Evolution, the Origin of Human Persons, and Original Sin: Physical Continuity with an Ontological Leap

In a ‘Message … on Evolution’ to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences in 1996 Pope John Paul II speaks of both a physical continuity and an ontological discontinuity or leap regarding the origin of human persons.1 Alan Porter considers an ontological leap to be contrary to the ‘gradualism’ of evolution.2 In this paper we first present Pope John Paul II's views on evolution, the origin of human persons, and original sin more fully. Next we examine Porter's view more fully, as well as that of Denis Lamoureux who takes a gradualist approach to both human origins and human sin. We then summarize the proposals of Germain Grisez, Benedict Ashley and Earl Muller with regard to how an ‘ontological leap’ might be reconciled with evolution. They also consider how original sin might be reconciled with evolution. These various views and proposals, as well as a proposal that I put forward, are then assessed in terms of what seems to be most consistent with science, human experience, philosophy and Christian theology. Concerning human origins, it seems that a gradualism involving many steps pertaining to our biological and psychological dimensions could have taken place, along with an ontological leap pertaining to our moral and spiritual dimensions. In line with this we can also understand original sin. The church's magisterium is directly concerned with the question of evolution for it involves the conception of man: Revelation teaches us that he was created in the image and likeness of God (cf. Gn. 1:27–29) . … [M]an is called to enter into a relationship of knowledge and love with God himself, a relationship which will find its complete fulfillment beyond time, in eternity . … It is by virtue of his spiritual soul that the whole person possesses such a dignity even in his body . … Consequently, theories of evolution which, in accordance with the philosophies inspiring them, consider the spirit as emerging from the forces of living matter or as a mere epiphenomenon of this matter are incompatible with the truth about man. Nor are they able to ground the dignity of the person. With man, then, we find ourselves in the presence of an ontological difference, an ontological leap, one could say. However, does not the posing of such ontological discontinuity run counter to that physical continuity which seems to be the main thread of research into evolution in the field of physics and chemistry? Consideration of the method used in the various branches of knowledge makes it possible to reconcile two points of view which would seem irreconcilable. The sciences of observation describe and measure the multiple manifestations of life with increasing precision and correlate them with the time line. The moment of transition to the spiritual is not the object of this kind of observation, which nevertheless can discover at the experimental level a series of very valuable signs indicating what is specific to the human being. But the experience of metaphysical knowledge, of self-reflection, of moral conscience, freedom, or again, of aesthetic and religious experience, falls within the competence of philosophical analysis and reflection, while theology brings out its ultimate meaning according to the Creator's plans.3 The account of the Fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man. … “Although set by God in a state of rectitude, man, enticed by the evil one, abused his freedom at the very start of history. He lifted himself up against God and sought to attain his goal apart from him” (GS 13, 1). By his sin Adam, as the first man, lost the original holiness and justice he had received from God, not only for himself but for all human beings. Adam and Eve transmitted to their descendants human nature wounded by their own first sin and hence deprived of original holiness and justice; this deprivation is called “original sin.” As a result of original sin, human nature is weakened in its powers; subject to ignorance, suffering, and the domination of death; and inclined to sin. … “We therefore hold, with the Council of Trent, that original sin is transmitted with human nature, ‘by propagation, not by imitation’ and that it is … ‘proper to each' ” (Paul VI, CPG, n. 16). The victory that Christ won over sin has given us greater blessings than those which sin had taken from us: “where sin increased, grace abounded all the more” (Rom 5:20).4 It is especially in regard to original sin in this second meaning that modern culture raises such strong reservations. It cannot admit the idea of a hereditary sin connected with the decision of a progenitor and not with that of the person concerned. It holds that such a view runs counter to the personalistic vision of man and to the demands which derive from the full respect for his subjectivity. However, the Church's teaching on original sin can be extremely valuable also for modern man who having rejected the data of faith in this matter, can no longer understand the mysterious and distressing aspects of evil which he daily experiences and he ends up by wavering between a hasty and unjustified optimism and a radical pessimism bereft of hope.5 Moreover, man, who was created for freedom, bears within himself the wound of original sin, which constantly draws him towards evil and puts him in need of redemption. Not only is this doctrine an integral part of Christian revelation; it also has great hermeneutical value insofar as it helps one to understand human reality. Man tends towards good, but he is also capable of evil.6 The premise that evolution was gradual but ensoulment was discontinuous predicates the irrational conclusion that for one generation the