JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for LITURGY Archives


LITURGY Archives

LITURGY Archives


LITURGY@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

LITURGY Home

LITURGY Home

LITURGY  1998

LITURGY 1998

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: Praying for animals

From:

Nathan Nettleton <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

[log in to unmask]

Date:

Thu, 25 Jun 1998 13:56:11 +1000

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (81 lines)

George R. Hoelzeman wrote:

> There should be a fundamental difference in the way we pray
> for objects and animals as opposed to humans.  This is clearly understood
> in the various prayers and blessings for tools, crops, animals, pets, rain,
> etc. which have been in long use by many Christian communions.

I agree with this up to a point, but I think it may be accusing me of
advocating things that I haven't advocated. If you look back at the liturgy
for my "funeral" for a dog, you will see that with the possible exception of
the line "We give back to you our friend Bindi" none of the prayers pray "for"
the deceased dog. There are prayers of thanks for the life of the dog and
there are prayers for those bereaved by the death of the dog but there are no
petitions for the dog.

George also wrote:
> there is still something to be said for the inate dignity of humanity
> which, IMHO, is compromised when one extends the ritual benefits of the
> Church to an animal

As I've implied above, I'm not claiming that the dog benefits from the ritual.
But I want to respond further than that. Certainly the innate dignity of
humans is of a different status to that of a dog, but we don't protect the
dignity of humans by denying the dignity of everything else. There is an
innate dignity in everything that is a product of the creative genius of God
and has been declared to be good by God. While I can accept that our dignity
as image bearers is of a different degree, God has placed us in an intricate
web of interconnectedness with the rest of creation and a church that tries to
separate its liturgy from its location in that web denies the wholeness of
creation and exacerbates its fragmentation.

I partially agree with George's statement that a pastoral liturgy around the
death of a dog should  "not recreate or parallel the rites used with humans".
But such a liturgy will inevitably parallel rites used with humans in so far
as both recognize and honour the grief of the bereaved and there will always
be unavoidable parallels in the liturgical expression of grief. However such a
liturgy must have significant differences too, because we are dealing with
events that have significant differences.

The objection I have with what goes on in the name of liturgy in far too many
churches is that it lacks the creativity to come up with appropriate liturgies
to give ritual expression to the various significant events in people's lives.
Too often we get stuck with our basic list of liturgies and we we don't know
what to do when someone's experience doesn't fit our categories. Among other
things this has resulted in the use of liturgies that mark stages of faith as
substitute liturgies to mark stages of life. 

For example, a service to celebrate a birth should "not recreate or parallel
the rites used" for a baptism, and a service to celebrate reaching puberty
should "not recreate or parallel the rites used" for confirmation, and yet
isn't that often how those important faith stage rituals end up being used? I
would bet that most of the non-church going parents who request baptism for
their children would actually be far happier if we offered them a service that
actually celebrated what it was they were wanting to celebrate and included
vows that they actually meant and intended to keep.

The problem that George is correctly reacting to, if not correctly
identifying, is actually the problem of trying to make too few church rites
fit too many different life situations. Instead we need to recognize that any
event that has a deep impact on a person is worthy of liturgical
acknowledgement and use our creativity and freedom to craft something suitable.

I don't believe I'm guilty of uncritically using a human rite for an animal. I
put the word "funeral" in inverted commas in my original post to acknowledge
that I realize it is not the same thing. What I am guilty of is believing that
worship and ritual are far too important to confine them to only a few
"churchy" areas of life. 

Peace and hope,

Nathan

_____________________________________
Nathan Nettleton
Pastor, South Yarra Community Baptist Church
Melbourne, Australia
[log in to unmask]


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

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

April 2024
March 2024
January 2024
December 2023
September 2023
June 2023
March 2023
February 2023
December 2022
September 2022
July 2022
June 2022
January 2022
October 2021
September 2021
July 2021
January 2021
December 2020
October 2020
June 2020
April 2020
January 2020
December 2019
October 2019
July 2019
June 2019
April 2019
January 2019
December 2018
October 2018
July 2018
June 2018
April 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
January 2017
December 2016
September 2016
July 2016
April 2016
February 2016
January 2016
November 2015
September 2015
April 2015
January 2015
December 2014
October 2014
September 2014
April 2014
November 2013
October 2013
June 2013
March 2013
December 2012
October 2012
September 2012
July 2012
April 2012
March 2012
December 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
November 2010
October 2010
August 2010
April 2010
January 2010
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
June 2009
April 2009
February 2009
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
February 2008
January 2008
November 2007
September 2007
April 2007
March 2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager