Development In Doctrine

[Cure of Ars]

[quote]In short, it was what is technically called a Development in doctrine.
But there seems to be a qwerty ignorance, not only about
the technical, but the natural meaning of the word Development.
The critics of Catholic theology seem to suppose that it is not so
much an evolution as an evasion; that it is at best an adaptation.
They fancy that its very success is the success of surrender.
But that is not the natural meaning of the word Development.
When we talk of a child being well-developed, we mean
that he has grown bigger and stronger with his own strength;
not that he is padded with borrowed pillows or walks on stilts
to make him look taller.  When we say that a puppy develops into
a dog, we do not mean that his growth is a gradual compromise
with a cat; we mean that he becomes more doggy and not less.
Development is the expansion of all the possibilities and implications
of a doctrine, as there is time to distinguish them and draw
them out...G. K. Chesterton[/quote]

[url="http://www.dur.ac.uk/martin.ward/gkc/books/aquinas.txt"]http://www.dur.ac.uk/martin.ward/gkc/books/aquinas.txt[/url]

[p0lar_bear]

ooh, I like!

[Guest JeffCR07]

Chesterton is awesome, like, AWESOME

[phatcatholic]

ya know, i just realized that i don't really have anything on "development of doctrine." this is valuable info since it is so misunderstood my non-catholics.

should i make a new entry or add it to the "sacred tradition" entry?

holla back yall,
phatcatholic

[MorphRC]

Ive read numerous books and articles calling 'Development of Doctrine' heresy.

[b]Pius IX at the First Vatican Council of 1870-[/b]

We teach and define that it is a dogma divinely revealed: that the Roman Pontiff, when he speaks ex cathedra, that is, when in discharge of the office of pastor and teacher of all Christians, by virtue of his supreme Apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine regarding faith and morals to be held by the universal Church, is by the divine assistance promised to him in Blessed Peter, possessed of that infallibility with which the divine Redeemer willed that His Church should be endowed in defining doctrine regarding faith or morals; and that, therefore, such definitions of the Roman pontiff are of themselves, and not from the consent of the Church, [i]irreformable[/i].

[b]the Council also declared-[/b]

…the doctrine of faith which God has revealed has not been proposed, like a philosophical invention, [i]to be perfected[/i] by human ingenuity; but has been delivered as a divine deposit to the Spouse of Christ, to be faithfully [i]kept and infallibly declared[/i]. Hence, also, that meaning of the sacred dogmas is perpetually to be retained which our holy Mother the Church has [i]once declared[/i]; nor is that meaning [i]ever to departed from[/i], under the pretence or pretext of a [i]deeper comprehension of them[/i].

[b]also-[/b]

If anyone shall assert it to be possible that sometimes, according to the progress of knowledge, a sense is to be given to doctrines propounded by the Church different from that which the Church has understood and understands; [i]let him be anathema[/i].

Ill see if I can get an online link.

[MorphRC]

[b]First Vatican Council 1869-1870 A.D.[/b]

[b][color=blue]SESSION 3 : 24 April 1870 - Dogmatic Constitution on the Catholic Faith (continued)[/color][/b]

[b]Chapter 4 On faith and reason:[/b]

13:For the doctrine of the faith which God has revealed is put forward

- not as some philosophical discovery capable of being perfected by human
intelligence,
- but as a divine deposit committed to the spouse of Christ to be faithfully
protected and infallibly promulgated.

14: Hence, too,[b]that meaning of the sacred dogmas is ever to be maintained which has once been declared by holy mother church[/b], and there must never [b]be any abandonment of this sense under the pretext or in the name of a more profound understanding[/b].

[url="http://www.dailycatholic.org/history/20ecume2.htm"]Daily Catholic: First Vatican Council - Session III[/url]

[MorphRC]

[b]First Vatican Council 1869-1870 A.D.[/b]

[color=blue][b]SESSION 3 : 24 April 1870 - Dogmatic Constitution on the Catholic Faith (continued)[/b][/color]

[b]Chapter 4. On the infallible teaching authority of the Roman pontiff:[/b]

9:Therefore,

- [b]faithfully adhering to the tradition received from the beginning of the Christian faith,[/b]
- [b]to the glory of God our Saviour, [/b]
- [b]for the exaltation of the Catholic religion and [/b]
- [b]for the salvation of the Christian people, [/b]
- [b]with the approval of the sacred council,[/b]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

- [b]we [i]teach[/i] and [i]define[/i] as a divinely revealed dogma that[/b]

->[b]when the Roman pontiff speaks EX CATHEDRA,[/b]
->[b]that is, when,[/b]

[b]1:[/b][font="Times"][b]in the exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians,[/b][/font]
[b]2:[/b][font="Times"][b]in virtue of his supreme apostolic authority,[/b][/font]
[b]3:[/b][font="Times"][b]he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole Church,[/b][/font]

-[i][b]he possesses,[/b][/i]
-[b]by the divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter,[/b]
-[i][b]that infallibility which the divine Redeemer[/b][/i]
-[b]willed His Church to enjoy in defining doctrine concerning faith or morals.[/b]
-[b]Therefore, such definitions of the Roman pontiff are of themselves, and not by the consent of the church, [i]irreformable[/i]. [/b]

[url="http://www.dailycatholic.org/history/20ecume3.htm"]Daily Catholic: First Vatican Council- Session VI[/url]

[MorphRC]

[b]St. Vincent on Development of Doctrine 5th Century:[/b]

The understanding, knowledge and wisdom of one and all, of individuals as well as of the whole Church, ought then to make great and vigorous progress with the passing of the ages and the centuries, but only along its own line of development, that is, [b]with the same doctrine, the same meaning and the same import[/b].

[i]Source: The Liturgy of the Hours - Office of Readings[/i]

[url="http://www.catholicradiodramas.com/SaintsWorksMthruZ/vincent_of_lerins.htm"]St. Vincent of Lerins[/url]

[phatcatholic]

morph,

i don't see these citations as rejecting "development of doctrine" as much as they define what "development of doctrine" truly is.

[quote]such definitions of the Roman pontiff are of themselves, and not from the consent of the Church,[i] irreformable[/i].[/quote]
this word "irrreformable" is somewhat ambiguous. if it means "to change in definition under the pretense that the original definition is incorrect" (as i understand it to mean) then that is not an element of development. through development, doctrines retain their essence of meaning. our understanding and exposition of this essence merely increases to include new caveats (sp?) or nuances that perfect [i]our understanding [/i](the doctrine is already perfect)

[quote]…the doctrine of faith which God has revealed has not been proposed, like a philosophical invention, to be perfected by human ingenuity[/quote]of course. infallibly declared doctrine is perfect. our understanding of it, however, is not. the Spirit of truth elucidates the One Deposit of Faith that we have already received as we become ready to receive it.

[quote]If anyone shall assert it to be possible that sometimes, according to the progress of knowledge, a sense is to be given to doctrines propounded by the Church different from that which the Church has understood and understands; let him be anathema.[/quote]of course, for that would not be true development, it would be "change" or "reform." the sense of the doctrine must always be retained, and i contend that through development this sense is never lost--even w/ doctrines like "outside the church no salvation."

[quote]The understanding, knowledge and wisdom of one and all, of individuals as well as of the whole Church, ought then to make great and vigorous progress with the passing of the ages and the centuries, but only along its own line of development, that is, with the same doctrine, the same meaning and the same import.[/quote]agreed! st. vincent of lerins has basically defined here what true development is: the progress of understanding w/o neglecting the inherent meaning.

so, i see in the info you provided the boundaries w/in which development must proceed. as long as it exists w/in these boundaries it is true.

pax christi,
phatcatholic

[Cure of Ars]

[quote name='phatcatholic' date='Jun 29 2004, 09:33 PM'] ya know, i just realized that i don't really have anything on "development of doctrine." this is valuable info since it is so misunderstood my non-catholics.

should i make a new entry or add it to the "sacred tradition" entry?

holla back yall,
phatcatholic [/quote]
You like my subtle hint. I think the correct understanding of doctrinal development is important when understanding Church history.

[VeraMaria]

or at least a sub-section, because I think this is really important to understand




loooove that quote/passage

chesterton is amazing!

[MorphRC]

I like St. Vincents quote better than VI, less 'Fanciness' in its writing.

[Cure of Ars]

A lot of info here.

[url="http://ic.net/~erasmus/RAZ13.HTM"]Development of Doctrine[/url]

[Cure of Ars]

St. Vincent of Lerins +450

[quote][b]On Development in Religious Knowledge.[/b]

[54.] BUT some one will say perhaps, Shall there, then, be no progress in Christ's Church? Certainly; all possible progress. For what being is there, so envious of men, so full of hatred to God, who would seek to forbid it? Yet on condition that it be real progress, not alteration of the faith. For progress requires that the subject be enlarged n itself, alteration, that it be transformed into something else. The intelligence, then, the knowledge, the wisdom, as well of individuals as of all, as well of one man as of the whole Church, ought, in the course of ages and centuries, to increase and make much and vigorous progress; but yet only in its own kind; that is to say, in the same doctrine, in the same sense, and in the same meaning.

[55.] The growth of religion in the soul must be analogous to the growth of the body, which, though in process of years it is developed and attains its full size, yet remains still the same. There is a wide difference between the flower of youth and the maturity of age; yet they who were once young are still the same now that they have become old, insomuch that though the stature and outward form of the individual are changed, yet his nature is one and the same, his person is one and the same. An infant's limbs are small, a young man's large, yet the infant and the young man are the same. Men when full grown have the same number of joints that they had when children; and if there be any to which maturer age has given birth these were already present in embryo, so that nothing new is produced in them when old which was not already latent in them when children. This, then, is undoubtedly the true and legitimate rule of progress, this the established and most beautiful order of growth, that mature age ever develops in the man those parts and forms which the wisdom of the Creator had already framed beforehand in the infant. Whereas, if the human form were changed into some shape belonging to another kind, or at any rate, if the number of its limbs were increased or diminished, the result would be that the whole body would become either a wreck or a monster, or, at the least, would be impaired and enfeebled.

[56.] In like manner, it behoves Christian doctrine to follow the same laws of progress, so as to be consolidated by years, enlarged by time, refined by age, and yet, withal, to continue uncorrupt and unadulterate, complete and perfect in all the measurement of its parts, and, so to speak, in all its proper members and senses, admitting no change, no waste of its distinctive property, no variation in its limits.

[/quote]

[url="http://www.ccel.org/fathers/NPNF2-11/vincentl/commonit.html#23"]http://www.ccel.org/fathers/NPNF2-11/vince...ommonit.html#23[/url]

[Cure of Ars]

[url="http://www.catholic.com/library/can_dogma_develop.asp"]Can Dogma Develop?[/url]