A Vital Theological Task

“I agree with Barth, however, that theology is finally fruitless unless the results of its reflections are brought to bear on questions of practice.”

“The animal question is a properly theological one in the sense that it raises and illuminates issues concerning the adequacy and coherence of Christian doctrine in the areas of trinity, creation, covenant, incarnation, atonement, eschatology, Christology, pneumatology, and beyond.”

                    ~ David L. Clough,

                                                        On Animals, Volume I: Systematic Theology

            We should seek to live according to what we say we believe, and our relationships with animals touch on nearly every aspect of what it means to be Christian.  These are two animating themes underlying David L. Clough’s book, On Animals, Volume I: Systematic Theology.  Since they are also two animating themes underlying this blog, you will not be surprised to learn that I am a big fan of this book.  Clough comes at these issues by delving into fundamental Christian doctrines to see where and how animals, and our relationships with them, might fit into or be informed by those doctrines.  I want to consider a number of ideas Clough discusses and I will do so over the course of several (not necessarily consecutive) posts in coming months.  Today, I just want to consider Clough’s forward and introduction, by way of setting the stage and explaining why I am so excited about this book. 

My dog-eared copy

            The first reason this book is important is that it fills (or starts to fill) a significant gap in the tools available to the church.  Clough begins by saying that he initially set out to write about Christian ethics as they relate to animals but quickly discovered that the groundwork for developing such an ethic, consideration of how animals might be understood in the context of Christian doctrines, was missing.  This volume is a step toward laying that foundation.  Volume II, yet to be published, will seek to address the implications of those doctrinal matters for how we live as Christians. 

            Of particular significance, Clough emphasizes that the question of animals and theology is a topic whose time has come.  It is a serious issue Christians must consider now more than ever for three reasons:

• ·         Human relationships with animals in the modern age “have undergone rapid transformation, as a result of the industrialization of meat production, the expansion of human population and scientific knowledge” giving rise to the need for reflection on the ethics of this paradigm, which requires a doctrinal foundation. (p. xii)

• ·         In recent years, theology has opened its eyes to consider the needs and perspectives of “those who have previously been excluded from its discussions on grounds of gender, race, or social location,” giving rise to the question of whether it should also open its eyes to the needs and perspectives of our fellow creatures. (p. xii)

• ·         It is an issue with wide ranging implications: “The animal question is a properly theological one in the sense that it raises and illuminates issues concerning the adequacy and coherence of Christian doctrine in the areas of trinity, creation, covenant, incarnation, atonement, eschatology, Christology, pneumatology, and beyond.” (p. xiii)

  

  Rublev Icon of the Trinity

         Regarding the first point, Clough puts his finger on what, for me, is probably the most important reason churches can no longer disregard animals as theological concern:

The newness of our current practices in relation to other animals is breathtaking.  In the period of history of the Christian Church, we have travelled from a time in which the killing of animals was only permitted within religious rituals to a time in which 60 billion animals per year are killed for human consumption, the majority of which are raised, slaughtered and processed in factory conditions far removed from the sight or concern of their consumers. (p. xiii)

In addition, he notes, stresses between animals and humans will only increase as human population increases and the impacts of climate change are felt.  We need to examine these new practices and circumstances in light of what we have always said we believe about the nature of God, the purpose of creation, and the role of humans in it.  We need to stop and ask, “What are we doing,” and “Is it acceptable”?

            Clough also makes the important point that in addressing our relationships with animals, we do not need to move away from traditional orthodox beliefs.  Instead, the new perspectives he is urging come from “looking squarely for the first time at the sum of what we already are committed to believing about our fellow creatures and their place in God’s creation.”  It requires only connecting “previously unconnected doctrinal insights,” “an attempt to trace the implications of doing Christian theology alert to the issue of where animals belong.” (p. xv).  Like me, Clough argues that the animals have always been there; we just haven’t seen them. 

St. Blaise with animals

             Clough tackles head on the notion that only humans matter, or that, at least, they matter significantly more than anything else.  He distinguishes and argues against various contexts and implications of anthropocentrism.  Of particular note, he urges that the idea that humans are the source of all value is an atheistic idea and cannot stand in a Christian context, which sees God as the source of all value.  The ethical sense of anthropocentrism, he argues, depends on our understanding of the purpose of creation (teleology): “if God made the world for the sake of humanity, presumably human interests should predominate, but, if this is not the case, then ethical anthropocentrism is hard to justify.” (p. xviii).  Telelogical anthropocentrism (the idea that creation exists for the sake of humans) is to be resisted:

“Clearly the Bible and the theological tradition . . . inevitably . . . look at God and the world from a human point of view and take an understandable interest in how God and the world relate to the human situation.  Teleological anthropocentrism goes further in asserting that this human view of things is also the view point of God: not only are we central in our view of God and the world, but this human perspective is also an accurate representation of our centrality in God’s acts of creation and redemption.  Throughout this book I will argue that taking this step of maintaining the centrality of humanity to God’s purposes is biblically and theologically both unnecessary and undesirable, and therefore Christianity should be distinguished by its theocentrism, than anthropocentrism.  (p. xx). 

            As a final introductory point, Clough responds to the view that looks at animals only as part of ecosystems.  While acknowledging the importance of considering our place and the place of animals in ecosystems and even the place of the earth in the rest of creation, Clough argues that it is theologically important to “pause with the animals:”  “We cannot rush from the acknowledged narrowness of an anthropocentric perspective to the broadest possible vision encompassing all of creation, because that would cause us to miss the theological and moral significance of those particular living things that are most like us.” (p.xxi)  He underscores that “it is a vital theological task” to consider all creatures with the breath of life, in their commonalities and their differences, each “worthy of attention as individuals, communities and species.” (p. xxi).

            The book is structured in three parts:

• ·         Creation, which looks at the purpose of creation, the place of animals in creation, and the ways humans have tried to define the differences between humans and other animals;

• ·         Reconciliation, which looks at the incarnation and the work of atonement; and

• ·         Redemption, considering both the scope of redemption and living a redeemed life.  

       This is a lot of ground to cover, but is all important for our understanding of why animals, as a subject of theological inquiry, matter, and why, as Christians, we need to give the issue our theological attention if we hope to grow into the creatures God has created us to be.  If you have followed this blog, you will recognize many of these themes as issues that are important to me and that I believe are critical to making the changes we so urgently need in our Christian perspective on animals.  I am so grateful to Clough for this contribution to the scholarly consideration of these issues.  I look forward to undertaking the “vital theological task” of thinking through these issues with you!

Photo by Pam Lennard