What did Pope Pius XII mean?

  • Thread starter Thread starter sdean
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

sdean

Guest
What did Pope Pius XII mean when he wrote:

“When, however, there is question of another conjectural opinion, namely polygenism, the children of the Church by no means enjoy such liberty. For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains either that after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parents of all, or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents. Now, it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the teaching authority of the Church proposed with regard to original sin which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam in which through generation is passed onto all and is in everyone as his own” (Humani Generis 37).

This was copied from the Adam, Eve, and Evolution article on Catholic.com (catholic.com/library/adam_eve_and_evolution.asp)

What does Pope Pius XII mean in his first sentence? The phrase “by no means enjoys such liberty.” has a definite meaning to me and most people I know. I appears to me that Pius XII (within the context of the encyclical & read independently as in the article) is stating that polygenism is not a theory that Catholics may believe.

Also, what did Pope Pius XII mean in his last sentence? Can Adam be viewed as only a myth? Could there have been an original father that was not Adam?
 
sdean,
Often when I see references to Pius XII and Humani Generis, it is used as a “final say” in the Church’s teaching on evolution.
I think your question has this in mind.

The best answer I can give to your question is to direct you to Pope John Paul II’s October 22, 1996’s address to the Pontifical Academy of Science. Here he address the issue on the Church’s teaching on evolution and the relationship of science and theology.

Some may post opinions that since 1996, Pope Benedict XVI has issued addresses that refute John Paul II’s position. However, having read all of Pope Benedict’s speaches and homilies on this matter, he doesn’t refute John Paul’s teachings, rather, his criticism is of those scientist whose theory of evolution rest solely on a materialistic evolution that denies any possibility of God as the “First Cause”, an atheistic evolution theory.
 
TOME,

I’ll certainly read the text of this speach. Thanks.

Reading Humani Generus, I believed that Pius XII was addressing issues of his day, but also leaving the relationship between science and Catholocism free to develop without a collision. Much emphasis was on appropriate science, but nothing that was copmpletely exclusive. It was the para 37 use of “liberty” that has become somewhat of a hot potato. I’ve heard a description of this phrase as “Pope Speak” for it’s ok to believe as long as it (polygenism in this case) can be reconciled with a firm teaching (original sin). I’m far from even a novice in this area so I have little to go on other than my understanding of the word “liberty”. As it is used in para 37, it means “may not.” So, that is much of my question. I find the Church’s position on the history of the universe to be quite easy to understand until this…

That’s why I asked.

Again, thanks.

Sam
 
Sam,

The first sentence in the paragraph refers back to something before the beginning of the quote. The “however” means that this sentence stands in contrast to what went before. Here is the previous paragraph from Humani Generis:
For these reasons the Teaching Authority of the Church does not forbid that, in conformity with the present state of human sciences and sacred theology, research and discussions, on the part of men experienced in both fields, take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in as far as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter - for the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God. However, this must be done in such a way that the reasons for both opinions, that is, those favorable and those unfavorable to evolution, be weighed and judged with the necessary seriousness, moderation and measure, and provided that all are prepared to submit to the judgment of the Church, to whom Christ has given the mission of interpreting authentically the Sacred Scriptures and of defending the dogmas of faith.[11] Some however, rashly transgress this liberty of discussion, when they act as if the origin of the human body from pre-existing and living matter were already completely certain and proved by the facts which have been discovered up to now and by reasoning on those facts, and as if there were nothing in the sources of divine revelation which demands the greatest moderation and caution in this question.
Click to expand...
And here’s the link:

vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_12081950_humani-generis_en.html

The gist of it is that Catholics are free to investigate the biological theory of evolution as an explanation of the source of our physical bodies, but …

(1) We must keep the belief that God creates our souls individually and “immediately” (which I take to mean at the moment of our conception).

(2) Our conclusions need to be in accordance with the teachings of the Catholic Church.

The paragraph you are asking about begins by contrasting the freedom to investigate the theory of evolution with the requirement to believe that there were a single Adam and a single Eve.

I’m not sure what you mean by “myth.” Adam needs to have been real and physical enough that we inherited a very real sin from him. Within that parameter, you are probably free to speculate as you wish.
  • Liberian
 
Sam,

I had a beautiful answer for you but something crashed and it was lost. Here is a link to all of Humani Generis:

vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_12081950_humani-generis_en.html

Paragraph 36–which immediately precedes your quote–talks about the acceptability of looking into the biological theory of evolution as an explanation for how our physical bodies came to be here. The “no such liberty” contrasts this acceptability of looking into biological evolution with the unacceptability of accepting the theory of polygenism.

The last sentence in the paragraph you cite specifies that Adam was real enough and singular enough to have passed original sin down to us by himself. I’m not sure what you mean by “myth,” but any belief needs to be consistent with the fact that we got original sin from Adam and that the Church has taught that Adam was a single individual.
  • Liberian
 
Adam had no other Father than God period!

