A Persistent Language

  • Philip J. SampsonEmail author
Part of the The Palgrave Macmillan Animal Ethics Series book series (PMAES)


The nonconformist discourses of creation, fall and redemption find few adherents today outside theological communities. Most people are not interested in this tradition, even if they are aware of it. Yet its fragments and traces persist in current public debate about animals. Both the passionate concern for individual animals, and the language of kinship between human and other species, find a heritage in nonconformity. The sense throughout the modern advocacy movement that animals are not ours references a long debate about the ownership of God’s creatures, and the language of ‘rights’ has a genealogy in that of the rightful treatment of animals which were created to glorify God. The continuing presence of these fragments in the public arena provides a resource to develop and enrich the contemporary discussion of animal-human relationships.


  1. Bentham, Jeremy. 1789 [1970]. An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. London: Athlone.Google Scholar
  2. Berry, Evan. 2015. Devoted to Nature: The Religious Roots of American Environmentalism. San Francisco: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  3. Birke, Lynda, Arnold Arluke, and Mike Michael. 2007. The Sacrifice: How Scientific Experiments Transform Animals and People. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Booth, Daryl. 2018. Hearing the Confession of the Meat Industry. Sarx Website:
  5. Calvin, John. 1583. Sermons on Deuteronomy. Translated by Arthur Golding. London: John Harison.Google Scholar
  6. Dawkins, Richard. 1989. The Selfish Gene. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Dunlap, Thomas R. 2004. Faith in Nature: Environmentalism as Religious Quest. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press.Google Scholar
  8. Forrester, Duncan. 2005. Theological Fragments: Essays in Unsystematic Theology. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
  9. Fudge, Erica. 2017. Re-enchanting the Farm. Available at Accessed November 1, 2017.
  10. Giroux, Valery. 2016. “Animals Do Have an Interest in Liberty.” Journal of Animal Ethics 6 (1): 20–43.Google Scholar
  11. Hansard. 1879. House of Lords Debate 15 July 1879,. vol. 248, cc419–36.Google Scholar
  12. Hodges, Thomas. 1675. The Creatures Goodness, as They Came Out of God’s Hands. London: Tho. Parkhurst.Google Scholar
  13. King, John. 1594 [1864]. Lectures upon Jonah. Edinburgh: James Nichol.Google Scholar
  14. Linzey, Andrew. 1994. Animal Theology. London: SCM.Google Scholar
  15. Luther, Martin. 1958. Works. Vol. 2. Edited by Jaroslav Pelikan. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing.Google Scholar
  16. Maasen, Sabine, and Peter Weingart. 2013. Metaphors and the Dynamics of Knowledge. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  17. MacIntyre, Alistair. 1981. After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory. London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
  18. Pope, Alexander. 1713. “Against Barbarity to Animals.” The Guardian, No. 61, London, May 21.Google Scholar
  19. Preece, Rod. 2005. Brute Souls, Happy Beasts, and Evolution. Vancouver: UBC Press.Google Scholar
  20. Primatt, Humphrey. 1776 [1992]. The Duty of Mercy. Fontwell, Sussex: Centaur Press.Google Scholar
  21. Rawlinson, John. 1612. Mercy to a Beast: A Sermon Preached at Saint Maries Spittle in London on Tuesday in Easter Weeke 1612. Oxford: Joseph Barnes.Google Scholar
  22. Rémy, Catherine. 2003. “Une Mise à Mort Industrielle ‘humaine’?” Politix 64: 51–73.Google Scholar
  23. Rutherford, Samuel. 1644: The Due Right of Presbyteries. London: Richard Whittaker and Andrew Crook.Google Scholar
  24. Sampson, Philip J. Forthcoming. “Evangelical Christianity: Lord of Creation or Animal Among Animals?” In The Handbook of Religion and Animal Ethics, edited by Andrew Linzey and Clair Linzey. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  25. Stoll, Mark. 1997. Protestantism, Capitalism, and Nature in America. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.Google Scholar
  26. Stoll, Mark. 2006. “Creating Ecology: Protestants and the Moral Community of Creation.” In Religion and the New Ecology, edited by David M. Lodge and Christopher Hamlin, 53–72. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame.Google Scholar
  27. Thomas, Keith. 1984. Man and the Natural World. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  28. Trapp, John. 1660. Annotations upon the Whole Bible. Vol. 3. London: R. W. Google Scholar
  29. van Dooren, Thom. 2014. Flight Ways: Life and Loss at the Edge of Extinction. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  30. White, Lynn. 1967. “The Historical Roots of Our Ecologic Crisis.” Science 155 (3767): 1203–1207.Google Scholar
  31. Wise, Stephen. 2000. Rattling the Cage. London: Profile Books.Google Scholar
  32. Withrow King, Sarah. 2016. Animals Are Not Ours. Oregon: Cascade.Google Scholar
  33. Woodfall, W. 1800. “House of Commons Debate, 2 April 1800.” In The Parliamentary Register, vol. 2. London: John Stockdale.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Oxford Centre for Animal EthicsOxfordUK

Personalised recommendations