possess something of the ephemeral, minimally a sort of consciousness—especially among those who already believe in human souls.  But long before scientists discovered the ability of many animals to communicate and demonstrate other behaviors that reflect some capacity for learning, Descartes’ proclamation that animals lacked reason and soul articulated the persistent and forceful framework that wholly rejected the notion of animal consciousness.

That lack of a soul or consciousness (essentially unprovable for any species) has often been identified as a significant point of differentiation between animals and humans in spiritual and moral matters.  Historically, beliefs about animals have reinforced a hierarchical cosmology (clearest perhaps, in Aquinas’ writing), and many prominent 20th century theologians continued to view human life as inherently of more value than other species.  Curiously, it is these abstract beliefs and arguments which hinge at the center of conversations about what role animals “ought” to play, particularly for humans.

Despite the frequently assumed hierarchy, world religious traditions have consistently attempted to weigh and balance human need and animal welfare.  Across global religions, there is little doubt that traditions include animals in the moral sphere (for instance, from Islamic prohibitions of cruelty and neglect to animals to Buddhist notions of universal compassion for sentient beings).  While the spiritual debate over souls continues, nearly all religions seem to support a basic trend toward minimizing unnecessary harm toward all creatures.

Coming to terms with the precise meaning of the proper preposition “with” or “for” may well determine what role animals play in individual lives, yet regardless of abstract beliefs about souls (human or animal), it’s worth noting that world religions are far from silent on the case of animal treatment. For a brief, but interesting look at global perspectives on animals and religion, check out this Animal Ethics resource.  For a full examination of animal rights and religious issues, Kemmerer’s Animals and World Religions from Oxford University Press provides a thorough consideration of topics.

 

 

Ghostdog

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column width=”1/1″][/vc_column][/vc_row]