BROADCASTS.com

b'

Objection 2: Further, it is unfitting that elements hostile to one another should be brought under the mastership of one. But many animals are hostile to one another, as the sheep and the wolf. Therefore all animals were not brought under the mastership of man.

Reply to Objection 2. In the opinion of some, those animals which now are fierce and kill others, would, in that state, have been tame, not only in regard to man, but also in regard to other animals. But this is quite unreasonable. For then ature of animals was not changed by man\'s sin, as if those whose nature now it is to devour the flesh of others, would then have lived on herbs, as the lion and falcon. Nor does Bede\'s gloss on Genesis 1:30, say that trees and herbs were given as food to all animals and birds, but to some. Thus there would have been a natural antipathy between some animals. They would not, however, on this account have been excepted from the mastership of man: as neither at present are they for that reason excepted from the mastership of God, Whose Providence has ordained all this. Of thisProvidence man would have been the executor, as appears even now in regard to domestic animals, since fowls are given by men as food to the trained falcon.

ST 1. Q 96. A 1.

---

Link to my post:\\xa0http://mattfradd.com/was-there-death-before-the-fall/

Link to Jimmy Akin\'s post:\\xa0http://www.ncregister.com/blog/jimmy-akin/did-animals-die-before-the-fall/

Holy Apostles College and Seminary\\xa0is\\xa0the sponsor for this show:\\xa0http://www.holyapostles.edu/