Abstract
The previous chapter explores the manner in which Aquinas’s anthropocentrism and conservationism have been appropriated in contemporary Catholic thought. I suggest there that the magisterial teachings of the Catholic Church continue to maintain the ethics grounded in Aquinas’s theology, albeit at times ambiguously so. In this chapter I seek to contribute to a perspective, already delineated by careful thinkers, that honors a traditional differentiation between humans and animals and at the same time avoids viewing the nonhuman creation strictly in terms of utility.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
I. Kant (1785/1998), The Groundwork of the Metaphysics of the Moral, translated by M. Gregor (New York: Cambridge University Press).
R. Descartes (1637/1985), “Discourse on the Method,” translated by J. Cottingham, R. Stoothoff, and D. Murdoch, in The Philosophical Works of Descartes (New York: Cambridge University Press), V.
T. Aquinas (1265/1946), Summa Theologica, translated by the Fathers of the English Dominican Province (New York: Benzinger), 1.
Augustine (1948), City of God, in W. J. Oates (ed.), Basic Writings of Saint Augustine (New York: Random House), XII.
Nonetheless, I do not believe that Jesus denied nonhuman animals what today one might consider direct moral concern. For considerations, see Richard Bauckham’s two entries (1998): “Jesus and Animals I: What Did He Teach?” and “Jesus and Animals II: What Did He Practice?” in A. Linzey and D. Yamamoto (eds), Animals on the Agenda: Questions about Animal Ethics for Theology and Ethics (Chicago: University of Illinois Press), pp. 33–48
Irenaeus (1868), Against Heresies, in A. Roberts and J. Donaldson (eds), The Ante-Nicene Christian Library (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark), IV.4.3.
Ephrem (1994), Commentary on Genesis, in K. McVey (ed.), St. Ephrem the Syrian: Selected Prose Works, translated by E. G. Mathews and J. P. Amar (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press), 2.4.
Gregory of Nyssa (1988), On the Making of Man, in P. Schaff and H. Wace (eds), Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans), 16.9.
S. J. Grenz (2001), The Social God and the Relational Self: A Trinitarian Theology of the Imago Dei (Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox Press), p. 143.
N. Habel (2011), The Birth, the Curse and the Greening of Earth: An Ecological Reading of Genesis 1–11 (Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Phoenix Press), 35.
D. Clough (2009), “All God’s Creatures: Reading Genesis on Human and Nonhuman Animals,” in S. C. Barton and D. Wilkinson (eds), Reading Genesis after Darwin (New York: Oxford University Press), pp. 145–148.
J. R. Middleton (2005), The Liberating Image: The Imago Dei in Genesis 1 (Grand Rapids, MI: Brazos Press), pp. 18–19.
D. J. Hall (1986), Imaging God: Dominion as Stewardship (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans), p. 90.
See M. Erickson (1998), Christian Theology, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books), pp. 519–534
N. M. Sarna (1989), The JPS Torah Commentary: Genesis (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society), 12.
B. M. Ashley, J. K. deBlois, and K. D. O’Rourke (2006), Health Care Ethics: A Catholic Theological Analysis (Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press), p. 40.
Middleton, The Liberating Image, pp. 50–55; W. S. Towner (2005), “Clones of God: Genesis 1:26–28 and the Image of God in the Hebrew Bible,” Interpretation 59: 341–356.
W. Sibley Towner (2001), Genesis (Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox Press), 28.
E. Wolde (1995), Stories of the Beginning: Genesis 1–11 and Other Creation Stories (Ridgefield, CT: Morehouse), p. 28.
T. Fretheim (2006), God and World in the Old Testament: A Relational Theology of Creation (Nashville: Abingdon Press), p. 52
C. M. LaCugna (1993), God for Us: The Trinity and Christian Life (San Francisco: Harper).
N. V. Harrison (2008), “The Human Person as the Image and Likeness of God,” in M. B. Cunningham and E. Theokritoff (eds), The Cambridge Companion to Orthodox Christian Theology (New York: Cambridge University Press), p. 86.
K. Ware (1999), “The Soul in Greek Christianity,” in M. James and C. Crabbe (eds), From Soul to Self (New York: Routledge), p. 64.
D. Yarri (2005), The Ethics of Animal Experimentation: A Critical Analysis and Constructive Proposal (New York: Oxford University Press), p. 115.
N. Phelps (2002), The Dominion of Love: Animal Rights according to the Bible (New York: Lantern Books), p. 45
J. Moltmann (1993), The Crucified God: The Cross of Christ as the Foundation and Criticism of Christian Theology, translated by R. A. Wilson and J. Bowden (Minneapolis: Fortress Press).
J. Moltmann (1996), The Coming of God: Christian Eschatology, translated by M. Kohl (Minneapolis: Fortress Press).
J. Moltmann (1992), The Spirit of Life: A Universal Affirmation, translated by M. Kohl (Minneapolis: Fortress Press), p. 172.
A. Schweitzer (2002), “First Sermon on Reverence for Life,” in M. and K. Bergel (eds), Reverence for Life: The Ethics of Albert Schweitzer for the Twenty-first Century (Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press).
A. Schweitzer (1946), Civilization and Ethics (London: Adam and Charles Clark).
P. Barsam (2008), Reverence for Life: Albert Schweitzer’s Great Contribution to Ethical Thought (New York: Oxford University Press).
S. Hauerwas and J. Berkman (1993), “A Trinitarian Theology of the ‘Chief End’ of ‘All Flesh’,” in C. Pinches and J. B. McDaniel (eds), Good News for Animals? Christian Approaches to Animal Well-Being (New York: Orbis Books), p. 71.
W. Brueggemann (1982), Genesis (Atlanta: John Knox Press).
T. Fretheim (1991), Exodus (Atlanta: John Knox Press).
D. Bonhoeffer (1971), Letters and Papers from Prison (London: SCM Press), p. 361.
G. D. Fee (1995), Paul’s Letter to the Philippians (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans), p. 208.
M. Bockmuehl (1998), Black’s New Testament Commentary: The Epistle to the Philippians (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson), p. 133.
The interpretation I offer of the book of Jonah is well represented in biblical scholarship. However, it is also contested as to whether or not the issue of inclusion of the nonelect is the central didactic emphasis of the narrative. While I can accept that it is not, I hold the issue is nonetheless in the purview of the author. For considerations, see R. P. McLaughlin (2013), “Jonah and the Religious Other: An Exploration in Biblical Inclusivism,” Journal of Ecumenical Studies 48, 1 (Winter): 72–75.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2014 Ryan Patrick McLaughlin
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
McLaughlin, R.P. (2014). Theology and the Reconfiguration of Difference. In: Christian Theology and the Status of Animals. The Palgrave Macmillan Animal Ethics Series. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137344588_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137344588_4
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-46607-8
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-34458-8
eBook Packages: Palgrave Religion & Philosophy CollectionPhilosophy and Religion (R0)