parents were animals without souls and their children humans, made in the image of God, and with souls. Biological gradualism is incompatible with a sudden ensoulment dichotomy both in the evolutionary history of humans and for a maturing foetus, human or animal. At some point … there must have existed a strange family. The parents are hominid “animals” without souls, incapable of the knowledge of good and evil and of the experience of God after death and thus devoid of any of the theological interpretations of “imago Dei”. John and Jenny their children by contrast, have been ensouled by an arbitrary gift of God and possess all the physical, cognitive, behavioural and spiritual attributes of a human. This implies a speciation event involving one generation only which is an evolutionary, anthropological and spiritual absurdity . …7 the Image of God and human sinfulness were gradually and mysteriously manifested through many generations of evolving ancestors. The origin of spiritual characteristics that define and distinguish humanity is not marked by a single punctiliar event in history. Rather, these metaphysical realities arose slowly and in a way that cannot be fully comprehended. Their manifestation during human evolution is similar to that in embryological development. Consequently, there never was an Adam/s or Eve/s. [Concerning the] … question of another conjectural opinion, namely polygenism, the children of the Church … cannot that which that after Adam there existed on this who not their origin through generation from him as from the first of or that Adam a of first it is in no way how such an can be reconciled with that which the of truth and the of the of the Church with regard to original sin, which from a sin by an Adam and which, through is on to all and is in as his … must that the spiritual for was given by a which to a of and to as a single In this in sin by the whole of was possible at the God then have which into an and to any in the moral of In this they not by … even not all humans were descendants of a single . is no to the original human had a single was for its as view would be an of what Lamoureux punctiliar as a physical … is In to complete it as a which is … fully consistent with the of it is to to some … is to the origin of human human … cannot be to a of the Consequently, the evolutionary origin of human while it must have been consistent with the of biological evolution, also was a event . … is … the origin of that to a human capable of at the human level on the of one that in the of a which was not human but which then with another of its own kind to a and who were the first human having fully human and who by the of the human this or the is consistent with the of Genesis which is not concerned with the way in which the human into and as a single and to have a history by a of human original is a single human . … sin that human must have been sin. This in a spiritual of human that all of … not sin. … spiritual … and the of that a the that is the Council of transmitted by than by . … But sin is a moral and this moral have to evolutionary In point of all that is by Christian faith is the in sin that is the … has been an to the human is to ensouled with for many to to that with a single is no theological to ensoulment could have taken place to the of the physical of the human or even after this had been would in with the present of the human had been In any event, the of the these of with any In the of evolution, it seems to that not only the of moral and spiritual life would have an ontological The first of psychological would also have a kind of or or an ontological animals the of psychological life seems to from who only experience a experiences such as how one experiences the or to more animals such as and who seem to experience many or a whole of psychological The and of that an experiences seems to be very to the of and present of its as well as the of its body its and it seems that first to experience during As the into its or it to experience more and more it experiences to of its for to a or an to a for its in the will no longer be able to experience that it the has a that it it then no longer experiences any the to it to psychological experiences seem to be to the kind of and body an the psychological of have first with a capable of that kind of in a single that was this would then also be present in that over time could have more and more and capable of more and more psychological As as we we are the only living on that has not only biological and psychological but also moral and spiritual dimensions. we can a kind of freedom that makes us for our and and we can have a involving knowledge and with God, who is and who the physical Pope Benedict of us human created in the image of God, as with souls and of we are persons, of us is only able to our moral and spiritual in this life we have that us to be the human and all the human nature, with moral and spiritual at we can not these a of and psychological development. Nor can we we have a that us the the to and a level of psychological the person be able to his or moral and spiritual the present to moral and spiritual in this seems to be to a level of present and psychological no or has been in the human As a I with and teaching that the human is a of a physical body and spiritual I have this view in another on philosophical and theological I will not all of I with Pope John Paul Grisez, Ashley and Muller that our moral and spiritual our of or would have an ontological leap during evolution, which God a spiritual soul for human person. even a human is a living human an of the human with a human nature, it seems that the most time that God created spiritual soul was body to at and might the first human