Can Catholic Theology Change?

  • Thread starter Thread starter cerad2
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

cerad2

Guest
There is another thread titled “Isn’t Theology a Science?” which is a bit too broad of a question for my tastes. So let’s try to focus things down a bit.

In science one can find numerous examples of previously accepted theories being replaced (or heavily modified) by new theories. In general, this is considered a good thing.

Is it possible for Catholic Theology to change? If so, are there any examples of such a change?
 
The patristic distinction between the essences and energies of God evolved in the west to a shift to a belief in total divine simplicity, without any distinction of essences and energies.
 
Catholics say that the “deposit of faith” (revelation from God) can not change. Revelation includes Sacred Scripture (the Bible) and Sacred Tradition (teachings handed down through the apostles). So, from a Catholic viewpoint, the Church’s teachings can not change, and this is rooted in the fact that Truth - which is based on God’s existence - is eternal and absolute. To quote William Shakespeare, “Truth is truth till the end of the reckoning” (Measure for Measure, Act 5, Scene 1). If truth was true for one age, and a lie for another, that isn’t really “Truth”, nor does it reflect the absolute essence of God’s existence.

From a secular point of view though, the Church has changed it’s opinion (implicitly) on issues such as usury (which was previously regarded as any charge of interest). When I have the time, I’m going to research more into this. I’ve looked at Catholic responses to why this “change” occurred, but I’m not satisfied. Catholics claim their Church’s teachings do not change, but that doctrine can still develop. That doesn’t really make sense to me :confused:. For, if doctrine “develops”, that means the knowledge of the topic prior to such development was flawed. And if such knowledge was flawed, how can it be regarded as binding on the faithful?

If what I have read is true, it was actually John Calvin (the Reformer who impacted theology with his view of predestination) that justified “usury” and was well ahead of his time for what is in essence, the bedrock of modern Capitalism as we know it. This probably explains why Max Weber coined the phrase, the “Protestant work ethic”.
 
Bohm_Bawerk said:
Catholics say that the “deposit of faith” (revelation from God) can not change. Revelation includes Sacred Scripture (the Bible) and Sacred Tradition (teachings handed down through the apostles). So, from a Catholic viewpoint, the Church’s teachings can not change, and this is rooted in the fact that Truth - which is based on God’s existence - is eternal and absolute. To quote William Shakespeare, “Truth is truth till the end of the reckoning” (Measure for Measure, Act 5, Scene 1). If truth was true for one age, and a lie for another, that isn’t really “Truth”, nor does it reflect the absolute essence of God’s existence.
From a secular point of view though, the Church has changed it’s opinion (implicitly) on issues such as usury (which was previously regarded as any charge of interest). When I have the time, I’m going to research more into this. I’ve looked at Catholic responses to why this “change” occurred, but I’m not satisfied. Catholics claim their Church’s teachings do not change, but that doctrine can still develop. That doesn’t really make sense to me :confused:. For, if doctrine “develops”, that means the knowledge of the topic prior to such development was flawed. And if such knowledge was flawed, how can it be regarded as binding on the faithful?
If what I have read is true, it was actually John Calvin (the Reformer who impacted theology with his view of predestination) that justified “usury” and was well ahead of his time for what is in essence, the bedrock of modern Capitalism as we know it. This probably explains why Max Weber coined the phrase, the “Protestant work ethic”.
Click to expand...
I notice that you do not identify yourself as a Catholic. You keep bringing up something about usury. Where did you get your infomation? Please provide a link in defense of your statements…
Did you use the 1st or 2nd Edition of the Catechism which contains the Doctrine of the Faith for your quotes? - of course not because what you state does not exist.

John Calvin has not impacted Catholic beliefs at all. Try St.Thomas Aquinas, and St. Augustine, St. Robert Bellarmine, St. Charles Borromeo instead.
For more information - please read: “Catholicism for Dummies” by Fathers Tragilio and Breghenti.
Followers of Calvin and John Knox (today’s Presbyterians) believe that Christ died on the cross only for the “Elect”, etc.
 
ANNE_2 said:
I notice that you do not identify yourself as a Catholic. You keep bringing up something about usury. Where did you get your infomation? Please provide a link in defense of your statements…
Did you use the 1st or 2nd Edition of the Catechism which contains the Doctrine of the Faith for your quotes? - of course not because what you state does not exist.
Click to expand...
Hello,

Yes, I’m not Catholic anymore. This was a website I read from a priest a couple of days ago: askthepriest.org/askthepriest/2005/10/never_a_borrowe.html

I also said I was still doing research. Forgive me if I’m wrong, but your post sounds very belligerent. It seems like you want to pick a debate for the sake of debating :confused:
ANNE_2 said:
John Calvin has not impacted Catholic beliefs at all. Try St.Thomas Aquinas, and St. Augustine, St. Robert Bellarmine, St. Charles Borromeo instead.
For more information - please read: “Catholicism for Dummies” by Fathers Tragilio and Breghenti.
Followers of Calvin and John Knox (today’s Presbyterians) believe that Christ died on the cross only for the “Elect”, etc.
Click to expand...
I never said Calvin impacted Catholic beliefs. Read my post again. I said Calvin impacted theology. Theology doesn’t necessarily mean Catholic theology, but philosophy of God in general. And whether one wishes to admit it or not, it’s a historical fact that Calvin impacted theology. Same goes for Martin Luther. It’s historical revisionism to consider who impacted history based on your own preferences.
 
Bohm_Bawerk said:
Catholics say that the “deposit of faith” (revelation from God) can not change. Revelation includes Sacred Scripture (the Bible) and Sacred Tradition (teachings handed down through the apostles). So, from a Catholic viewpoint, the Church’s teachings can not change, and this is rooted in the fact that Truth - which is based on God’s existence - is eternal and absolute. To quote William Shakespeare, “Truth is truth till the end of the reckoning” (Measure for Measure, Act 5, Scene 1). If truth was true for one age, and a lie for another, that isn’t really “Truth”, nor does it reflect the absolute essence of God’s existence.

From a secular point of view though, the Church has changed it’s opinion (implicitly) on issues such as usury (which was previously regarded as any charge of interest). When I have the time, I’m going to research more into this. I’ve looked at Catholic responses to why this “change” occurred, but I’m not satisfied. Catholics claim their Church’s teachings do not change, but that doctrine can still develop. That doesn’t really make sense to me :confused:. For, if doctrine “develops”, that means the knowledge of the topic prior to such development was flawed. And if such knowledge was flawed, how can it be regarded as binding on the faithful?

If what I have read is true, it was actually John Calvin (the Reformer who impacted theology with his view of predestination) that justified “usury” and was well ahead of his time for what is in essence, the bedrock of modern Capitalism as we know it. This probably explains why Max Weber coined the phrase, the “Protestant work ethic”.
Click to expand...
Usury
 
cerad2 said:
There is another thread titled “Isn’t Theology a Science?” which is a bit too broad of a question for my tastes. So let’s try to focus things down a bit.

In science one can find numerous examples of previously accepted theories being replaced (or heavily modified) by new theories. In general, this is considered a good thing.

Is it possible for Catholic Theology to change? If so, are there any examples of such a change?
Click to expand...
Whatever the subject matter, the content of human knowledge of it develops or grows or changes. For example, history is more than what is written down in all the world’s history books. Few individuals, if any, record for posterity every action taken or every thought behind every action taken. Just because the vast majority of the thoughts and actions of every person aren’t recorded doesn’t mean these thoughts and actions didn’t happen. They did happen. They are historical. Humans don’t know the vast majority of it. God knows all of it.
 
miguel said:
Whatever the subject matter, the content of human knowledge of it develops or grows or changes. For example, history is more than what is written down in all the world’s history books. Few individuals, if any, record for posterity every action taken or every thought behind every action taken. Just because the vast majority of the thoughts and actions of every person aren’t recorded doesn’t mean these thoughts and actions didn’t happen. They did happen. They are historical. Humans don’t know the vast majority of it. God knows all of it.
Click to expand...
So Catholic Theology can change? Do you have an example of it happening?
 
