Re: The monkey in Buchanan's tree

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Kotliar: "Anthropology and Sociology"
• Previous message: JOHN LANGDON: "Alaska arch opportunity (fwd)"
• Maybe in reply to: Dorothy J. Cattle: "The monkey in Buchanan's tree"

>Also, since Buchanan is[?]/was[?] a Catholic, does anyone know the
>various papal encyclicals in which one or more popes set forth the
>Catholic Church's position on evolution and science? I am thinking there
>was an encyclical in the 1940's that stated +/- that the Bible wasn't
>meant to be a book on natural history, that science and the study of
>evolution were valid enterprises, and that as long as science didn't
>presume to deal with matters of the soul, there was no conflict with the
>Church. If someone could cite the relevant official documents, maybe
>Pat's campaign should know about them and also about how limited is their
>candidate's understanding of evolution.

According to C. Loring Brace in _The Stages of Human Evolution_ (1991) page
1, there were two papal encyclicals in 1943: _Providentissimus Deus_, and
_Divina Afllante Spiritu_, and another in 1950: _Humani Generis_, that make
that argument.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert W. Park rwpark@watarts.uwaterloo.ca
Department of Anthropology (519) 888-4567 extension 5666
University of Waterloo

• Next message: Kotliar: "Anthropology and Sociology"
• Previous message: JOHN LANGDON: "Alaska arch opportunity (fwd)"
• Maybe in reply to: Dorothy J. Cattle: "The monkey in Buchanan's tree"