persons, with spiritual souls, have in the of proposals have some proposals, and the views in this are assessed in the it seems that the of the first human person or during evolution not have a specific the as an Christ was fully with a human body and he was also fully according to Christian faith and With in human history there within life in this a or reality. This the of the or the second person of the who was fully with his human nature, body and the with human that his human body to this would not have biological but a by God, his was a and the the full of the and it that there were in human with a human It does not that the any specific Rather, it at the time in human history by and which is greater than it seems that the moral and spiritual dimensions of human and psychological to be in this God would have these were present in a hominid at in many during part of their to the first human person or This not have any specific but God it at the most time according to It seems that the of the first human person would have as most with God their spiritual at their conception or that their body to as was to faith original sin having one human and transmitted by human it seems that there are possible one person who or two or more persons, the of a who The one or more and their children the and could then have with of their biological These of their would have been very similar to them and The of the moral and spiritual would have the psychological experiences of the who It would also have to in the This would have all of the human were and by original sin, as is the original sin the first human person or would have been in the state of grace or with who in his body and was from sin, beginning with his human who never sin, the first human person or against God or sin original having who would not have been without sin, and their and to us more than one human person was in the state of grace sin, it is that one of these and the which could have to some of the human by original sin, and not It thus seems that most there was only one human person who or only a who the were the both human would have been in this original sin, with its for this is possible from a metaphysical and theological for it is also possible that there was only one human person the first human sin. God, who is and could have created a human soul for one human or he could have created souls for more than one human he or or they and had In this proposal seems to be in line with the of original sin which is to all human ‘by propagation, not by imitation’ II By our we have all with this original sin. the of one to this was the of who was without sin, and never by a or grace of God, to as the of our It seems that such a as in this is in line with the of doctrine on original sin, as well as what Pope John Paul II about both physical continuity and an ontological the origin of human along these this would have a kind of from a within a from a biological this proposal is also in line with human evolution. In this I first a points Grisez, Muller and I then to Porter and conclusion that Pope John Paul II's views are in line with a of the and a metaphysical and theological of human views are that and the spiritual of are present or However, his proposal that God a whole of humans all at and more all at after sin, would human ensoulment place at various of human from the to This proposal does not with the view that the most time God the spiritual both and was the body of the to that at or a in the of an place the body to makes the human person is a of physical body and spiritual In contrast, the proposal of is for all the who would have been ensouled some time after their to In the spirit of the are given in his that it is possible to a in with a by the of various … how a single could have a sudden and during evolution on the of and us some into how it could have at the and In any two both a single which was the such that one or two human capable of a fully human This one or two from the would have been or to a spiritual soul or souls created by proposal is not it seems that a of his proposal is his an a spiritual soul with his or a single could have to the first human then a after this event, in a human that the to such a human to human would not have received a spiritual soul from God, and would not be a This would be from the of and which are not the of human and are not human beings. a of proposal is that it would the view that all human are in dignity and human of the of their and This could be used to than in the image of the one God and with souls, all have the nature and the by the of all are called to in the all therefore an … in … must be and as incompatible with and who is also a to teaching on the origin of human and original sin with biological evolution. view seems to be to both the proposals of and and these have been the are to to the by ensoulment could have taken place to the of the physical of the human or even after this had been would in with the present of the human had been to evolutionary humans similar to us in between they to and the of the their was from of modern humans and of about of the of of it is that as modern humans the they with these of the Concerning this in of the of the that from and humans to for in how the but most of these are to have no The human of modern humans, must have been to this it seems that ensoulment most in modern humans some of them and with and In this way all humans or not they any from and the human nature with souls having moral and spiritual and are by original sin. The proposal by in this paper is to the proposal by but does not the of the first human spiritual which in the first human to a specific This the which from that could this and result in one or more of our not