Belief in evolution is permissable. Belief that Adam had an Earthly father is not!
 
Jerry-Jet said:
Adam had no other Father than God period!

Belief in evolution is permissable. Belief that Adam had an Earthly father is not!
Click to expand...
Jerry-Jet,

Can you cite some official Church teaching to this effect? I would appreciate it; if I need to change my mind I would like to know on what grounds…
  • Liberian
 
I don’t know the exact document but if you look up Catholic Dogma from Ott you will find that it is DOGMA that Adam and Eve were the SOLE parents of the human race.

That teaching is De FIDE.

Polygenism or the belief that either they had parents or that there were other parents than Adam and Eve has been condemned by the Catholic Church.
 
Jerry-Jet said:
I don’t know the exact document but if you look up Catholic Dogma from Ott you will find that it is DOGMA that Adam and Eve were the SOLE parents of the human race.

That teaching is De FIDE.
Click to expand...
Based on what? A papal opinion expressed in an encyclical does not make something De FIDE. What if Adam and Eve were symbols for the human race, which went astray collectively and thus passed on original sin to all its descendents. I’m not saying that is the way it was, but we don’t really know, and should not put limitations on interpretation without solid reasons. The Galileo case showed the dangers of that, and the Church has wisely kept its options mostly open as far as human origins.
 
Read paragraph 360 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. If you won’t believe an Encyclical by Pope Pius X!! and if you won’t believe the Catechism of the Catholic Church then you’re just going to believe anything you want to and have made yourself the authority on creation!
 
Jerry-Jet said:
I don’t know the exact document but if you look up Catholic Dogma from Ott you will find that it is DOGMA that Adam and Eve were the SOLE parents of the human race.

That teaching is De FIDE.

Polygenism or the belief that either they had parents or that there were other parents than Adam and Eve has been condemned by the Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
Jerry-Jet,

I think the question is one of earthly parents versus human parents. Is it required to believe that Adam was created ex nihilo, or is it permitted to believe that Adam’s body was created as a natural result of the sexual union of two non-human hominids, and that then God breathed His spirit into Adam and made him human?
  • Liberian
 
Liberian said:
Jerry-Jet,

I think the question is one of earthly parents versus human parents. Is it required to believe that Adam was created ex nihilo, or is it permitted to believe that Adam’s body was created as a natural result of the sexual union of two non-human hominids, and that then God breathed His spirit into Adam and made him human?
  • Liberian
Click to expand...
Church doesn’t require belief that Adam’s body was created ex nihilo - only his soul. (Gen 2:7 then the Lord God formed man of dust from the ground)

Nita
 
It would be possible for Adam to be the result of two hominids but only if he was a completely new species–if he were the same species as a byproduct of two hominids then he couldn’t be our soul parent.

Sponataneous mutations can result in new species.

My opinion is that Adam was the first homo sapien.

I don’t know whether he was a new species from earlier hominids OR if God created him in a miraculous manner–I was not there.

I DO know that Adam was the first person to ever have a soul. The soul DOES NOT evolve!

It is possible for much evolution to be true but for Adam’s creation to NOT come from an evolutionary process.

It is not an EIther/Or question.
 
Adam and Eve were the first two and unique human parents of the race is what Pius XII is saying and the Catechism restates. Poly-genism is forbidden because it would mean we had more than these two parents and the dogma of original sin would disappear and render the cross meaningless How their bodies were arrived at IS open for discussion but they must be held as the ONLY first unique parents who were actually human.
 
sdean said:
What did Pope Pius XII mean when he wrote:

“When, however, there is question of another conjectural opinion, namely polygenism, the children of the Church by no means enjoy such liberty. For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains either that after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parents of all, or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents. Now, it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the teaching authority of the Church proposed with regard to original sin which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam in which through generation is passed onto all and is in everyone as his own” (Humani Generis 37).

This was copied from the Adam, Eve, and Evolution article on Catholic.com (catholic.com/library/adam_eve_and_evolution.asp)

What does Pope Pius XII mean in his first sentence? The phrase “by no means enjoys such liberty.” has a definite meaning to me and most people I know. I appears to me that Pius XII (within the context of the encyclical & read independently as in the article) is stating that polygenism is not a theory that Catholics may believe.

Also, what did Pope Pius XII mean in his last sentence? Can Adam be viewed as only a myth? Could there have been an original father that was not Adam?
Click to expand...

He was spelling out the doctrine of the Church in that last sentence.​

 
That God created the first man is infallible dogma, according to Ludwig Ott in his “Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma.”

That all humanity is descended from one human pair is “sententia certa,” which means it is theologically certain doctrine. (Same source)

Dogma is the result of Divine Revelation. Doctrine may come from revelation, theological conclusions, or Natural Law. Both dogma and doctrine must be believed by the faithful.

Hope this helps,

Ruthie
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top