Does the Catholic church make things up as it goes along?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Montalban
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Montalban said:
One Catholic poster here:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=707950

Seems to be arguing that the Catholic church made up a dogma at the sixth ecumenical council

I would argue that the church always taught that Jesus had two wills.
Click to expand...
Montalban has a way of misrepresenting what I say. Here is what I believe about this doctrine…

I believe it has ALWAYS been taught by the Church IMPLICITLY. How? Because the Church has ALWAYS taught that Christ has TWO NATURES. The Church did not address the issue of Christ having TWO WILLS until the 7th century. THAT’S when they made it a doctrine. Prior to that, no one spoke about Christ having two wills.

Here is something from catholic.com that states exactly what I believe

catholic.com/quickquestions/can-the-catholic-church-list-all-the-teachings-given-to-the-apostles-by-divine-revela
No it can’t, because some of the teachings have been passed down in implicit rather than explicit form, and it is impossible to list all of the implications of a set of doctrines.
Click to expand...
A good example of why this is so can be found in the Monothelite controversy. The Monothelites were seventh-century heretics who claimed that Jesus had only one will, the divine. The orthodox position is that Jesus also has a human will which is distinct from but never in conflict with his divine will. This position was infallibly defined at the Third Council of Constantinople (680-681).
Click to expand...
Neither the Bible nor the writings of the earliest Church Fathers explicitly stated that Christ has a human will distinct from but in harmony with his divine will. That doctrine was not handed on from the apostles in explicit form, but it was handed on in implicit form.
Click to expand...
The apostles taught, as the Bible and the Fathers indicate, that Jesus was fully human and fully divine. This contains the implicit teaching of two wills, because if Christ is fully human, he must have a human will, and if he is fully divine, he must have a divine will. For Christ to lack one or the other would make him either not be fully human or not be fully divine. Because of Christ’s supreme holiness and the unity of his Person, his human and divine wills are never in conflict.
Click to expand...
What this proves is that there was a development of doctrine in the Early Church…NOT a window for NEW DOCTRINES as Montablan thinks I am saying. The understanding of Christ having two wills DEVELOPED from the fact that He has two natures. It was NEVER directly taught that He had two wills until the 7th century. The seed of this doctrine derives from the fact that Christ has TWO NATURES.

Just wanted everyone to understand my position and not let Montablan steer you in misrepresenting me.
 
Vatican II explained:
“The tradition which comes from the apostles develops in the Church with the help of the Holy Spirit. For there is a growth in the understanding of the realities and the words which have been handed down. This happens through the contemplation and study made by believers, who treasure these things in their hearts, through a penetrating understanding of the spiritual realities which they experience, and through the preaching of those who have received through episcopal succession the sure gift of truth. For, as the centuries succeed one another, the Church constantly moves forward toward the fullness of divine truth until the words of God reach their complete fulfillment in her” (Dei Verbum 8).
Click to expand...
catholic.com/quickquestions/can-the-catholic-church-list-all-the-teachings-given-to-the-apostles-by-divine-revela
 
Then that leads nicely back to my OP in the other thread

What evidence do you have for the teachings of a connection between the single key (in Isaiah) with the several keys(in Matthew)

It’s taken all this just to get you to answer that OP
 
Montalban said:
Then that leads nicely back to my OP in the other thread

What evidence do you have for the teachings of a connection between the single key (in Isaiah) with the several keys(in Matthew)

It’s taken all this just to get you to answer that OP
Click to expand...
I didn’t make the thread about two wills to prove you wrong about the key/keys. I made it to understand the Orthodox position better. What is this like the 5th time now I tell you this?

GET OVER IT! :eek:
 
Guys…dont fight. Please? 🙂

Its just not worth arguing over, right?
 
Angelsflight said:
Yes! He is my patron saint…the greatest missionary that ever lived. 🙂
Click to expand...
My family have always liked him. My mum was having a baby boy (alas he died) and the name Damian* had already been picked out for him

*-yes, I know it’s different spelling
 
lyrikal said:
Montalban has a way of misrepresenting what I say. Here is what I believe about this doctrine…

I believe it has ALWAYS been taught by the Church IMPLICITLY. How? Because the Church has ALWAYS taught that Christ has TWO NATURES. The Church did not address the issue of Christ having TWO WILLS until the 7th century. THAT’S when they made it a doctrine. Prior to that, no one spoke about Christ having two wills.

Here is something from catholic.com that states exactly what I believe

catholic.com/quickquestions/can-the-catholic-church-list-all-the-teachings-given-to-the-apostles-by-divine-revela

What this proves is that there was a development of doctrine in the Early Church…NOT a window for NEW DOCTRINES as Montablan thinks I am saying. The understanding of Christ having two wills DEVELOPED from the fact that He has two natures. It was NEVER directly taught that He had two wills until the 7th century. The seed of this doctrine derives from the fact that Christ has TWO NATURES.

Just wanted everyone to understand my position and not let Montablan steer you in misrepresenting me.
Click to expand...
Sounds correct to me.

👍👍👍
 
Montalban said:
My family have always liked him. My mum was having a baby boy (alas he died) and the name Damian* had already been picked out for him

*-yes, I know it’s different spelling
Click to expand...
Ohhh…I am so sorry to hear that! 😦
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top