Developing Dogmas and Doctrines

[Janet1983]

There was not a one time,single deposit of information/faith, but an ever developing progressing snowballing collection of thoughts that some, not all church Fathers started around 100 AD with Mary being the new Eve, not immaculate growing to co-redemptrix, mediatrix, and advocate.

As far as I know it was Irenaeus of Lyons (2nd century) who was the first draw comparisons between Eve and Mary, though he was only contrasting them…
Putting all claims of when he was born together and using the broadest view he was born some time between 115 and 142 and died some time around the year 200.

Catholics need no real proof because of the Doctrines/Dogmas of Sacred Tradition and infallibility. Both of which appear to be newly developed also.
Is this true- 1545A.D Council of Trent tradition of equal authority with scripture?

The teaching about “Sacred Tradition” in the ecclesiastical sense assumes that those teachings that were not exhaustively debated in Sacred Scripture, but were held by the apostles, were handed down from one generation to the next and therefore this is considered on an equal footing with Scripture. Some interpretations of Scripture are also a part of this Sacred Tradition, as the belief is held, that these teachings were already sanctioned by the apostles and the early church fathers.
In some cases dogmata were pronounced throughout history that make it seem as if it were a new teaching, but the Catholic Church constitutes that these teachings had been present since the time of the apostles and that they just had not been declared, pronounced, and defined as being understood to be formally revealed, explicitly or implicitly yet.
(The latter part of this text was partly inspired by the Catholic Encyclopedia concerning its wording.)

Here is something that I found in the Encyclopedia too:
“It is a dogma of faith that the Church is infallible in defining these two classes of revealed truths; and the deliberate denial of one of these dogmas certainly involves the sin of heresy.”

I am an ex-Catholic, so I will accept any corrections of my assessment if I was to be proven wrong or not precise enough in my wording…

 

[Born_Warrior]

What new dogmas or doctrines have been developed about Jesus that was not laid out first in the Bible?

A Sacred Tradition that was passed down through just the Catholic Church from the time of the Apostles, something that must be believe for our salvation.

Example, developed Mary Dogmas - we know absolutely from the Bible that she was a virgin when she concieved Jesus. What developed later and not in the Bible is that she was concieved immaculately, remained forever a virgin and was assumed to heaven.

Then is this belief really required for our salvation?

No

 

[PRmerger]

The teaching about “Sacred Tradition” in the ecclesiastical sense assumes that those teachings that were not exhaustively debated in Sacred Scripture, but were held by the apostles, were handed down from one generation to the next and therefore this is considered on an equal footing with Scripture. Some interpretations of Scripture are also a part of this Sacred Tradition, as the belief is held, that these teachings were already sanctioned by the apostles and the early church fathers.
In some cases dogmata were pronounced throughout history that make it seem as if it were a new teaching, but the Catholic Church constitutes that these teachings had been present since the time of the apostles and that they just had not been declared, pronounced, and defined as being understood to be formally revealed, explicitly or implicitly yet.
(The latter part of this text was partly inspired by the Catholic Encyclopedia concerning its wording.)

I am an ex-Catholic, so I will accept any corrections of my assessment if I was to be proven wrong or not precise enough in my wording…

:kiss4you:

npatrol: