Third Reply to Professor Kemp

Clarifications Regarding “Theological Humans” and the Magisterium of the Church on Human Origins

Keywords: evolutionism, creationism, human origins, monogenism, polygenism, thomisic philosophy

Abstract

This paper is the third reply to Prof. Kemp. It begins with a brief summary of the polemics between him and the author. The author states that Kemp misquoted St. Augustine and that he did not present any conclusive argument against Catholic monogenism. Then the argument is presented against the distinction proposed by Kemp into "biological" and "theolgical humans". The author restates that such distinction is either biologically impossible or is reducible to equivocation. The paper ends with a response to the three points of critique presented by Kemp in his previous paper. At the end the author explains why Humani Generis encyclical by Pius XII does not support the evolutionary origin of man rather it just opens the debate without settling the issue.

References

Augustine. “De Genesi ad Litteram.” In The Works of St. Augustine: A Translation for the 21st Century, edited by John E. Rotelle, translated by Edmund Hill. Vol. 13, On Genesis. 168–506. New York: New City Press, 2002. Latin text after https://www.augustinus.it/latino/genesi_lettera/index2.htm

Chaberek, Michael, and Rômulo Carleial. 2022. “Human Origins Revisited: On the Recognition of Rationality and the Antiquity of the Human Race.” Studia Gilsoniana 11 (2): 249–87. https://doi.org/10.26385/SG.110210.

Chaberek, Michał. “The Arches and the Spandrels: A Response to Kenneth W. Kemp (2).” Forum Philosophicum 30 (1): 273–87.

John Paul II. “Created Things Have a Legitimate Autonomy.” General Audience, 16 April 1986. In God, Father and Creator: A Catechesis on the Creed, 216–20. Boston: Pauline Books & Media.

John Paul II. “Man Is a Spiritual and Corporeal Being.” General Audience, 16 April 1986. Accessed February 10, 2026. http://www.totus2us.co.uk/teaching/jpii-catechesis-on-god-the-father/man-is-a-spiritual-and-corporeal-being/

Kemp, Kenneth. “Second Reply to Fr. Chaberek: On Why Merely Biological Humans Can Survive, and on When Merely Traditional Doctrine Can Be Abandoned.” Forum Philosophicum 30 (2): 295-301. 10.35765/forphil.2025.3002.14

Pius XII. 1950. Humani Generis. Accessed February 10, 2026. https://www.vatican.va/content/pius-xii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_12081950_humani-generis.html

Wayman, Erin, “Energy Efficiency Doesn’t Explain Human Walking?” Smithsonian Magazine, September 17, 2012. Accessed February 10, 2026. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/energy-efficiency-doesnt-explain-human-walking-39161215/

Published
2026-06-13
How to Cite
Chaberek, M. (2026). Third Reply to Professor Kemp: Clarifications Regarding “Theological Humans” and the Magisterium of the Church on Human Origins. Forum Philosophicum, 31(1), 87–100. https://doi.org/10.35765/forphil.2026.3101.06
Section
Discussions