« On the other end, for once | Main | As you can see... »
October 11, 2005
Oh, please
Rabbi Terry Bookman, of Temple Beth Am in Pinecrest, said he is all for loving and caring for pets, but a ''bark mitzvah'' is crossing the line.
Posted by Amy Welborn | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451be0d69e200d8349269cc69e2
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Oh, please:
Comments
A bark mitzvah? I'm simply bow-wowled over!
Posted by: Jeff at Oct 11, 2005 1:20:34 AM
Times when you wonder about reporters:
"But a bark mitzvah is a desecration of a sacred event."
Rabbi Ed Farber of Beth Torah, a conservative congregation in Northeast Miami-Dade County, had even stronger words: "It is just distasteful."
How is "distasteful" a stronger word than "desecration"?
Posted by: Maureen at Oct 11, 2005 6:20:24 AM
Confirming long-held theory of your humble scribbler. Devotion to four-legged friends has increased in direct proportion to legal or backroom abortions. Surrogate children more fun than The Real Things. Less maintenance over 18 to 21 years, too. Also confirming Marvcus Sheavus' assertion- show me a culture that despises virginity and I'll show you a culture that despises children.
Posted by: Gerard E. at Oct 11, 2005 7:48:59 AM
I'll admit to taking the kids and our rambunctious puppy to the pet blessing at our parish a couple of weeks ago (although, truth be told, the puppy is more in need of an exorcism).
I recently read an article (USA Today maybe) that claimed people were beginning to overschedule their pets the way many overschedule kids, signing up for agility training, playing "teams" and all kinds of other daily commitments.
A "bark mitzvah" is really over the top. And as much about throwing a party to impress the guests (the ones who walk on two feet, needless to say).
Posted by: Cheryl at Oct 11, 2005 7:56:29 AM
"Today I am a man's best friend."
Posted by: Terrence Berres at Oct 11, 2005 8:10:04 AM
Unfortunately all too often our human religious events, be they bar mitzvahs, first communions, weddings, whatever, are more about throwing parties to impress the guests than anything else.
Posted by: Al DelG at Oct 11, 2005 8:12:45 AM
Pets are people too! /sarcasm
Thinking of the recent dust up over that loony PETA add equating animals w/ victims of lynchings and also a convo with a guy at work who was trying to tell me that his dog has feelings just like he has.
Posted by: Colleen at Oct 11, 2005 9:08:14 AM
Dogs do have feelings. But there is no reason to subject them to religious rituals (other than the St. Francis' Day blessing, which is totally optional) because they are not in man's sinful condition. A "bark mitzvah" makes a mockery of the owner's faith -- or perhaps only points out how unseriously he or she takes it. Abraham must be spinning in his grave.
Posted by: Yurodivi at Oct 11, 2005 9:15:42 AM
From Plutarch's Life of Pericles:
CAESAR once, seeing some wealthy strangers at Rome, carrying up and down with them in their arms and bosoms young puppy-dogs and monkeys, embracing and making much of them, took occasion not unnaturally to ask whether the women in their country were not used to bear children; by that prince-like reprimand gravely reflecting upon persons who spend and lavish upon brute beasts that affection and kindness which nature has implanted in us to be bestowed on those of our own kind.
http://classics.mit.edu/Plutarch/pericles.html
Posted by: Josh at Oct 11, 2005 9:21:27 AM
They had a Fransiscan pet blessing at a local church last week, a perfectly fine old tradition, only the blessing itself seemed a bit kooky to me. It included something about how St. Francis had striven to learn the language of the animals. Now, I know St. Francis loved animals, but I really don't remember his Donkey-Human Dictionary as one of his great achievements.
Posted by: Eileen R at Oct 11, 2005 9:32:09 AM
anthropomorphism has taken over, as we kill more and more children via abortion, these childless couples are getting very wierd about animals....sick and sad at the same time
Posted by: Matt at Oct 11, 2005 9:43:20 AM
I have been thinking about a book idea on the very subject of how pets have basically become equivalent to people in the eyes of many (and not just the PETA people either). We dress them as people, talk to them like they were people, and now the trend has begun it seems to include them (by more than just blessing them) in our faith traditions as well. Anyone interested in the book idea?
