Maybe I’m not understanding your definition of revelation, but how can you say that there can be no new truths or changes to the faith, as time progresses?
The way we understand and live the faith can develop, and additional elements of the deposit of faith can be declared dogma by the Magisterium, but the public revelation of Jesus Christ to the world - ending with the death of the last Apostle - is the fullness of God’s revelation.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church says the following in paragraph
66:
There will be no further Revelation
"The Christian economy, therefore, since it is the new and definitive Covenant, will never pass away; and no new public revelation is to be expected before the glorious manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ." Yet even if Revelation is already complete, it has not been made completely explicit; it remains for Christian faith gradually to grasp its full significance over the course of the centuries.
Paragraph 67 goes on to acknowledge that private revelation can happen - and almost certainly has - but that this can never be binding upon the faithful as part of the deposit of faith.
Isn’t cannon law a Catholic doctrine that comes from the Holy Spirit that works directly through the Magesterium -post Apostolic age?
Canon law is a body of laws and regulations that the Church has adopted. Authoritative? Yes. But no, not a part of divine revelation. Saying that canon law is doctrine doesn’t even make sense. Doctrine is what we
believe, what we
profess. Canon law is a set of rules.
Surely we don’t believe that the Magesterium just simply tweak teachings out of their own worldly imaginations.
Of course not. The teaching authority of the Church is certainly guided by the Holy Spirit. But the Magisterium can never proclaim that new revelation has been added to the orthodox Christian faith.
Honestly, I’d like to draw similarities between the Orthodox and Catholic Churches too, but I’m not interested in ‘cover-ups’… I believe in being honest, not that I think you aren’t, but if the Spirit does not work through the Magesterium, then I should convert to Orthodox.
As I have proven through citations to the Church’s official catechism, my comments are accurate, and I am being honest.
The Spirit
does work through the Magisterium. But the Spirit doesn’t bestow upon the Church new revelation. Publicly binding divine revelation - the faith of the Church - was given to us whole and complete by the time the last Apostle died.
The Catholic Church’s stance on revelation is that there can be NO New Public Revelation after Jesus Christ’s Ascension.
That’s not exactly accurate. The New Testament wasn’t even written until well after Christ’s Ascension. Revelation ended with the death of the last Apostle.
I’ve heard that Eucharistic Adoration only began approximately 100 years ago in our Catholic Church, is that true? If so, why didn’t we worship Jesus in the Eucharist before then?
It’s much older than that; the practice began approximately 1000 years ago. While widespread in the West, it never developed in the East, so it’s only a part of Latin Christianity, not Byzantine Christianity.
Thanks…
This I’ve been replaying the post I quoted over and over in my mind last night and all day today. I’m really not interested at all in pandering our beliefs towards some agenda. I’m into honest truth. Otherwise, for me, everything comes to a screeching hault.
I’m not into “pandering our beliefs towards some agenda,” either. You were just incorrect about the notion of new public revelation.
