Blessing of Animals?
#11
There is a lot of stuff in Catholicism that is done, but is actually not required. I'm learning some of it is OK to just pass on. This is one of those for me.
Reply
#12
What Florus said. I'm an old farm boy and I wish my parents had been Catholic so that we could have had our animals blessed.
Jovan-Marya of the Immaculate Conception Weismiller, T.O.Carm.

Vive le Christ-roi! Vive le roi, Louis XX!
Deum timete, regem honorificate.
Kansan by birth! Albertan by choice! Jayhawk by the Grace of God!
“Qui me amat, amet et canem meum. (Who loves me will love my dog.)” 
St Bernard of Clairvaux

My Blog 'Musings of an Old Curmudgeon'
FishEaters Group on MeWe
[-] The following 1 user Likes jovan66102's post:
  • mpk1987
Reply
#13
(09-18-2019, 11:07 PM)Markie Boy Wrote: There is a lot of stuff in Catholicism that is done, but is actually not required.  I'm learning some of it is OK to just pass on.  This is one of those for me.

So it's okay to bless food, houses, books, beer, and chalices, but not animals? It's not pagan to want God to watch over your animals, whether it's a beloved pet or a horse you need to plow the fields or the cow that's going to provide food for your family.

Or do you find blessing other objects weird, too?
[-] The following 2 users Like Paul's post:
  • jovan66102, mpk1987
Reply
#14
(09-19-2019, 09:50 AM)Paul Wrote: So it's okay to bless food, houses, books, beer, and chalices, but not animals? It's not pagan to want God to watch over your animals, whether it's a beloved pet or a horse you need to plow the fields or the cow that's going to provide food for your family.
Or radio stations, lime kilns, stone quarries, blast furnaces, bridges, stables (for those blessed animals), mills, granaries, orchards, or fields, mountain meadows, and pastures where the blessed animals graze. These all, and more, have authorised, pre-conciliar blessings provided.
Jovan-Marya of the Immaculate Conception Weismiller, T.O.Carm.

Vive le Christ-roi! Vive le roi, Louis XX!
Deum timete, regem honorificate.
Kansan by birth! Albertan by choice! Jayhawk by the Grace of God!
“Qui me amat, amet et canem meum. (Who loves me will love my dog.)” 
St Bernard of Clairvaux

My Blog 'Musings of an Old Curmudgeon'
FishEaters Group on MeWe
[-] The following 1 user Likes jovan66102's post:
  • mpk1987
Reply
#15
Fr Zed was asked about this. Here's his reply,

ASK FATHER: Blessing of pets and of stuffed animals

From a priest…


QUAERITUR:
Quote:Today on the feast day of St. Francis of Assisi many parishes and schools will have a blessing of pets. We did ours this morning at our school and it went well. There were horses, a goat, many dogs and cats, turtles, lizards, fish and some other “creeping things.” It went very well and was reverent. I am seeing pictures of other parishes from around the country and I see a few of blessings of stuffed animals. I think that is rather stupid. Stuffed animals are not pets, I consider them toys. I think it diminishes the beauty of animals on the feast of St. Francis. Animals certainly do have a certain dignity because they are created by God and are considered “good.” What is your take on it? Do the blessings of teddy bears that I am seeing circulating cheapening the meaning of the blessing of animals and pets?? Or am too “rigid?”
Are you “too rigid”?  Good question.  Do you have a saturno?

The blessing of animals is a good practice.  In times past, a much larger percentage of the population depended on their animals for work and for food.  They needed their critters to be healthy.  And, for the most part, they couldn’t afford to sentimentalize them.  Puppies were cute, but dogs worked.  Kittens were cute, but they killed rodents.  Colt and calves… etc.  Their cattle (domesticated animals) kept them alive.   Of course they sought the Church’s blessings for them.

Today, however, it strikes me that more and more people have the notion that critters have immortal souls.   And so there are places that might have a huge pet blessing day, and maybe put out information about rescuing animals, but perhaps not a parish pro-life initiative.

Teddy bears?  It doesn’t harm anything or anyone to bless a little child’s stuffed animal.  After all, demons can attach to things.   And little ones form strong bonds that form them even later.
However, the difference in the way people are blessed and, on the other hand, the way that critters and stuffed animals are blessed, must be clear.

Let’s preach clearly about the differences between human beings, made in God’s imagine and likeness, and good, wonderful, amazing critters!  When they are gone, they are gone.  We, on the other hand, have immortal souls to attend to.
Jovan-Marya of the Immaculate Conception Weismiller, T.O.Carm.

Vive le Christ-roi! Vive le roi, Louis XX!
Deum timete, regem honorificate.
Kansan by birth! Albertan by choice! Jayhawk by the Grace of God!
“Qui me amat, amet et canem meum. (Who loves me will love my dog.)” 
St Bernard of Clairvaux

My Blog 'Musings of an Old Curmudgeon'
FishEaters Group on MeWe
[-] The following 2 users Like jovan66102's post:
  • Blind Horus, mpk1987
Reply
#16
Why German Nazis Were Big Fans Of Animal Rights 

By Alexander Cockburn
1996

Creators Syndicate, Inc.

I DON'T like animals to suffer pain. Each year, I also butcher a couple lambs raised by neighbors on their pasture down the road. The other day, an animal-rights zealot started abusing me for hypocrisy for not being vegetarian. By way of getting even, I regaled him with the history of the Nazis in their role as animal-rights activists.

