I have some fundamental philosophical differences with our veterinarian.  We seem to disagree on my responsibilities as a pet owner.  I have always been a pet owner, and have owned dogs, cats, hamsters, guinea pigs, parakeets, finches, gold fish, beta fish, and a terrapin.  I have always thought of myself as a responsible pet owner.  My pets have always been well fed, well watered, well housed, and current on all their shots.  They have never been mistreated or neglected.  I am, as of this writing, in possession of a 17 year old cat, which we have had since her kitten-hood.  She has visited the vet more than any pet we have ever owned because she developed a severe allergy to even a single flea-bite, and no flea prevention product will completely prevent a single bite.  Also, she needs medication for thyroid trouble – which she gets twice a day, every day. 

            Now, my vet tells me that the cat needs blood-work every two weeks to make sure her blood levels are good – at a cost of $150 a test – hence the philosophical difference.  I believe that it is beyond the call of pet ownership to pay $300 a month to make sure a 17 year old cat had good blood levels.  Especially since this cat is healthy, active, and content.  I am warned that if I want her to stay as healthy as she is now she’ll have to get regular blood work done.  I don’t think it is worth $150 twice a month to make sure a 17 year old cat feels as spry as a 12 year old cat.

            Our real difference is not so much in that I think it costs too much to pay all my cat’s necessary (according to her) medical bills – it is that I think of my cat as a cat.  My veterinarian thinks of my cat as her patient.  The vets I knew growing up spent as much time in people’s barns as they did in their offices.  They understood that a cow is a cow, a horse is a horse, a pig is a pig, a dog is a dog, and a cat (as remarkable as this seems) is a cat.  I’m sure my veterinarian never moonlighted as a farrier (she may not even know what a farrier is), but she is an excellent healer and woman of science who thinks my 17 year-old, six-and-a-half pound feline should get all the tests, treatments, and therapies she can think of to prescribe.

            I believe that people are people and animals are animals.  If one is not willing or able to care for a pet one should not own a pet, certainly, but there are limits.  How many people who need regular blood-work are unable to afford it?  People are more important than animals.  You may, or may not agree with me about the cost of keeping a geriatric cat in fine-tuned health.  But I hope you agree with me that steps we take to care for humans are not necessarily necessary for animals.  I’ve known enough pet owners to guess that many do disagree.  I am not arguing that we neglect our pets.  I am asking that we prioritize people.

            Souls take priority.  Humans have souls, souls given by God, souls that will return to God (Ecclesiastes 12.7).  Jesus died on the cross so that these souls could be saved (John 3.16).  And yet we often treat our pets better than we treat each other – care for our pets more than we care for each other.  I have three questions I want each of us to ask ourselves.

Do I love people more than I love my pets?

Do I spend as much time on the care and feeding of my own soul as I do for my pet’s care and feeding?

Do I spend as much time caring for the souls of others as I do caring for my pet?

You may dismiss this as silliness, but I don’t think it is silly at all. Relationships with pets are simpler than relationships with people, so it is easier to give them our preference – but it isn’t right.  Think of the treasure we spend on them.  “Where our treasure is, there will our hearts be also,” Jesus insists (Matthew 6.21).  The metrics are not illusive.  We can know, if we are honest, where our hearts really are.  Jesus surely knows.