Does doctrine ever stop devoloping?

[Imtrying]

1. Can a doctrine ever come to complete understanding?
2. Has our understanding of the Trinity and the Real Presence been completed, or are these doctrines still developing?

 

[Maximilian75]

1. When the world ends and Christ comes again, yes. Complete understanding will come then.
2. IDK

 

[pianistclare]

What is your definition of doctrine.
Here’s ours:

A dogma of the Catholic Church is defined as “a truth revealed by God, which the magisterium of the Church declared as binding.” The Catechism of the Catholic Church states:

The Church’s Magisterium asserts that it exercises the authority it holds from Christ to the fullest extent when it defines dogmas, that is, when it proposes, in a form obliging Catholics to an irrevocable adherence of faith, truths contained in divine Revelation or also when it proposes, in a definitive way, truths having a necessary connection with these.

Dogma can also pertain to the collective body of the Church’s dogmatic teachings and doctrine. The faithful are required to accept with the divine and Catholic faith everything the Church presents either as solemn decision or as general teaching. Yet not all teachings are dogma. The faithful are only required to accept those teachings as dogma if the Church clearly and specifically identifies them as infallible dogmas.[4] Not all theological truths have been promulgated as dogmas. A tenet of the faith is that the Bible contains many sacred truths, which the faithful recognize and agree with, but which the Church has not defined as dogma. Most Church teachings are not dogma. Cardinal Avery Dulles pointed out that in the 800 pages of the Second Vatican Council documents, there is not one new statement for which infallibility is claimed.

 

[mkoopman]

Maximilian75 identified a great answer to question number 1

In this same light, Jesus, the light of the world returning triumphant it might be fair to say the True Presence will be “fully” known. We will be fully aware of the Lamb of God offered for our salvation. More aware than St. Thomas with his hand upon the sacred heart through the wound in Jesus side. There will be no sin to cloud our senses. How phenomenal will this be? Receiving The Eucharist in a way more complete than presently.

As to the Trinity, this too we will know but in what way more than in fully receiving the Lamb? Is it possible to know the godhead greater than by the Lamb?

However, although doctrine can be known fully, the Trinity will always remain mystery. God will always be deeper and more awesome in every moment of eternity. This is living as God intends for us and is too wonderful for our finite being to comprehend.

 

[Imtrying]

I want to be a faithful Catholic, so whatever is defined as doctrine must be my definition too. I have some questions about this definition that I am obliged to believe.

A dogma of the Catholic Church is defined as “a truth revealed by God, which the magisterium of the Church declared as binding

1. the magisterium determines which truths are revealed by God, right

The Church’s Magisterium asserts that it exercises the authority it holds from Christ to the fullest extent when it defines dogmas

1. there being truths that I am required to assent to, is there a complete list of all such dogmas

when it proposes, in a form obliging Catholics to an irrevocable adherence

1. what is are the “forms” that obliges me?

also when it proposes, in a definitive way, truths having a necessary connection with these

1. what is required for the “way” to be “definitive”

Dogma can also pertain to the collective body of the Church’s dogmatic teachings and doctrine

1. what is the distinction between this body and “defined dogmas proposed in an obliging form”?

required to accept with the divine and Catholic faith everything the Church presents either as solemn decision or as general teaching

1. what is the distinction between a “solemn decision”, “general teaching”, and defined dogma

Most Church teachings are not dogma

1. aren’t most Church teachings

truths having a necessary connection with these

“these” being understood as defined dogmas. Is it that “definitive way” caveat that makes the difference? Does the Church not define everything she teaches? If she doesn’t define a teaching how can one be expected to understand, or follow it?

Cardinal Avery Dulles pointed out that in the 800 pages of the Second Vatican Council documents, there is not one new statement for which infallibility is claimed.

I have read a few VII documents and they definitely “have a necessary connection with these”. No statement in VII has infallibility claimed for it because they don’t need too. Their infallibility is guaranteed because they are teachings connected to defined infallible dogmas. right?

Still just a neophyte so I have no idea what I’m talking about.

 

[Imtrying]

do you think there is a point where our human ability to clearly present, defined, academic understandings of revealed truth reaches an end? A point where a doctrine cannot be elucidated any further by human theologians.

 

[CatholicSpirit]

To me, that is like asking “will time stop and all those in line halfway or three quarters of the way to Sainthood in the Church not reach the goal-line?” I like to think in those kinds of terms. Will we ever stop having Saints that perform two miracles or will miracles stop? I really don’t think that will stop and many things have been seen through their miracles.

I still remember my Aunt announcing to me, “we have a new Pope and he chose Francis because he is for THE POOR!” She wanted to say that for years. To her, that was a great day.

 

[thistle]

I want to be a faithful Catholic, so whatever is defined as doctrine must be my definition too. I have some questions about this definition that I am obliged to believe.

Do not get hung up on which doctrines are infallible or non-infallible because it doesn’t matter.
CATHOLICS ARE BOUND BY BOTH INFALLIBLE AND NON-INFALLIBLE DOCTRINES.

Read the Catechism of the Catholic Church. In there are summaries of Church teachings which Catholics are bound by plus footnotes showing which Church documents (Sacred Scripture and other Church documents) underpin the teachings.

 

[Gorgias]

Do not get hung up on which doctrines are infallible or non-infallible because it doesn’t matter.

CATHOLICS ARE BOUND BY BOTH INFALLIBLE AND NON-INFALLIBLE DOCTRINES.

This!

The question isn’t “is this teaching infallible?”, it’s “is this teaching authoritative?”

And, if it’s taught by the Church, by the leadership that Jesus put in place and gave authority… then, yes: the teachings are authoritative.

To your question about “development”: yes, doctrine continues to develop… but, once definitively declared as dogma or doctrine, it will never be abandoned. So, if you’re asking “I’m having a hard time believing that God is three-in-one,” then no – that won’t change. Might it be expressed in different ways in different times in the future? Perhaps; but never in a way that denies the doctrine as established.

 

[Imtrying]

are the contents of the catechism authoritative?

 

[Gorgias]

are the contents of the catechism authoritative?

Yes.

 

[AmbroseSJ]

are the contents of the catechism authoritative?

Yes. But not infallible.

 

[Hereiam]

I think in the premise of your question you are confusing doctrine with theology.

As pianoclare points out, it depends first how you define doctrine; dogmata is unchanging. However things you might consider doctrine can change (example priests being married).

However, if you meant theology, well yes, it does evolve.

 

[guanophore]

However things you might consider doctrine can change (example priests being married).

Married priests is a discipline that has changed, and may change again. Although all disciplines are rooted in doctrine, they are not, in themselves, doctrines.

 

[Hereiam]

My point …