In April 1933, soon after they had come to power, the Nazis passed laws regulating the slaughter of animals. Later that year, Hermann Goering announced an end to the "unbearable torture and suffering in animal experiments" and threatened to "commit to concentration camps those who still think they can continue to treat animals as inanimate property."

Horses, cats and apes were singled out for special protection. In 1936, a special law was passed regarding the correct way of dispatching lobsters and crabs and thus mitigating their terminal agonies. Crustaceans were to be thrown into rapidly boiling water. Bureaucrats at the Nazi Ministry of the Interior produced learned research papers on the kindest method of killing.

The aim of the Law for the Protection of Animals was - as the preamble stated - "to waken and strengthen compassion as one of the highest moral values of the German people." Animals were to be protected for their own sake rather than as appendages to the human moral and material condition. This was hailed as a new moral concept. In 1934, an international conference in Berlin on the topic of animal protection saw the podium festooned with swastikas and crowned by a banner declaring "Entire epochs of love will be needed to repay animals for their value and service."

Nazi leaders were noted for love of their pets and for certain animals, notably apex predators like the wolf and the lion. Hitler, a vegetarian and hater of hunting, adored dogs and spent some of his final hours in the company of Blondi.

Joseph Goebbels said, famously, "The only real friend one has in the end is the dog. . . . The more I get to know the human species, the more I care for my Benno." As historians Arnold Arluke and Boria Sax put it, "The Nazis abolished moral distinctions between animals and people by viewing people as animals. The result was that animals could be considered `higher' than some people."

The blond Aryan beast of Nietzsche represented animality at the top available grade, at one with wild nature. Aryans and animals were allied in a struggle against the contaminators, the vivisectors, the under-creatures. "The Fuhrer," Goebbels wrote, "is deeply religious, though completely anti-Christian, views Christianity as a symptom of decay. Rightly so. It is a branch of the Jewish race. . . . Both (Judaism and Christianity) have no point of contact to the animal element, and thus, in the end, they will be destroyed. The Fuhrer is a convinced vegetarian on principle."

Race purification was often seen in terms of farm improvement, eliminating poor stock and improving the herd. Martin Bormann had been an agricultural student and manager of a large farm. Heinrich Himmler had been a chicken breeder. Medical researchers in the Third Reich, Arluke and Sax write, "also approached Germans as livestock." Those contaminating Aryan stock were "lower animals" and should be dispatched. Seeing such people as low and coarse animal forms allowed their production-line slaughter. Hoss, the Auschwitz commandant, was a great lover of animals, particularly horses, and after a hard day's work in the death camp liked to stroll about the stables.

"Nazi German identity," Arluke and Sax conclude, "relied on the blurring of boundaries between humans and animals and the constructing of a unique phylogenetic hierarchy that altered conventional human-animal distinctions and imperatives. . . . As part of the natural order, Germans of Aryan stock were to be bred like farm stock, while `lower animals' or `subhumans,' such as the Jews and other victims of the Holocaust, were to be exterminated like vermin as testament to the new `natural' and biological order conceived under the Third Reich."

Animal-rights advocates and vegetarians often fidget when told this history and say, "So what?" The moral here is not that there is something inherently Nazi-like in campaigning against vivisection or deploring the eating of animals' meat or reviling the cruelties of the feedlot and the slaughterhouse. The moral is that ideologies of nature imbued with corrupt race theory and a degraded romanticism can lead people up the wrong path, to genocide. For the Nazis, their death camps were, in a way, romanticism's revenge for the slaughterhouses and the hogsqueal of the universe.

The "deep ecology" types who think America's true "carrying capacity" is 200,000, who back "wildlands" projects that aim to clear people out of certain low-populated areas of the American West so that they can become "natural" again, who cheer epidemics because they think human overpopulation is the big problem - all these people should study Nazi ideologies of nature with particular care.
Oh, where are the snows of yesteryear!
Reply
#17
Animals suffer on account of man's fall into sin which  brought death and pain upon all living things.  They are wonderful companions and hard workers for many. I love the idea of blessing animals and personally make the sign of the cross over all the animals in my life, asking God to bless and keep them safe, and sometimes entrusting them to my favorite "animal lover" saints (Paul of Obnora, St Gerasimos et.al.). It seems like a natural expression of folkish type piety to me and I've never really been against it. Seems to me that since animals make up such a large part of our lives and that they suffer on account of man we ought to include them in our blessings. Just my two cents,  but take it with a grain of salt as I'm not a RC nor am I the average mainstream type of guy. Always been kind of eccentric.
Walk before God in simplicity, and not in subtleties of the mind. Simplicity brings faith; but subtle and intricate speculations bring conceit; and conceit brings withdrawal from God. -Saint Isaac of Syria, Directions on Spiritual Training


"It is impossible in human terms to exaggerate the importance of being in a church or chapel before the Blessed Sacrament as often and for as long as our duties and state of life allow. I very seldom repeat what I say. Let me repeat this sentence. It is impossible in human language to exaggerate the importance of being in a chapel or church before the Blessed Sacrament as often and for as long as our duties and state of life allow. That sentence is the talisman of the highest sanctity. "Father John Hardon
[-] The following 2 users Like formerbuddhist's post:
  • Eric F, mpk1987
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)