Ecce Verbum
Darwinism is a Rejection of Proportional Causality Darwinian Evolution is repugnant to natural reason. One way to see this is to understand that it fundamentally rejects the principle of proportionate causality. The principle of proportionate causality is…
Monogenism and Polygenism
Monogenism is the name of the scientific opinion, according to Scripture, which proves the common origin and therefore the unity of our human race. The Old Testament not only gives Adam as the father of the whole human race, but moreover presents Noah as the father of all peoples alive today (Gen. 6, 13. 7, 21. 10, 32). This unity is given in Revelation as a historical fact, and this fact, although centuries in advance of the epoch in which the ages of the nations began, is so evident that it cannot be denied. Everywhere on the face of the earth we find traces of dispersion, of wanderings, which indicate this original unity of our origin. It is only in more recent times that this unity has been opposed, and not because of some scientific requirement, but out of a dislike of biblical teaching. The fathers of anthropology, Blumenbach, Pritchard, as well as their predecessors and immediate successors, Buffon, Cuvier, Stephens, Schubert, Rudolf and Andrew Wagner, Charles Baer, H. Meyer, Burdach, Wilbrand, Stefan and Isidore Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, de Blainville, Hugh Miller, Serres, Flourens, Quatrefages, Milne Edwards, Lyell, Huxley and many others are monogenists.
The list of polygenists, i.e. those maintaining the plurality of human kinds, is incomparably less numerous and less impressive in terms of scientific significance of names. We find in this line: Oken, Karus, Vogt, Agassiz, Giebel, Paul Broca, George Pouchet and others. Lyell (De l'ancienneté de l'homme, p. 409), speaking of the unity of the origin of the human race, writes: "against this doctrine, as far as I know, no one has so far put forward a serious argument". Polygenists accuse those who defend the unity of the human race of being influenced by biblical legends, and therefore wish to attach less importance to their doctrine, but this charge is most idle, in view of the names quoted above, the recognised importance in science, and, moreover, the greater part of them are known for their unfriendly attitude to the doctrine of Revelation. Alexander Humboldt cannot be accused of favouring the Bible, since he explicitly praises (Cosmos, I, 284) the newer direction of natural science for having "succeeded in freeing itself from Semitic influences"; yet he firmly declares himself in favour of the unity of the human race (ibid. p. 379). In doing so, he cites the opinion of Jan Müller, whom he calls the most outstanding anatomist of our age.
The polygenists base their doctrine on racial differences, but the monogenists show that the differences between human races in the structure of the skull and pelvis, in the colour of the skin, in the properties of the hair, and finally in speech, do not go so far as to treat the human races, which are merely varieties of one species, as different zoological species; that, on the contrary, the properties common to all human beings, and especially the fertile combinations of all races, prove their species unity. The reader will find this evidence collected in Reusch, The Bible and Nature, translated by X. M. Nowodworski, 1872, pp. 358-408, and Moigno, Splendeurs de la foi, 1877, II, 496-601. The researches of the natural sciences agree on this point most completely with biblical science.
We add here just one more remark. The polygenists, who break up the human race into several separate species, since they deprive it of a common father, must admit that human beings are not brothers, and that the meanest minds have indulged in the illusion of appealing in the great affairs of mankind to a universal brotherhood of nations, peoples and individuals. And if the Negroes and American Indians were not human beings like us, but, as the polygenists want, "separate beings, pursuing a separate end, proper to themselves and not our own" (Pouchet, Pluralité des races humaines, p. 133), they would feel to be in the complete right, treating the Negro as a cattle and exterminating whomever they view to be of inferior race.
