Jump to content
An Old School Catholic Message Board

Vegetarianism And Compassion For Animals


Pliny

Recommended Posts

existence is good, non-existence is evil. even existence in hell is better than non-existence. wrap your head around that.

 

 

Have you ever been in hell?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

existence is good, non-existence is evil. even existence in hell is better than non-existence. wrap your head around that.

 

Wut.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PhuturePriest

Have you ever been in hell?

 

She's a grad student. She's in hell.

Edited by FuturePriest387
Link to comment
Share on other sites

existence is good, non-existence is evil. even existence in hell is better than non-existence. wrap your head around that.

 

How do I reconcile this ^^^ with this:

 

"And the Son of man indeed goeth, as it is written of him: but woe to that man by whom the Son of man shall be betrayed. It were better for him, if that man had not been born."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tab'le De'Bah-Rye

I won't eat lamb or veal except for on special occasions based on that they have not had sufficient enjoyment of life yet to become dinner. And also possibly the better treated the beef the better the meat , including life span without always happening to eat a stringy ancient one, perhaps tastier and healthier with such guide lines. Rabbits are often in plague proportion, eat more bunnies. lol.

Edited by Tab'le De'Bah-Rye
Link to comment
Share on other sites

maximillion

I eat bunnies, lots of them. Caught and painlessly dispatched by my foster son. This is mostly organic meat, it's free apart from the time it takes to catch and deal with, and it rids the local farmers of a menace. So far not one land owner has refused my foster son permission to hunt on his land. We also take birds when we can, mainly pigeon. You don't get much meat off a pigeon but six of them can make a very good meal.

 

I haven't eaten beef in 35 years. I rarely eat pork. I do eat fish, mainly farmed or line caught if I can get it ( we fish too) as well as shellfish. I am fortunate to live in Devon UK, very rural, but right next to the sea too. We also forage. When I say we I mainly mean my foster son these days as I am disabled, but we pick greens, samphire, herbs, wild fruits etc in season.

 

I am trying to tread lightly on this earth and to not screw up the eco-system. I won't shop in supermarkets unless it's a dire emergency, and I have a windowsill and a tiny patio garden for salad and veggies. I wish to could keep hens.......

 

God gave us the stewardship of the earth and all that is here, and how we 'use' it - including how we raise animals for the table will be on our account sheet. Is it better for an animal to live for the food industry rather than never to have existed. Well, realms of philosophy here. 

Not all animals have self awareness like a dog or a cat does. Is a beef animal self aware? From my close observation of it I would say no, so, apart from considerations of cruelty in how the animal is raised/dispatched at the end, I doubt it give a hoot about it's personal existance.......

 

What I also know is that the average human needs only 25/50 grams of animal protein a day to remain healthy ( more veg protein than this is needed ).

This means that most of us in the developed world are grossly over producing and over eating animal products.

It's greed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do I reconcile this ^^^ with this:

"And the Son of man indeed goeth, as it is written of him: but woe to that man by whom the Son of man shall be betrayed. It were better for him, if that man had not been born."


Hyperbole.

Or--note that he said "born" and not "conceived."
Link to comment
Share on other sites

KnightofChrist

Like coldness is merely the absence of heat, evil is the absence of good. God is Good, and Goodness exist or even is existence itself, evil is the lack of that existence. God loves all in creation as He created them, for "God looked at everything He had made, and He found it very good” - Genesis 1:31.

Because God loves all that He created He will not allow it to be destroyed, as energy cannot be destroyed, “[f]or you (God) love all things that are and loathe nothing that you have made; for you would not fashion what you hate. How could a thing remain, unless you willed it; or be preserved, had it not been called forth by you? But you spare all things, because they are yours, O Ruler and Lover of souls” - Wisdom 11:24-26.

So yes in a very real sense non-existence is pure evil, and if God who loves all the things, as He created them, willed someone to nonexistance, rather than out of love saving them in heaven or in hell, God would uncreate a good of His creation and that would be pure evil.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

She's a grad student. She's in hell.

 

Being in grad school is pretty fun... It's the grad students themselves that are hell:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FXvv5sTqNa4

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like coldness is merely the absence of heat, evil is the absence of good. God is Good, and Goodness exist or even is existence itself, evil is the lack of that existence. God loves all in creation as He created them, for "God looked at everything He had made, and He found it very good” - Genesis 1:31.

Because God loves all that He created He will not allow it to be destroyed, as energy cannot be destroyed, “[f]or you (God) love all things that are and loathe nothing that you have made; for you would not fashion what you hate. How could a thing remain, unless you willed it; or be preserved, had it not been called forth by you? But you spare all things, because they are yours, O Ruler and Lover of souls” - Wisdom 11:24-26.

So yes in a very real sense non-existence is pure evil, and if God who loves all the things, as He created them, willed someone to nonexistance, rather than out of love saving them in heaven or in hell, God would uncreate a good of His creation and that would be pure evil.


What a poet!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

HisChildForever

Hyperbole.

Or--note that he said "born" and not "conceived."

 

So it would have been better for Judas to have died in the womb?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

existence is good, non-existence is evil. even existence in hell is better than non-existence. wrap your head around that.

 

How do I reconcile this ^^^ with this:

 

"And the Son of man indeed goeth, as it is written of him: but woe to that man by whom the Son of man shall be betrayed. It were better for him, if that man had not been born."

 

Still waiting for a satisfactory answer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

KnightofChrist

He was using hyperbole, Christ is saying it is really really bad to betray the Son of man. Like if He was saying it was raining cats and dogs outside He would actually mean it's raining really hard. Or like the hyperbolic statement He made when He said a person should cut of his hand if it makes him sin, He did not mean one should actually cut off his hand but rather to go and sin no more.

God willed to make Judas, just as He willed to create all of man, and He willed to give us all eternal life, and He found this very good.
Because of that God will not allow the good that He has created to be destroyed. Allowing any being of His creation to cease to exist would be saying He made a mistake in creating that being who was created with an immortal soul. Hell is salvation from nonexistence, nonexistence is evil because it lacks any good. Hell is better than nonexistance because existence is better by its very nature of existing and being created by God.

"The Church knows three apokatastaseis. One is the [apokatastasis] of everything according to the principle (logos) of virtue; in this apokatastasis one is restored who fulfills the principle of virtue in himself. The second is that of the whole [human nature] in the Resurrection. This is the apokatastasis to incorruption and immortality. The third, in the oft-cited words of Gregory of Nyssa, is the apokatastasis of the powers of the soul which, having lapsed into sin, are again restored to that condition in which they were created. For it is necessary that just as the entire nature of the flesh hopes in time to be taken up again into incorruption in the apokatastasis, so also the powers of the soul, having become distorted during the course of the ages had instilled in it a memory of evil, so that at the end of ages, not finding any rest, will come to God Who has no limit. And thus the distorted powers of the soul will be taken up into the primeval apokatastasis, into a merely discursive knowledge of, but not into the participation in, the good things [of God], where the Creator is known yet without being the cause of [their] sin." - St. Maximos the Confessor, Quaestiones ad Thalassium (PG 90:796BC)

Edited by KnightofChrist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ithinkjesusiscool

The problem with modern vegerarianism, as I see it, is about anthropology. Many vegetarians don't even have a reasonable and good anthropology. They can't see the difference between an animal and a human. That being said, eating vegetarian food is ok (I do it myself) but delving into vegetarianism is just anti-Catholic. But question still is (and I ask you Catholics who know your Theology): why is it ok to kill an animal but not a human?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...