ST. ALBAN’S FORUM: CROSSING THE DIVIDE

“Shalom means that all human beings live together as siblings, at peace with one another, and with God and in right relationships with all of the rest of creation.”
                                                                      ~The Most Rev. Katharine Jefferts Schori 

This past Sunday, I was honored to be the guest speaker at the adult forum at St. Alban’s Episcopal Church in Washington, DC.  The Rev. Jim Quigley and I discussed why animals matter from a theological perspective, followed by Q&A from the audience.  Our conversation was broad ranging and the questions were insightful and thought-provoking.  I want to write today about some of my reflections coming out of that discussion, which seemed to me to highlight the many ways we can build bridges and make connections – both among and within species.  It brought to mind (stay with me here) the homily by Katharine Jefferts Schori at her installation ceremony as Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church in 2006.  In it, she talked about the Jewish concept of shalom, in which the whole world rests, together, in peace and harmony:  

Shalom means that all human beings live together as siblings, at peace with one another and with God, and in right relationship with all the rest of creation.  It is that vision of the lion lying down with the lamb and the small child playing over the den of the adder, where the specter of death no longer holds sway.  It is that vision to which Jesus points when he says, "today this scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing."  To say "shalom" is to know our own place and to invite and affirm the place of the rest of creation, once more at home in God.

 It is a sermon that has stayed with me all these years, and while the connection is a little grandiose for my little forum talk, the notion of building bridges in search of a more peaceful and compassionate world seemed to come up in several contexts, and it seems to me that every time we are able to make a connection with another living creature – human or nonhuman, we are one step closer to the wholeness of shalom.  The trick for most of is to remember to include both humans and other animals in that idea.  (It also seems to me that the trick of Christianity is to live out just such grand ideas in every day contexts.)

 Japanese Tea Garden Bridge by  Rocky Leplin

              Of course we talked about the theological underpinnings of animal welfare as a Christian concern, in particular in the creation story, which tells of how we, created in God’s image, are tasked with making the connection between Creator and creation by showing creation who the Creator is. We also addressed bridging the gap between helping animals and helping humans by recognizing that helping animals often helps humans, too.  So, when we help humans in need by providing pet food as well as human food, those humans can keep the pets who mean so much to them, and the pets can keep their humans and their homes, and do not wind up in shelter.  Or, when we help animals by confronting factory farming, we help the planet and our health, as well.  Or, when we help animals by preserving wild spaces, we help the human spirit, which is so often refreshed in these sanctuaries.  In the vision of shalom, no one is whole until we all are whole. 

            I want to focus, though on two particular gaps sorely in need of bridging: one was raised by Jim and one was raised by two questioners.  Jim emphasized the disconnect so many of us have between how well we love and care for our family pets and how little regard we have for our impact on the lives of other animals.  This is an important issue and I think addressing it requires a two-pronged attack.  First, we need to recognize that the animals we eat, the animals in labs, and the animals in entertainment venues are each unique individuals, with their own personalities, just as our dogs and cats are.  Because we are so far removed from animals other than pets in our daily lives, we grow used to thinking of cows, for example, as an undifferentiated group – we don’t see the individuals and we don’t know anything about them. When we think of animals that way, it is easy to think of them as objects instead of creatures, and to forget that they suffer.  As we learn more and more – both as a society and as individuals – about how animals perceive and interact with the world, we can see them as individuals and we can come to appreciate that the suffering of one cow is as poignant as the suffering of one dog, and that the suffering of billions of chickens, cows, and pigs is, in the words of Charles Camosy, “a social structure of sin.” This, I think, is the beginning, of compassion.

            The second prong consists of learning about the reality in which these animals live.  Most of us, to the extent we think about these animals at all, think they live in spacious areas, are well-cared for, and are protected by animal welfare laws.  This is a convenient fiction.  When we learn about the reality of life on a factory farm for these animals, or that the overwhelming number of animals in our slaughterhouses are not protected by any laws (chickens and turkeys are not considered “animals” under the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act) and that the overwhelming number of animals in laboratories are not protected by any laws (birds, mice and rats are not considered “animals” under laws governing research facilities), or when we learn about the cramped housing, cruel training, and other realities of animals in circuses and other entertainment venues, we are forced to confront the impact of our daily decisions and ask ourselves whether the benefit we gain is worth the cost to the animals.  This is the beginning of mercy. 
            Bridging that gap between our cats and dogs and other animals we affect, therefore, draws us nearer to the image of God, and nearer to the vision of shalom. 

             We also talked about hunting.  I especially appreciated two questions/comments from the audience in this regard.  The first was from a person asking about deer (and other animal) overpopulation.  The second, following up on that topic, was from a hunter who works with a group to give venison to food kitchens to feed those in need.  These questions brought up concerns about the animals starving due to lack of resources, danger to humans and deer with deer running into the road, and the fact that the meat from hunting can be put to good use.  

            What is so important about these questions, particularly in this kind of venue, I think, is that it shows us another gap we need to bridge:  the gap between people of good will with different viewpoints, a gap that can be bridged with respect and careful listening.  I think both of these questioners raised good points, demonstrating that, while in some cases right and wrong in our dealings with animals is quite clear, in others there is more subtlety.  My response on this issue was to note first that humans we need to take responsibility for protecting wild spaces, so that wild animals can have enough room and resources to thrive.  Second, we need to continue to explore non-lethal means to address wild animal population, such as birth control, where progress is being made.  And third, that if we find ourselves in a situation where overpopulation really is an issue that is causing the animals to suffer and we have no other alternative, then limited hunting may be necessary, but it should be done by experienced hunters using weapons designed to kill as quickly and painlessly as possible.  We cannot turn to lethal methods simply because we don’t like the deer eating our tulips, and if killing is necessary, the event should be focused on sparing the animals suffering.  I welcome further discussion from these and other individuals.  I was very grateful that they approached the issue with respect for my position and I hope that I responded with respect for theirs.  It is only by engagement with those of with other perspectives that we can learn – or teach - anything.  And, as Christians, even animal lovers must remember that humans are our neighbors, too, and that even they are invited into the circle of shalom!

            Finally, I am very grateful to the Humane Society of the United States Faith Outreach for some of my handouts, including Animal Protection Ministries: A Guide For Churches and the DVD Eating Mercifully.  As the event wrapped up, I spoke with several people about possibilities for following the event up with programs made possible through the resources and support of Faith Outreach, including a showing of Eating Mercifully with discussion afterward and expanding their food collections for those in need to include pet food through HSUS’s Fill The Bowl Project.  Faith Outreach helps bridge the gap between good intentions and resources!  

            All in all, I was very encouraged by the strong attendance at the event, the excellent questions, and the interest in following up with more programs and events in the future. This is the kind of conversation that needs to be taking place in churches everywhere – even when it leads to difficult places like diet and hunting.  As Christians, we don’t get to skirt the tough subjects.  And, as Christians, we need to make sure that we are not sending the message, as Humphrey Primatt feared, that cruelty is not a sin.  So long as there is cruelty to animals, there will be no shalom for humans.

---