God bless
Posted by: Brian O at Oct 11, 2005 9:44:09 AM
About 2 weeks ago, I was organist at a wedding where a dog was ring-bearer. Since our choir loft is at the rear of the church, I couldn't see how he was carrying the rings -- not in his mouth, hopefully! Even though the dog was very well-behaved and impeccably groomed (had a beautiful white ribbon around his neck), and even though I love dogs myself, I still think that animals have no place in church, except for a blessing of the pets. Still less appropriate to have animals taking part in a Sacrament! Not only that, the groom hadn't yet been baptized, yet both bride and groom received the Eucharist at the Nuptial Mass. Perhaps the groom had been baptized in another denomination, or perhaps our Bishop had provided a special dispensation, so I may be jumping the gun here. But our pastor announced that the groom would be baptized the next day, along with the couple's infant son. As Al DelG points out above, inserting gimmicks like a canine ring-bearer into a liturgical rite indicates a desire to impress people and be "cute" (and Calvin definitely is cute!), rather than a desire to honour God. I definitely was NOT impressed -- especially to see Calvin's name in the beautifully printed programme with a paw-print next to it! Lord have mercy!
Posted by: Patricia Gonzalez at Oct 11, 2005 9:53:06 AM
I'm not against pet blessings. It's Catholic (and Jewish) tradition to bless everything: food, beer, cattle, tools, vehicles, the works. That's all part of turning pretty much everything in Creation into a sacramental, and repairing the fallen world.
But it's wrong to treat animals like people; and not very fair to them, either. It's bad enough when you see parents explaining that "we don't do that" to human children about things they can't possibly understand yet -- but I've seen people lecturing animals in that same wishywashy tone. (They'll never understand you if you don't say "No!" in a firm voice.)
And then people say they've got a bad dog or a vicious dog, when what they've got is a confused dog desperately looking for a little alpha guidance from their human.
So if people want to have a party for their friends with dogs, fine. But don't make it into a mockery of your religion and people, or try to make your dog live up to the obligations of a son.
Posted by: Maureen at Oct 11, 2005 10:02:31 AM
The rings were probably around the dog's neck, possibly on the ribbon.
I can see wanting to have your dog in your wedding. Really. I can see it. But I think they'd be a lot happier waiting outside for you or (if you had to have them in church) acting as "honor guards". Or if you really have to be overcute, have them fetch your flowers.
But not the ring. Everybody you even remotely know who has a child who could have been ringbearer will be hugely insulted. Also, you will be weirding up the symbolism of the rings, which cuts at the core of the actual act of getting married.
Dogs like things orderly and settled and routine. If you really love them, have that kind of wedding -- and definitely have that kind of marriage. They hate to see their alpha people fight.
Posted by: Maureen at Oct 11, 2005 10:10:40 AM
Out here in L.A. the dog=human culture has taken over and I can totally attest to the dog-instead-of-kids phenomena. I have two children, and you don't know how many times I'll say how the baby did this or the toddler did that, and someone will say "Oh, fido finally returned the frisbee the other day!" and really mean it like a proud parent.
Dogs are part of God's creation, but they're not human, and they have a place in society - like in a yard or on a farm, not weddings, out to dinner, the mall, the local Starbucks, or playgrounds. Leave them at home, and dog-garnet, pick up after them when you take them for a walk! Something that's VERY common out here, sad to say.
Posted by: Kenneth at Oct 11, 2005 10:32:25 AM
Bark mitzvah?
Crikey! What will we see next??
Catholics celebrating their Pets' birthdays by giving them Real Presents?
or Protestant Ministers preaching shoala scriptura to their goldfish?
Posted by: Venerable Aussie at Oct 11, 2005 10:34:06 AM
"anthropomorphism has taken over, as we kill more and more children via abortion, these childless couples are getting very wierd about animals....sick and sad at the same time"
Oh not at all. As abortion and other crimes against humanity have risen so has the way we treat animals. How else can you explain that America, a so-called "dog loving" country routinely kills thousands of discarded dogs and cats each year? And the way we abuse animals in the industrialized agribusiness system? Dogfighting is also on the increase in many parts of the country. You want to see human viciousness at work? Go attend one.
I'm with Yurodivi. Animals don't sin (unlike homo sapiens) and it is preposterous to subject them to religious rituals that have absolutely no meaning for them. And while I do agree that PETA gets over the top at times the great Jewish novelist Isaac Bashevis Singer, a holocaust survivor spoke passionately against factory farming because of what he experienced in the concentration camps. He made the point that victimizers (in his case the brutality of the Nazis) are all the same, whether the object of their abuse is human or not. Thomas Merton also spoke eloquently on this subject.