🔗p.2 and sources
#evolution
Monogenism is the name of the scientific opinion, according to Scripture, which proves the common origin and therefore the unity of our human race. The Old Testament not only gives Adam as the father of the whole human race, but moreover presents Noah as the father of all peoples alive today (Gen. 6, 13. 7, 21. 10, 32). This unity is given in Revelation as a historical fact, and this fact, although centuries in advance of the epoch in which the ages of the nations began, is so evident that it cannot be denied. Everywhere on the face of the earth we find traces of dispersion, of wanderings, which indicate this original unity of our origin. It is only in more recent times that this unity has been opposed, and not because of some scientific requirement, but out of a dislike of biblical teaching. The fathers of anthropology, Blumenbach, Pritchard, as well as their predecessors and immediate successors, Buffon, Cuvier, Stephens, Schubert, Rudolf and Andrew Wagner, Charles Baer, H. Meyer, Burdach, Wilbrand, Stefan and Isidore Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, de Blainville, Hugh Miller, Serres, Flourens, Quatrefages, Milne Edwards, Lyell, Huxley and many others are monogenists.
The list of polygenists, i.e. those maintaining the plurality of human kinds, is incomparably less numerous and less impressive in terms of scientific significance of names. We find in this line: Oken, Karus, Vogt, Agassiz, Giebel, Paul Broca, George Pouchet and others. Lyell (De l'ancienneté de l'homme, p. 409), speaking of the unity of the origin of the human race, writes: "against this doctrine, as far as I know, no one has so far put forward a serious argument". Polygenists accuse those who defend the unity of the human race of being influenced by biblical legends, and therefore wish to attach less importance to their doctrine, but this charge is most idle, in view of the names quoted above, the recognised importance in science, and, moreover, the greater part of them are known for their unfriendly attitude to the doctrine of Revelation. Alexander Humboldt cannot be accused of favouring the Bible, since he explicitly praises (Cosmos, I, 284) the newer direction of natural science for having "succeeded in freeing itself from Semitic influences"; yet he firmly declares himself in favour of the unity of the human race (ibid. p. 379). In doing so, he cites the opinion of Jan Müller, whom he calls the most outstanding anatomist of our age.
The polygenists base their doctrine on racial differences, but the monogenists show that the differences between human races in the structure of the skull and pelvis, in the colour of the skin, in the properties of the hair, and finally in speech, do not go so far as to treat the human races, which are merely varieties of one species, as different zoological species; that, on the contrary, the properties common to all human beings, and especially the fertile combinations of all races, prove their species unity. The reader will find this evidence collected in Reusch, The Bible and Nature, translated by X. M. Nowodworski, 1872, pp. 358-408, and Moigno, Splendeurs de la foi, 1877, II, 496-601. The researches of the natural sciences agree on this point most completely with biblical science.
We add here just one more remark. The polygenists, who break up the human race into several separate species, since they deprive it of a common father, must admit that human beings are not brothers, and that the meanest minds have indulged in the illusion of appealing in the great affairs of mankind to a universal brotherhood of nations, peoples and individuals. And if the Negroes and American Indians were not human beings like us, but, as the polygenists want, "separate beings, pursuing a separate end, proper to themselves and not our own" (Pouchet, Pluralité des races humaines, p. 133), they would feel to be in the complete right, treating the Negro as a cattle and exterminating whomever they view to be of inferior race.
🔗p.2 and sources
#evolution
Ecce Verbum
On the necessity of Baptism
1. As the ordinary means of regeneration, Holy Baptism is absolutely necessary (necessitate medii) for the attainment of salvation.
The Holy Church, basing itself on the teaching of the Holy Scriptures, as well as on the conduct of the Apostles and on constant teaching, has declared that Holy Baptism is indispensable for salvation. - Council of Trent sess. VI, cap. 4; sess. VII, De baptis. can. 5. cf. John 3:5: "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is reborn of water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter the Kingdom of God."
(2) Holy Baptism of infants and immature persons is likewise absolutely necessary, since the Holy Faith gives no other means of substituting for Holy Baptism in them. For
a) Infants and immature adults are capable of receiving Holy Baptism and need it. They are able to receive it because Christ the Lord, according to Sacred Scripture, blessed both infants and children and because Holy Baptism does not ex opere operantis 🔗(1), but ex opere operato 🔗(2) have effect; they need it because they are in original sin. And if Holy Baptism is the ordinary means of cleansing from original sin for all men, it is so necessary for immature children that no other means can replace it, at least no other means is given us by faith to replace Holy Baptism.
b) The words of Christ the Lord: "Unless one is reborn of water and of the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter the Kingdom of God", have a general meaning and therefore also apply to infants.
c) The fact that infants were already being baptised in apostolic times is evidenced by the words in Scripture which state that the Apostles baptised certain men with their whole household; for it must be assumed that there were also children among those baptised. This is how St. Peter baptised the house of the rittmeister Cornelius in Caesarea (Acts 10), St. Paul baptised the house of Lydia of Tiatyra (Acts 16:15), the house of the keeper of the prison in Philippi (Acts 16:32-33) and the house of Crispus in Corinth (Acts 18:8).
d) Finally, the constant teaching and practice of the Holy Church, as well as the solemn judgements of universal councils, speak in favour of the necessity of infant baptism. Cf. St Augustine Epist. 166: "Whoever asserts that even infants receive salvation in Christ who, without receiving his sacrament, pass out of this world, opposes in fact not only the apostolic doctrine, but also condemns the whole Church, because for this very reason infant baptism is hastened, since we believe undoubtedly that by no other means can they attain salvation".
The error of the Pelagians and the new-baptists was solemnly condemned by the Council of Trent; cf. sess. V, De pecc. orig. can. 4 and sess. VII, De baptis. can. 13. In the last place, the Council declares that, however baptised children do not have a valid faith, they must nevertheless be counted among the faithful. For although they do not have an actual faith, they have an infused permanent faith (fides infusa, fides habitualis).
Faith does not tell us what the fate of children who die without baptism is; only the Universal Council of Florence makes it clear that even those who die in original sin alone will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven. From this it follows that parents have a sacred duty to bring forward the baptism of their children.
(3) People already in possession of reason, but who cannot by any means receive baptism, can obtain salvation by baptism of blood (baptismus sanguinis), or baptism of desire (baptismus flaminis).
The baptism of blood consists in giving one's life for Christ; the baptism of desire consists in perfect love, and the desire flowing from it, to receive the sacrament of baptism.
a) That baptism of blood replaces the sacrament of baptism is evident from Mt 10:32: "Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven"; and Mt 16:25: "Whosoever shall lose his life for my sake shall find it".
🔗part 2, sources with footnotes
1. As the ordinary means of regeneration, Holy Baptism is absolutely necessary (necessitate medii) for the attainment of salvation.
The Holy Church, basing itself on the teaching of the Holy Scriptures, as well as on the conduct of the Apostles and on constant teaching, has declared that Holy Baptism is indispensable for salvation. - Council of Trent sess. VI, cap. 4; sess. VII, De baptis. can. 5. cf. John 3:5: "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is reborn of water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter the Kingdom of God."
(2) Holy Baptism of infants and immature persons is likewise absolutely necessary, since the Holy Faith gives no other means of substituting for Holy Baptism in them. For
a) Infants and immature adults are capable of receiving Holy Baptism and need it. They are able to receive it because Christ the Lord, according to Sacred Scripture, blessed both infants and children and because Holy Baptism does not ex opere operantis 🔗(1), but ex opere operato 🔗(2) have effect; they need it because they are in original sin. And if Holy Baptism is the ordinary means of cleansing from original sin for all men, it is so necessary for immature children that no other means can replace it, at least no other means is given us by faith to replace Holy Baptism.
b) The words of Christ the Lord: "Unless one is reborn of water and of the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter the Kingdom of God", have a general meaning and therefore also apply to infants.
c) The fact that infants were already being baptised in apostolic times is evidenced by the words in Scripture which state that the Apostles baptised certain men with their whole household; for it must be assumed that there were also children among those baptised. This is how St. Peter baptised the house of the rittmeister Cornelius in Caesarea (Acts 10), St. Paul baptised the house of Lydia of Tiatyra (Acts 16:15), the house of the keeper of the prison in Philippi (Acts 16:32-33) and the house of Crispus in Corinth (Acts 18:8).
d) Finally, the constant teaching and practice of the Holy Church, as well as the solemn judgements of universal councils, speak in favour of the necessity of infant baptism. Cf. St Augustine Epist. 166: "Whoever asserts that even infants receive salvation in Christ who, without receiving his sacrament, pass out of this world, opposes in fact not only the apostolic doctrine, but also condemns the whole Church, because for this very reason infant baptism is hastened, since we believe undoubtedly that by no other means can they attain salvation".
