At 06:21 PM 23/6/98 +1000, Doug wrote:
>
>My problem with this discussion is that it follows the lead of the
>pantheists, et. al. who focus their attention on the creation instead of
>its creator.
>
	<snip>
>
>It seems to me that the Lord would be most pleased if we would turn our
>attention to Him and proclaiming His majesty and lead His people into
>such worship rather than us praising our emotional ties to His creation
>and leading His people to focus on it as well.
>

As I read Nathan's post on the funeral for a dog, the focus was not on the
dog as inheritor of eternal life (though, given some of the NT imagery
about "all things" being reconciled to God, and the renewal of all
creation, that seems to me to be an open question), but on the dog as a
part of the network of relationships in a particular household or
community. If we believe that God cares for us, isn't it appropriate to
bring before God our grief at the termination of such a relationship? Such
a funeral need no more focus on the creature to the exclusion of the
creator than do funerals of humans.

As Nathan said, funerals (whether of dogs or of humans) are for those who
remain alive after the death rather than for the deceased. As for the newt,
well, something may depend on what kind of relationship a person had with
it.	:)	Seriously, though, I think the question of relationships (which we
acknowledge as among God's good gifts to us) is a useful touchstone that
would preclude ritualising the burial of soup bones while allowing funerals
for companion animals.

Cheers,
	inari
		<><

===========================================================================
Inari Thiel, Engineering, Griffith University, Nathan, Brisbane, Australia
===========================================================================
	"That's why I hate this Windows -- because of the icons --
		I'm a Protestant, and I don't believe in icons."


%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%