Natural Moral Law and its approach to Non-Human matters of Life and Death

Question 1

Use of animal as food and intensive farming

Answer 1

• Aquinas’ approach is governed by Aristotle’s hierarchy of souls: animals were created for any human use, including farming and intensive farming.
• Aquinas Summa Theologica: Only humans are rational, so animals have instrumental value only, which includes using them for Farming and intensive farming.
• Aquinas Summa Theologica: There is no sin in using something for the purpose for which it was intended. Scripture allows us to control and eat animals.
• Aquinas Summa Theologica: If someone bludgeons another mans ox to death, that is just property theft. Equally, Farming and Intensive farming are just property issues.

Evaluation

• Aristotle’s hierarchy of the souls is pre-scientific nonsense
• How useful is Aquinas’ view that animals are merely property?
• Should the Christian virtue of compassion be extended to all animals?
• The genesis text about dominion over animals can also be interpreted to mean that humans should be responsible stewards of other animals.

Question 2

Use of animals in scientific procedures and Cloning

Answer 2

• If animals amount to property, then SP must be acceptable
• CCC : Accepts SP if the procedures ‘remain within reasonable limits’, especially if they lead to saving human lives
• Using SP to cure terminal illnesses fulfils the primary precept of preserving life
• Aquinas might accept SP even when animals are not given pain relief, since in Summa Theologica he says that cruelty to animals is morally wrong only where the person is concerned: ‘Might go on and do the same to men.’
• Aquinas might probably condemn AC because it changes the nature of a species, whereas God created each species to fulfil its purpose
• The Catholic Church accepts AC to increase milk yield, animal size, resistance to disease etc.
• CCC accepts SP/AC to provide cures for human diseases, provided that adequate pain relief is given.

Evaluation

• Same as for F/IF, since SP and AC include much the same considerations
• CCC and the Catholic Church make the point that animals must be given pain relief where required, which is an advance on Aquinas

Question 3

Blood Sports

Answer 3

• The pain and suffering inflicted on animals through BS is morally wrong only if it leads to humans being cruel to humans
• The death of the animal must be a legitimate use of property
• CCC, however, modifies Aquinas’ view: Men owe animals kindness, following the example of saints like Francis of Assisi
• CCC: ‘It is necessary to human dignity to cause animals to suffer or die needlessly.’

Evaluation

• Aquinas’ views would allow BS, but the thinking is still outdated; ANML refuses to acknowledge the moral status of other animals
• Even on Aquinas’ thinking, it is hard to see how animals that are killed or maimed in BS can have a chance of fulfilling the end for which they were created by God, unless we accept that their purpose is for human use.
• Catholic groups have called on the Pope to take action over BS in line with Church ideas about responsible stewardship.

Question 4

Xenotransplantation

Answer 4

• As with other animal issues, xenotransplantation is not an issue that Aquinas would have thought about, but his account of NML would accept it
• ANML would accept Xenotransplantation so long as there was no attempt to modify the human germline (that is, to alter God’s blueprint for humans)
• This specific safeguard has been recommended by the CMA - the Catholic Medical Association
• The CMA insists that all procedures should minimise animal pain and suffering.

Evaluation

• As with BS, it is hard to see that how an animal that is killed as the result of xenotransplantation can fulfil the end for which it was created by God
• Is it fair to say that most people accept Xenotransplantation where adequate pain relief is given and where animal suffering is minimised. The Catholic Church and the CMA accept this.