All the friends I know that care deeply about the humane treatment of animals are also pro-life to the core.
There's a big difference between those who want to be good caretakers of all that God has made and the kooks who don't respect animals for what they are and try to turn them into little people.
Posted by: Christine at Oct 11, 2005 10:37:17 AM
I care deeply about animals too, I feed them and take care of them and am responsible with our own pets (including three stray cats - what was I thinking!!!) but when I see the grocery store aisle w/ pet products consuming more space than child care products, something is out of whack! I believe we in the US spent @ 35 Billion dollars on pet related products last year. Look at the very successful 'petsmart' & 'petco' (the equivalent of 'Target' for pets) and I know people who have spent literally thousands for surgery/treatment for their dogs and cats. Which I understand to a degree but still wrestle morally with in light of the human suffering all around us (maybe not in our community but it's there out in the world).
And wasn't there a kerfluffle last year or so with an Episcopalian service which included pets in the pew?
I dunno. Somehow or other I think if I had more kids or had the prospect of tons of grandchildren pets wouldn't take such a front-seat in our lives.
Posted by: Colleen at Oct 11, 2005 10:51:32 AM
I would bet dollars to bones that any children or other relatives in that family don't call, don't write, don't visit, don't show up for holidays, etc.
I'm not excusing it, but I would guess that you have here some very lonely people.
Posted by: Ray in MN at Oct 11, 2005 10:57:18 AM
Go to any pet cemetery and be prepared to be physically ill. The degree to which people obsess over their pets, even at death, is sad.
Posted by: Jimmy Mac at Oct 11, 2005 11:00:00 AM
Colleen,
We live in a consumer driven society and the corporate world is going to sell anything it can. Pet food, for one, is simply a byproduct of the packing industry and doesn't take anything away from human consumption. I certainly don't spend excessively on my dog other than what is needed to keep him fed and healthy.
Line that up with the constant barrage on the idiot box that targets young people to get the lastest gadget or doodad dujour. Not to mention the countless hours and dollars spent on cell phones babbling about absolutely nothing.
If people allow themselves to be hoodwinked by the advertising industry that fido just can't live without a pearl-studded collar, well, that's not the pooch's fault.
Posted by: Christine at Oct 11, 2005 11:20:16 AM
Maybe we could let up a little bit?
Of course having animals as participants in religious rituals (except receiving blessings) is off the wall. That's obvious to any adult.
But this too. It isn't just selfish, contracepting married people getting silly about pets. There are so many who are lonely. Old people who have no families, or who are neglected by the ones they do have; single people who have not succeeded in making meaningful human bonds; the sick, isolated...the list goes on and on. In a functioning society all these people would be enfolded in the extended family structures; as it is, they are alone.
Isn't it better to find something to love, even if it's only a dog, than to die of loneliness? So people get foolish about it, so what.
Those of us who feel superior to such people might ask ourselves what we have done lately to relieve the isolation of the lonely and sick people we know ourselves in our own lives and communities. Don't say there aren't any. We're surrounded by them.
Posted by: Carlo at Oct 11, 2005 11:24:09 AM
It is ironic--treating animals like people and unborn babies like animals whose lives can be snuffed out at will.
Posted by: Sr. Lorraine at Oct 11, 2005 11:28:09 AM
News: They're not called "pets" any more.
Nowadays the term is "furkid".
When all your real kids got flushed down the drain of a Womyn's Reproductive Choice Clinic, all that maternal instinct has got to go somewhere.
Jimmy Mac:
Go to any pet cemetery and be prepared to be physically ill.
Been there. Done that. Got the T-shirt. When my folks' dog died, they did the whole Evelyn Waugh-ish nine yards with the pet cemetery -- even ripped into me when I didn't decorate the dog's grave on a regular basis. (But then they ripped into me on a lot of things -- wish I'd been the dog instead of only the son.)
Other Kenneth:
Out here in L.A. the dog=human culture has taken over and I can totally attest to the dog-instead-of-kids phenomena.
I grew up in LA. It's always been flaky out here, especially since Sauron got The Ring back in the Sixties; I watch South Park for its grounding in reality.
A bud of mine has said a lot of Animal Lovers/Activists are that way not because they love animals, but because they hate humans.
Posted by: Ken at Oct 11, 2005 11:30:24 AM
