The Particularity of Animals and of Jesus Christ: with David Fergusson, “God, Christ, and Animals”; Margaret B. Adam, “The Particularity of Animals and of Jesus Christ”; Christopher Carter, “The Imago Dei as the Mind of Jesus Christ”; Stephen H. Webb, “Toward a Weak Anthropocentrism”; and David Clough, “On Thinking Theologically about Animals: A Response.”
Clough's theological account of animals critiques the familiar negative identification of animals as not-human. Instead, Clough highlights both the distinctive particularity of each animal as created by God and the shared fleshly creatureliness of human and nonhuman animals. He encourages Chris...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Interlibrary Loan: | Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany) |
| Published: |
2014
|
| In: |
Zygon
Year: 2014, Volume: 49, Issue: 3, Pages: 746-751 |
| Further subjects: | B
Salvation
B Animals B two-nature Christology B creatures B Flesh B Redemption B Particularity B theological ethic |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Summary: | Clough's theological account of animals critiques the familiar negative identification of animals as not-human. Instead, Clough highlights both the distinctive particularity of each animal as created by God and the shared fleshly creatureliness of human and nonhuman animals. He encourages Christians to recognize Jesus Christ as God enfleshed more than divinely human, and consequently to care for nonhuman animals as those who share with human animals in the redemption of all flesh. This move risks downplaying the possibilities for creaturely specific forms of redemption; limiting the cosmic efficacy of salvation in Christ; and losing the particularity of Christ's divine and human natures. Another, possibly less risky, direction to take Clough's insights about creatureliness and well-formed theological ethics might attend to the perverse ways that humans assess the worthiness of human and nonhuman animals by substituting particularities of use and abuse for the particularities of creation and salvation. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1467-9744 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Zygon
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1111/zygo.12118 |