Change in doctrinal teachings

[georgemiller]

In discussing the Catholic church with Protestant friends, if I were to state that the Cathlic Church has never changed throughout history a doctrianl teaching, would that be correct?
If so, do I need to put any other qualifiers on this faith position?

 

[prayerandstudy]

From what I understand, doctrine cannot change. It was revealed to us and is now passed down through the Magisterium of the Church. We can come to a better understanding of doctrine over time. There will be no new Revelation. That ended with the death of the last of the 12 Apostles. Doctrine includes things like the Trinity – three persons in one God; Jesus’ Divine and human nature; Original Sin.

Some things the Church teaches are not dogma or doctrine but rather are disciplines. One example would be that we were not allowed to eat meat on Fridays when I was growing up. We are still supposed to do some sort of mortification on Fridays but now it is left up to us what that will be. We may eat meat on Fridays.Disciplines include things such as which way the priest faces during Mass, which are the Holy Days of Obligation, how long we need to fast before receiving the Eucharist.

I hope that helps.

 

[Joe_5859]

In discussing the Catholic church with Protestant friends, if I were to state that the Cathlic Church has never changed throughout history a doctrianl teaching, would that be correct?
If so, do I need to put any other qualifiers on this faith position?

Yes, that would be correct.

I wouldn’t say you necessarily need qualifiers, but such a claim does tend to warrant further explanation. There are no shortage of individual Catholics who have espoused heresy (including priests and bishops [e.g. Arius]). There have also been plenty of changes to small ‘t’ traditions (e.g. the language of the Mass, the manner in which the Sacrament of Reconciliation is celebrated, etc.). And there has definitely been development in doctrine throughout the centuries (e.g. the Immaculate Conception).

But none of these things amount to a change in doctrine from the Church.

To me, one of the handiest analogies is the acorn and the oak tree. Now, the acorn and the oak tree might look very different. But the substance of the oak tree is present in the acorn—just in seed form. The development of doctrine is the same. Something like the immaculate Conception or even the Trinity is not necessarily explicit in Scripture, but it is there in seed form. And the Holy Spirit—who leads the Church into all Truth—makes those realities clearer in time.

But it is never a matter of pulling new doctrine out of a hat. or rejecting past doctrine. That has never happened and never will.

 

[PJM]

=georgemiller;13475900]In discussing the Catholic church with Protestant friends, if I were to state that the Cathlic Church has never changed throughout history a doctrianl teaching, would that be correct?
If so, do I need to put any other qualifiers on this faith position?

Nearly correct

While neither Doctrine nor Dogma can “BE CHANGED”; our understanding of them can be enlarged; can increase as Guided by the Holy Spirit. CASE in point: All Salvation is through the Catholic Church:

Our Catechism:
CCC 1260 “Since Christ died for all, and since all men are in fact called to one and the same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partakers, in a way known to God, of the Paschal mystery.” Every man who is ignorant of the Gospel of Christ and of his Church, but seeks the truth and does the will of God in accordance with his understanding of it, can be saved. It may be supposed that such persons would have desired Baptism explicitly if they had known its necessity.

CCC 846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers? Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:

Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it

CCC 847 847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church:

Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.

The Doctine remains in tact; but our understanding is chnaged by necessity, as God desires that ALL MEN be saved. Amen

 

[fred_conty]

I believe you can say that this is the one church that does not change truths to meet situations. Truth is permanent. Just as the color red remains the color red forever and dosen’t morph into some other color.

An old established truth may be better understood as time advances. This may seem like a change but isn’t. It is like advancing from basic math to algebra. It is still math but looks different. The truth grows up as it matures.

And there is never any new truth of our faith, since the full set of faith truths ended after the last apostle, St. John, died around 92 AD.

But there is a difference between truths of our faith, and church regulations. Church regulations are guides helping us to be spiritual and those may change.