Bohm_Bawerk said:
Catholics say that the “deposit of faith” (revelation from God) can not change. Revelation includes Sacred Scripture (the Bible) and Sacred Tradition (teachings handed down through the apostles). So, from a Catholic viewpoint, the Church’s teachings can not change, and this is rooted in the fact that Truth - which is based on God’s existence - is eternal and absolute.
To quote William Shakespeare, “Truth is truth till the end of the reckoning” (Measure for Measure, Act 5, Scene 1). If truth was true for one age, and a lie for another, that isn’t really “Truth”, nor does it reflect the absolute essence of God’s existence.

From a secular point of view though, the Church has changed it’s opinion (implicitly) on issues such as usury (which was previously regarded as any charge of interest). When I have the time, I’m going to research more into this. I’ve looked at Catholic responses to why this “change” occurred, but I’m not satisfied. Catholics claim their Church’s teachings do not change, but that doctrine can still develop. That doesn’t really make sense to me :confused:. For, if doctrine “develops”, that means the knowledge of the topic prior to such development was flawed. And if such knowledge was flawed, how can it be regarded as binding on the faithful?
Click to expand...
An excellent question from the OP, and an excellent response from Bohm.

This question has puzzled me for a long time – particularly on salvation – and like Bohm, I’ve received the same unsatisfactory response: development is change!
🤷
 
cerad2 said:
So Catholic Theology can change? Do you have an example of it happening?
Click to expand...
I am not a Theologian. But if change to a specific doctrine means the Catholic Church believes the opposite today of what it believed 2000 years ago, I would say no. But theological understanding of a specific doctrine can develop over time. Cardinal Newman (the anglican convert to catholicism) had an essay on this.

newmanreader.org/works/development/
 
Catholic dogma does not change. Like a bush gets fuller, so does our understanding. The branches are not cut off.
 
Greetings to all who have posted in this thread and or reading this,

As a student working on my Master’s in Sacred Theology I feel that perhaps I can answer this. 😃 *

The posters who wrote that Catholic Dogmas/Doctrine do not change, Truth remains unchanged, but however our understanding of that Truth can become more rich and more fuller than what it had been are correct.

The replies having to do with Usury are non-relevant to this topic. Usury was never a defined dogma or doctrine, albeit it was a bad tradition [notice tradition with a small t, meaning that it can be changed, and thank God it was abolished.]

God bless you all.
Anathama Sit*
 
Of course it can and indeed has over the centuries, people are no longer burned at the stake for believing multiple worlds exist for example - or for believing the earth goes around the Sun etc.
 
razredge said:
Of course it can and indeed has over the centuries, people are no longer burned at the stake for believing multiple worlds exist for example - or for believing the earth goes around the Sun etc.
Click to expand...
That was never Catholic theology. Those were civil penalties imposed. Not Catholic theology.

BTW – who was burned at the stake for believing that the earth goes around the sun?
 
razredge said:
Of course it can and indeed has over the centuries, people are no longer burned at the stake for believing multiple worlds exist for example - or for believing the earth goes around the Sun etc.
Click to expand...
Greetings Razedge,

This was not a De Fide doctrine nor solemnly promulgated. This example you give is irrevelant to the discussion at hand.

Catholic theology as in Catholic Dogmas in Faith and Morals do not change. Tradition with a captital T does not change. Our understanding of them may change as in the fact we understand them in a deeper and more complete way than what we understood them to be prior in the past.

And I would like to know who was burned at the stake for believing that multiple worlds existed and for believing that the earth goes around the Sun. I will want sources that are credible and that I can see for myself. *

Oh, and I am going to be gone for the next two weeks starting tomorrow and will not be back until 17/09/2011, so if I do not respond it is because I am in the United States of America during this time. We can continue this discussion when I get back.

God bless.
Anathama Sit*
 
razredge said:
Of course it can and indeed has over the centuries, people are no longer burned at the stake for believing multiple worlds exist for example - or for believing the earth goes around the Sun etc.
Click to expand...
This is not Catholic Theology, and it never has been.

Please read “Catholicism for Dummies” by Frs Tragilio and Breghenti.
 
cerad2 said:
Example please?
Click to expand...
Many examples! For instance, the dogmas about Mary for her Immaculate Conception and her Assumption: completely in harmony with Scripture, and the seeds of these dogmas are evident in Scripture. Over the centuries they were examined more closely and further insight about them was written.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top