It is rare to find a philosophical discussion on the treatment of animals, but I found this one
today. It discusses the duties of humans towards "animals" and even more specifically the
unique relationship between humans and pets. While I might not agree with everything stated
in this article, for a long time we've all searched for a way to describe our relationships to
our pets as pet owners, pet lovers, pet parents, companion animals, valued members of our families.
This phrase "companions in creation" seems to sum it up for me.

The problem of animal abuse also seems to stem for the current popular attitude by pet food companies
and food producers and many others that animals are simply here to be exploited for profit or entertainment
having gone too far.

So I'm going to adopt the phrase "companions in creation" to describe that unique human/animal relationship
which so many of us on Itchmo and other places are trying to use "the internet thingy" to promote.
At the least, this article is certainly food for thought:

http://www.the-tidings.com:80/2008/061308/benson.htm

Animal rights and the Church 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
By Rev. Richard Benson, C.M. 

We cannot just do whatever we want with them," he said. "Certainly, a sort of industrial use of creatures, so that
geese are fed in such a way as to produce as large a liver as possible, or hens living so packed together that they
become just caricatures of birds, this degrading of living creatures to a commodity seems to me in fact to contradict
the relationship of mutuality that comes across in the Bible. Animals, too, are God's creatures and even if they do not
have the same direct relationship to God that human beings have, they are still creatures of God's will, creatures we
must respect as companions in creation."

Thank you, Shiba, for pointing out a book that I will read. All of nature is humanity’s romper room, to play with, rearrange and plunder at will. I believe that's the same commoditizing that allows animal abuse for profit and entertainment to exist which
is so out of hand these days in so many places.

I hope everyone is clear that in no way am I suggesting that the source of this creation is anything but a highly personal choice
subject to each individual's beliefs.

3cat, trudy It makes me shudder to think how we have debased ourselves by selling out to factory farming, canned hunts and abuse. Sometimes, I think it would be easier to take the pink/blue pill (whichever one it is that returns you to being blissfully ignorant of the Matrix).

I agree, kaffe, that it is very hard to express the nature of this bond.

Sometime I ago, I was given the opportunity to write modules for a pastoral studies course designed for beginning Asian pastors and theology students.  I've pulled out some pertinent sections that reflect where my soul stands on this theme:

From Old Testament Studies (The Pentateuch:  Genesis to Deuteronomy), Module 1 Genesis , Lesson 3: Genesis 1 to 11: the Primeval History, p. 31, 32

"In the ideal setting of the garden, God demonstrated His concern for man’s aloneness and plans and acts to meet this need.  He imparts to man the divine prerogative of naming and calling:  He brought the animals to the man and whatever he called them, that was what they were (“whatever you say, Man, must be right!”).   The man shares with his Creator the insight to see into the essence of things (2:14).  Before He created man, it was God who named and defined things for man (1:5, 8, 10); now He allows man to call and categorize the subhuman creation in demonstration of man’s capacity to rule and order the earth as God’s regent.  The entire created order was in harmony and cooperation with man:  the ground producing plants, trees and herbs that were aesthetically and practically functional, providing good food for both man and the animals (2:9a).  Both the man and the animals had a common link with the ground or the earth, out of which both had been formed; and the animals shared with the man ‘the breath of life’.  The animals neither feared nor avoided man, but accepted his presence (2:19).  The impression is one of wholeness and goodness with respect to the entire creation, and one of beneficent rule under God with respect to man’s dominion.

In answer to man’s need for a “helper comparable to him”, God created the woman and brought her to him.  The man’s response was one of joyous acceptance and delight; as much to say:  “At last! Someone like me!”  He recognized at once that the woman was of the same essence and nature as he (2:22,23) and that they were partners in a relationship of corresponding mutually, harmony and unity (2:24).  The human race, as represented by “Adam and Eve” was in its unfallen infancy, in harmony, cooperation, and solidarity with one another, with the created order and in fellowship with God.

---
From Theology 1 (Theology, Bibliology and Angeology), Module IV Theology Proper:  The Works of GOD, Lesson 2: The Work and Workmanship of GOD: Creation, p. 19-21

"Item 7.   God Cares About His Creation and has Planned for its Liberation from the
Effects of Sin.   This element of the Biblical teaching on creation has been largely
ignored or neglected in the often anthropocentric treatments of the theology of
redemption; as if God were concerned only for the redemption of man from the
effects of the Fall.  But this is not the case as presented by the Bible. The Apostle
Paul expresses the astonishing truth that the sub-human created order are also the
recipients of Christ’s saving work along with the elect:

18   For I consider that the sufferings of this present
time are not worthy to be compared with the glory
that is to be revealed in us.
19   For the anxious longing of the creation waits eagerly
for the revealing of the sons of God.
20   For the creation was subjected to futility, not of its own
will, but because of Him who subjected it in hope
21  that the creation itself also will be set free from its
slavery to corruption into the freedom of the glory of
the children of God.
22   For we know that the whole creation groans and
suffers the pains of childbirth together until now.
               (Rom. 8: 18 – 22)

Item 3: Praxis and Theological Implication: Our common creaturehood and dependence on our Maker provides a basis for the brotherhood of all humankind and a bond between humanity and the sub-human creation.  We are not to think of other people, races, animals, plants and rocks as alien or foreign to ourselves and as objects to be exploited.  We all have a common origin in God; share the same basic material building blocks; and equally depend on the Creator for our continued existence.

----
From New Testament Studies 2 (The Pauline Epistles), Module III Romans and Colossians, Lesson 3: Colossians, p 42-43.


G5.   Christ’s Work in Relation to All Creation (1:20)
… And by Him to reconcile all things to Himself, by Him, whether things on earth or things in heaven, having made peace through the blood of the cross.

"...this work of reconciliation does not only encompass the predicament of humankind.  It extends to “all things…whether things on earth or things in heaven” (1:20b).  The verse should not be construed as teaching a ‘universal salvation’  for that would be to contradict the testimony of the rest of Scripture.  Rather, the 'all things' that benefit from the reconciling, redemptive work of Christ should be understood as “the created order” or “nature” in keeping with Paul’s own teaching in Romans chapter 8: 18 – 22/

----

I confess that when I meditate on the sheer scope of God's redemptive work, I have transports of sheer JOY.

Read the peice i have in Law and Politics about pets, and see how much respect Bush has for the animals. It's in the polar bear link.