having received a spiritual this were the they would not be in dignity with the of second proposal as we in this would also have of a biological and this is not by the proposal in this It seems that one which some against proposal is that God human spiritual souls in one or more at a point in time, without a that this seem arbitrary on to this is that this is not any more arbitrary than the of Christ beginning at a point in time by As in there is no to that the was with a specific As we in Porter that biological gradualism is incompatible with a sudden ensoulment in his view this would have irrational conclusion that for one generation the parents were animals without souls and their children humans, made in the image of God, and with This view that humans have souls and animals but it does not the view of or that animals have souls, souls, humans have or spiritual souls, a kind of souls humans not only to the biological and psychological but also moral and spiritual to his of a sudden ensoulment dichotomy during evolution, Porter speaks of a strange the parents were of any of the theological interpretations of “imago children by … possess all the physical, cognitive, behavioural and spiritual attributes of a human. This implies a speciation event involving one generation only which is an evolutionary, anthropological and spiritual absurdity . As we have also the proposals of Pope John Paul Grisez, and the of this while biological gradualism in evolution, also an ontological leap regarding the of the spiritual of these proposals, second involves a from a biological the first human with a spiritual soul would have had a moral and spiritual and his or parents would in the of the proposal put in this they would have been very similar and proposals, the more fully human to a spiritual soul have also some psychological but the would have up in the culture of its we humans in that we have and psychological it not have strange at all at the time, the first human had some as to of his or As an we can consider how many great with their who some similar psychological to The first fully human would have been more similar to his or than a and a This that an ‘ontological leap’ not have been as strange as Porter the parents and this could have as they to over the as the of human origins is very in and various points of view and I with him that the origin of human in the image of God would have a which we cannot fully does not that we cannot understand or any that to the of the nature of the human as a of a physical body and a spiritual and sin, original sin. I the view that an ontological leap during evolution (cf. Grisez, the proposal put in this and John Paul is by a metaphysical of the human spiritual and The view that there was such an ontological leap is not to a and Rather, we can with human experience It is not possible to the moral and spiritual dimensions of human without that we have spiritual souls, which according to Christian are and this is in line with a of those pertaining to an state of the person in some between death and nature, as we experience is not only one of us also has to love God, and It is not possible to all of human evil only by biological and psychological and the we ourselves As Pope John Paul II II the doctrine of original sin is not only an integral part of Christian revelation; it also great hermeneutical value insofar as it helps one to understand human there was an ontological leap, with the first human person having received a spiritual soul created directly by God at conception to that his or body to as is then, that first person would have to be able to his or moral and spiritual he or would have been capable of and against sin in the human would not have been but with a moral a sin, by an human person. there was more than one person the first sin, no one of them would have the in time, even only Concerning both Pope John Paul II and Muller II and some very good points to original sin. These need not be In proposal I have also to to this In terms of of Genesis are not of modern or fully of the nature of these Pope John Paul II in his of the which they who we are in relationship to God and I with as well as Lamoureux himself that is part of and of God to an that was by In the of the it seems that Pope John Paul II's view regarding evolution involving both a physical continuity and an ontological leap is the of teaching on original sin is in line with good Christian and human experience and nature It can also be with evolution and human origins is a of as he we have and are about evolution and human origins, from the of the can be as to the of Christian and a theology. In this paper we have a of views with regard to evolution, the origin of human persons, and original sin. Porter and Lamoureux a gradualist approach to both biological evolution and the origin of human Lamoureux also takes a gradualist approach to original sin. Pope John Paul Grisez, and the of this all a gradualist approach to biological evolution. of us that human nature not only a physical but also a spiritual which can only be by a by God in the of human person. a spiritual soul is to our moral and spiritual These the biological and psychological of animals and human a human soul for the first human person or would have an ‘ontological to the of Pope John Paul an ontological leap can also us to understand original sin Grisez, and I have a proposals with regard to how an ontological leap have during the of biological evolution. This paper has not all views and proposals with regard to evolution, the origin of human persons, and original sin. proposal as well as of the views and proposals in this paper while to a to the of some very is not as a

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.