天主教与进化:多基因论与原罪第二部分

IF 1.1 0 RELIGION
J. R. Hofmann
{"title":"天主教与进化:多基因论与原罪第二部分","authors":"J. R. Hofmann","doi":"10.12775/SETF.2021.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Theological attention to the Catholic doctrine of original sin has a history that extends from the letters of Saint Paul through the Council of Trent and Pius XII’s 1950 encyclical, Humani generis . The doctrine has traditionally been articulated through the Genesis narrative of Adam and Eve as the first human beings from whom all others descend, an account known as monogenism. In the course of the nineteenth century, scientific research into human origins increasingly relied upon polygenism, the descent of humanity from non-human ancestors through a transitional population. Subsequent Catholic engagement with evolution included resistance to polygenism from the Vatican due to a perceived conflict with the doctrine of original sin. Humani generis included a prohibition that remains in place today in spite of widespread de facto acceptance of polygenism among theologians. Understanding the origin and persistence of this disparity stands to benefit from comparison to a corresponding ambivalence toward the sixteenth century Copernican hypothesis of a moving earth, only conclusively resolved in 1992. In Part I of this essay I introduce this historical comparison and describe the origins of monogenism and polygenism terminology in nineteenth century debate over the unity of the human race. I then describe the conceptual changes that transpired during the first half of the twentieth century and the resulting role of polygenism in the nouvelle theologie of the decade prior to Humani generis . Subsequent developments and implications follow in Part II.","PeriodicalId":41706,"journal":{"name":"Scientia et Fides","volume":"10 1","pages":"63-129"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Catholicism and Evolution: Polygenism and Original Sin Part II\",\"authors\":\"J. R. Hofmann\",\"doi\":\"10.12775/SETF.2021.003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Theological attention to the Catholic doctrine of original sin has a history that extends from the letters of Saint Paul through the Council of Trent and Pius XII’s 1950 encyclical, Humani generis . The doctrine has traditionally been articulated through the Genesis narrative of Adam and Eve as the first human beings from whom all others descend, an account known as monogenism. In the course of the nineteenth century, scientific research into human origins increasingly relied upon polygenism, the descent of humanity from non-human ancestors through a transitional population. Subsequent Catholic engagement with evolution included resistance to polygenism from the Vatican due to a perceived conflict with the doctrine of original sin. Humani generis included a prohibition that remains in place today in spite of widespread de facto acceptance of polygenism among theologians. Understanding the origin and persistence of this disparity stands to benefit from comparison to a corresponding ambivalence toward the sixteenth century Copernican hypothesis of a moving earth, only conclusively resolved in 1992. In Part I of this essay I introduce this historical comparison and describe the origins of monogenism and polygenism terminology in nineteenth century debate over the unity of the human race. I then describe the conceptual changes that transpired during the first half of the twentieth century and the resulting role of polygenism in the nouvelle theologie of the decade prior to Humani generis . Subsequent developments and implications follow in Part II.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41706,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Scientia et Fides\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"63-129\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-03-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Scientia et Fides\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.12775/SETF.2021.003\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"RELIGION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scientia et Fides","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12775/SETF.2021.003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

神学对天主教原罪教义的关注有一段历史,从圣保罗的书信到天特会议和庇护十二世1950年的通谕《人性》(Humani generis)。传统上,这一教义是通过《创世纪》的叙述来阐述的,亚当和夏娃是第一个人类,所有其他人类都是从他们身上进化而来的,这种说法被称为“一源论”。在19世纪的过程中,对人类起源的科学研究越来越依赖于多基因现象,即人类通过过渡种群从非人类祖先进化而来。后来天主教对进化论的参与包括梵蒂冈对多基因论的抵制,因为他们认为这与原罪学说相冲突。“属人论”包含了一项禁令,尽管神学家事实上普遍接受多基因论,但这项禁令至今仍然存在。要理解这种差异的起源和持续,可以将其与16世纪哥白尼的地球运动假说相比较,后者直到1992年才得到最终解决。在本文的第一部分中,我介绍了这种历史比较,并描述了19世纪关于人类统一的辩论中单基因论和多基因论术语的起源。然后,我描述了在20世纪上半叶发生的概念变化,以及由此产生的多基因论在人类属人之前十年的新神学中的作用。随后的发展和影响将在第二部分中介绍。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Catholicism and Evolution: Polygenism and Original Sin Part II
Theological attention to the Catholic doctrine of original sin has a history that extends from the letters of Saint Paul through the Council of Trent and Pius XII’s 1950 encyclical, Humani generis . The doctrine has traditionally been articulated through the Genesis narrative of Adam and Eve as the first human beings from whom all others descend, an account known as monogenism. In the course of the nineteenth century, scientific research into human origins increasingly relied upon polygenism, the descent of humanity from non-human ancestors through a transitional population. Subsequent Catholic engagement with evolution included resistance to polygenism from the Vatican due to a perceived conflict with the doctrine of original sin. Humani generis included a prohibition that remains in place today in spite of widespread de facto acceptance of polygenism among theologians. Understanding the origin and persistence of this disparity stands to benefit from comparison to a corresponding ambivalence toward the sixteenth century Copernican hypothesis of a moving earth, only conclusively resolved in 1992. In Part I of this essay I introduce this historical comparison and describe the origins of monogenism and polygenism terminology in nineteenth century debate over the unity of the human race. I then describe the conceptual changes that transpired during the first half of the twentieth century and the resulting role of polygenism in the nouvelle theologie of the decade prior to Humani generis . Subsequent developments and implications follow in Part II.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Scientia et Fides
Scientia et Fides RELIGION-
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
10.00%
发文量
14
期刊介绍: "Scientia et Fides" (SetF) is an open access online journal published twice a year. It is promoted by the Faculty of Theology of Nicolaus Copernicus University, in Torun, in collaboration with the Group of Research “Science, Reason and Faith” (CRYF), at the University of Navarra. The journal is characterised by the interdisciplinary approach, multiplicity of research perspectives and broad reflection on methodology as well as analysis of the latest publications on the relationship between science and faith. The tasks of the journal are perfectly expressed by the motto "Veritas in omnibus quaerenda est" ("to seek the truth in all things") from "De revolutionibus" by Nicolaus Copernicus. SetF aims to present rigorous research works regarding different aspects of the relationship between science and religion. For this reason, SetF articles are not confined to the methodology of a single discipline and may cover a wide range of topics, provided that the interdisciplinary dialogue between science and religion is undertaken. The journal accepts articles written in English, Spanish, Polish, French, Italian and German which will be evaluated by a peer-review process.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信