Tom Buck, who once frequented polemics circles and has collaborated with us for many of the articles on this website, asked a question in an article that Karen Swallow Prior was kind enough to get printed for him in Christianity Today (a publication with a growing list of nefarious authors, including another of Karen Swallow Prior’s friends, a homosexual who wrote about masturbation for the magazine just this week). That question was this…
What does Scripture have to say to those grieving the loss of an animal?
Such was the subtitle of Buck’s piece, in which he discussed “Why I Did a Funeral for a Dog.” The answer to Buck’s subtitle should be simple to anyone with a working knowledge of the Holy Scripture.
Nothing. Literally nothing is said regarding those grieving the loss of an animal.
At least, not explicitly. While general principles regarding mourning with those who mourn (Romans 12:15) and general empathy (1 Peter 3:8) can certainly be applied to those mourning anything (the loss of a job, the passing of a loved one, the loss of an appendage, the passing of an era, etc…), grieving for animals is not only not a major theme of Scripture, it is not a minor theme, nor is it mentioned a single time within 66 books of Inspired Writ. The Bible speaks of grieving for animals as much as it does the following:
- The whereabouts of Sasquatch
- Internet piracy laws
- The abundance of selfies in social media
- Cholesterol medicine
- Disease vaccination
In short, although general principles may be applied regarding grieving, empathy or overall kindness, nothing is said regarding those grieving the loss of an animal. The subtitle of Buck’s post, as well as the post itself, falls short of clarifying that although ethical paradigms derived implicitly from Scripture may or may not abstractly relate to the topic, it is not one that rises to such a concern to the Almighty that he address it explicitly a single time in the entire canon of Scripture.
Poised as a defense for why he did a funeral for a gunned-down police dog, the Texas pastor talked about the canine being an “officer of the law” and why he felt obliged to answer the request to do the funeral in the affirmative. Knowing Buck (and knowing him well), I fully presume the Gospel was preached at the event. And good on him, if that were the case. So then, Buck says, he attempted to answer the question, “Can the Scriptures speak to us even in a circumstance like this?”
Sadly, Buck failed tremendously to answer the question in the affirmative, and in so doing, he (hopefully, inadvertently) took part in the radical animal rights activism of Karen Swallow Prior. Propaganda, of course, only works if it is subtle. My contention, as you will see, is not with Buck’s intentions, but with his naivety in what he has taken part in, apparently unaware he’s playing the role of useful idiot (I use that term not as an insult, but in its specialized definition from 1941 Russia – click that link to find out why I use it) in a major worldview schism that seeks to not elevate the animal Kingdom to a place of our genuine concern, so much as to diminish and downplay the uniqueness and special nature of the divine origin of humanity.
First, a few obvious non-contentions. Obviously, there is nothing inherently wrong with helping people mourn anyone or anything. We humans are fragile creatures, and sometimes we need help processing things by sentient and empathetic friends. Emotions are not inherently wrong, one way or another, and sadness even over things that seem trite can be sympathized with and recovery assisted. Secondly, the passing of a beloved pet (for many people) is no small matter. While I have a farm-type mentality when it comes to seeing dogs as necessary tools rather than family members, I have no judgmentalism toward those who view their pets as more than that, at least until they start running into burning buildings to retrieve their cat. And when our pet-owning friends suffer loss, Gospel ministers can help to apply the Balm of Gilead to their soul. Third, a dead pet is an opportunity, as Buck suggested for sharing the Gospel. Of course, every single event in the history of mankind is an opportunity to share the Gospel, it should go without saying.
But, the devil (and by extension, Karen Swallow Prior) is in the details. Clearly, the extent in which the Holy Scriptures can be entangled in this mission is pretty limited. Be kind. Be empathetic. Minister to the hurting. The agenda in which Buck has chosen to take part, however, is not satisfied with generalized Biblical platitudes. Neither is the agenda in which Buck has chosen to take part essentially Christian in nature.
Karen Swallow Prior, who Buck credits for his change-of-thinking within the article, is on the faith advisory board for the radical Humane Society (along with Jewish rabbis, Muslim Imams and others – link), and these aren’t the people saving cats and dogs from being put to sleep at your local animal shelter. The Humane Society (HSUS) isn’t affiliated with any locally based pet shelters. They don’t run a single pet shelter. According to their tax returns, the HSUS gives less than 1% of their funds to local pet shelters or local operations to save pets. Rather, their funds are spent on lobbying efforts to end industrialized farming that feeds substantial portions of the world (source link). Their agenda, concealed by misleading television commercial featuring adorable-faced pets, is every bit as radical as their sister organization, PETA, and similarly advocates strict vegetarianism (source link).
