Hello PH! Great to see you again! I'm glad you have no problem with this. Still, I have a quibble or two, for your consideration.
One, as you note the Pope said, "knowledge has led to the recognition that evolution is more than a hypothesis. It is indeed remarkable that this theory has been progressively accepted by researchers, following a series of discoveries in various fields of knowledge. The convergence, neither sought nor fabricated, of the results of work that was conducted independently is in itself a significant argument in favour of this theory."
Arguably, the Pope was referring to evolution as a general category. For he notes the concept has found favor "in various fields of knowledge." (Inter alia, the concept has seemingly found favor with certain philosophers, such as Eric Voegelin.) He has not said anything here about the doctrine of natural selection per se, which is an exclusive preserve of evolutionary biology.
So we don't know what the Pope thinks about that, for he hasn't said. At least, not explicitly in these statements.
Two, Although man's spiritual nature "is a whole separate issue" apart from the physical sciences, I have very strong doubts that the investigation of what I understand to be man's spiritual nature is the exclusive province of theology. The question depends on what we mean by man's spiritual nature.
There are those who might say the question deals solely with matters religious, in particular with the final destination of the soul -- which many people today consider to be a superstitious fiction in the first place, from both the "soul" and "destination" standpoints. This is clearly the view of Stephen Pinker and Richard Dawkins, for instance. Julian Huxley laughed the idea out of court about a hundred years ago, calling it "the ghost in the machine," a risible idea. This has become the fashionable post-modern view.
But when I think of man's spiritual nature, what comes to mind is the idea of psyche -- an immaterial, "non-existent" (in the sense of not having physical existence) entity that has its source and provenance "outside" of physical nature. Psyche -- soul -- incorporates the conscious and unconscious mind, and includes the intellect as well as man's spiritual substance and ground. This was Plato's insight, predating Christianity by about 500 years. And Christian theology does not appear to refute it. Plato's model, to me, holds up very well in the evolution of historical time and experience.
Now, though he may have coined the term, Plato was no theologian. And neither are scientists working in the fields of psychology and cognitive biology.
I think Plato's model is what lies back of the Pope's remark that "theories of evolution which ... consider the mind 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."
But this is precisely what Pinker believes -- that the mind is, indeed, an epiphenomenon of matter, to such an extent that "brain" and "mind" are effectively synonymous terms with him.
I'm pretty sure the Pope wouldn't agree with him on this point.
Share your thoughts with me, if you get the chance? Thanks for writing, PH! All my best -- bb.