Animal rights organizations, like the Humane Society, made an intentional decision since about 2005 to infiltrate evangelical churches and organizations with “useful idiots” to push their radical agenda. This attempt to coup evangelical circles for animal rights activism has been detailed in many publications, and especially so in the Los Angeles Times in 2007 (source link). This was a very intentional invasion on their part. Their first thoughts of co-opting evangelicals to advocate for animal rights ended up in a 2005 PETA billboard campaign calling Jesus “The Prince of Peas” and calling vegetarianism “An Immaculate Conception” (source link). Obviously, the attempt of animal rights secularists who knew very little of evangelicals or how their minds work, backfired. Learning from their failure, they sought out particularly “useful idiots” who were already a part of evangelical circles, who leaned socially progressive already, and who might be indoctrinated and who might go on to indoctrinate others under a religious pretense. Eventually, they came up with the forerunner to the Every Living Thing Campaign (a partnership between the Humane Society and the Southern Baptist Convention’s ERLC, whose statement was written by Karen Swallow Prior, promoted Russell Moore, and signed by various Baptist leaders), the Best Friends Animal Society. They also came up with the Humane Society’s “Animal and Religion” program, which was designed to “persuade faith communities to take small steps for animal welfare, including a vegetarian fellowship meal or free range eggs at a prayer breakfast” (source link).
The Animal Agricultural Alliance, back in 2007, was blowing the whistle on this religious insincerity and infiltration by animal rights activists. They write…
HSUS is also seeking religious leaders in its political campaigns…The goal of vegan-driven animals rights activists, if realized, could devastate farmers, ranchers, and rural communities that rely on them.
Guess who Animal Agricultural Alliance points out – back in 2007 – was one evangelical who had been chosen for the task to push their radical agenda in evangelical circles. Yep. Karen Swallow Prior.
Karen Swallow Prior, an associate professor English at Liberty University – a fundamental Baptist institution funded by the late Jerry Falwell – recently wrote an editorial for the university’s journal declaring animal welfare an evangelical concern…The Los Angeles Times commented that buzz on animal rights activist websites indicated to leaders in the animal rights movement that the religious right was a potential ally and resource contributor.
and…
she spent years as an outspoken antiabortion activist, and that cause remains dear to her. But these days, Karen Swallow Prior has a new passion: animal welfare….She wasn’t sure, at first, that advocating for God’s four-legged creatures would go over well on the campus of Liberty University, a fundamentalist Baptist institution founded by the Rev. Jerry Falwell….Among the Liberty faculty — and conservative evangelicals in general — the animal-rights movement is often disdained as a secular, liberal cause….But activists have been working with increasing intensity to shed that image.
This is who Tom Buck says got him to change his views on animals.
A little bit more about the woman who Tom Buck says got him to change his views, and we know that she has defended Planned Parenthood against accusations of murder, been gay-affirming in her behavior and language, advocated for filthy gay erotica, promoted BlackLivesMatter and worse, but we’ll stick to the animal rights end of things…
- Karen Swallow Prior wants an end of mechanized and “industrialized” farming (the kind of farming that feeds the modern world) regardless of the consequences to people, saying that she wants to end it “even if the economy of the country be damned.” I have to wonder if there are any church members at Tom Buck’s church who labor in the farming or ranching industry whose personal economies would be “damned” if their pastor’s theological muse had her way.
- Karen Swallow Prior believes that pets go to Heaven, because naming them gives them “personhood” (link). Tom Buck did a funeral for a dog because Karen Swallow Prior, who believes pets go to Heaven, he claims enlightened his thinking.
- Karen Swallow Prior is – according to her – more emotional about pet cruelty than abortion (link). And Karen Swallow Prior, according to Tom Buck, has caused him to reconsider his thinking on animals. Those who are close to Buck should rightly be concerned that he is experiencing, at the very least, mission drift.
Buck’s article is replete with the same kind of sophomoric, shallow Scriptural connect-the-dots that one regularly sees among staunch animal rights activists like Karen Swallow Prior. His article, frankly, read like something one would expect to read in the Huffington Post religion column. You know the whole drill…Adam named animals and not trees and so this speaks of the special kindred and relationship between humans and animals. The Bble required a Sabbath for animals (and all farm equipment, I might add) and so on. While stretching to make the agenda Biblical, Buck practices what can best be described as an approach to Scripture that is sub-exegetical.
While holding a funeral for a dog hardly rises to the level of controversy (unless the dog is preached into Heaven, which Tom Buck’s teacher on animal theology says depends on whether or not the dog was given personhood by naming it), one wonders if Tom Buck has done anything to assist with the funerals of those 65,000 United States Armed Services veterans who according to the Department of Military Affairs are homeless and are dying without proper funerals. Has Tom Buck used those tragedies as a similar opportunity to share the Gospel? Has he done the same for our homeless vets?
You see, Karen Swallow Prior thinks that calling abortion murder and calling abortionists murderers is “unchristlike” (link), but calls Michael Vick “soulless” for dog-fighting (source link). Maybe Tom Buck should be learning his theological priorities from someone else.
I’ll tell you the truth of it. As sinful a guy as Michael Vick may be, he is the Imago Dei and therefore, is worth more to God than an infinite number of the cutest puppies you’ve ever seen.
Somehow, I don’t think the agenda for which Tom Buck has been serving as the polezniye duraki would agree with that.
[Contributed by JD Hall]