The error of the Pelagians and the new-baptists was solemnly condemned by the Council of Trent; cf. sess. V, De pecc. orig. can. 4 and sess. VII, De baptis. can. 13. In the last place, the Council declares that, however baptised children do not have a valid faith, they must nevertheless be counted among the faithful. For although they do not have an actual faith, they have an infused permanent faith (fides infusa, fides habitualis).
Faith does not tell us what the fate of children who die without baptism is; only the Universal Council of Florence makes it clear that even those who die in original sin alone will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven. From this it follows that parents have a sacred duty to bring forward the baptism of their children.
(3) People already in possession of reason, but who cannot by any means receive baptism, can obtain salvation by baptism of blood (baptismus sanguinis), or baptism of desire (baptismus flaminis).
The baptism of blood consists in giving one's life for Christ; the baptism of desire consists in perfect love, and the desire flowing from it, to receive the sacrament of baptism.
a) That baptism of blood replaces the sacrament of baptism is evident from Mt 10:32: "Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven"; and Mt 16:25: "Whosoever shall lose his life for my sake shall find it".
🔗part 2, sources with footnotes
Ecce Verbum
Photo
On the Jewish religion after the establishment of Christianity
The Mosaic religion was only the forerunner of the Christian religion.Therefore, after the death of Christ, it is no longer a true religion and has thus become a false religion.
The abolition of the Old Testament law accomplished by itself through the death of Christ, was proclaimed on the day of Pentecost; however, for a time it was permitted to keep this law, which the Apostles themselves did in part, but this observance of the Old Testament law was no longer necessary. Duns Scotus puts it beautifully (4. d. 3, qu. 4, n. 5): "The Old Law was not in itself evil as it is with idolatry, and therefore did not have to be immediately rejected, but the Synagogue should have been respectfully buried, so that it might be shown that it was good in its time".
By not accepting Christ as the Messiah, the Jewish people ceased to be a chosen people and became a rejected people. They still await the coming of the Messiah, and so far this religion is a building still unfinished; but since the Messiah will no longer come, thus the building must remain unfinished, it has become a body without a spirit.
Although the Jewish religion is, by its foundation and purpose, something particularistic and national, its adherents are scattered among all nations. The whole order on which it was based, such as the ark, the temple, the sacrifices, the priests, has been gone for more than 1800 years. Since the death of Christ, there has been no true prophet to comfort the nation and herald better times. Although numerous false prophets and false messiahs arose, none of them could perform miracles or otherwise prove that they were sent from God; on the contrary, the people who believed them were thrown into greater perdition. The Mosaic law, which the Jews still keep, cannot be observed in the greater and essential part, namely as to the judicial and ceremonial law. All this makes it clear that the Jewish people with their religion have been rejected by God, as already foretold by the prophet Daniel. (Dan. 9, 26 sq)
According to God's will, this nation will last until the end of the world. The Jews, always preserving their ancient sacred Books, testify that the Messianic prophecies contained therein are authentic, that is, that the prophecies foretold something before it happened, and that they are not fabricated post factum by Christians, as St. Augustine observes in his explanation of Ps. 56:9; M. 36:666. "Therefore the Jews still exist, so that to their shame they carry our Books. For when we wish to demonstrate to the Gentiles that Christ was prophesied, we cite this very Scripture to them. And lest by chance the unbelievers should say that it is we Christians who have arranged it, and that, together with the Gospel which we preach, we have invented prophets through whom it would seem that what we preach is foretold, then we persuade them on this ground that all those Scriptures in which Christ was foretold are found in the Jews.... The Jew carries the document on the basis of which the Christian believes. The Jews have become our bookkeepers..."
source: De religione judaica postchristiana, Compendium theologiae dogmaticae generalis. Auctore P. Parthenio Minges O. F. M. Doctore ss. Theol. Et Philos. Alumno Provinciae Bavaricare. Editio secunda emendata et augmenta. Ratisbonae 1923, pp. 97-98 (nn. 162-163).
#judaism
The Mosaic religion was only the forerunner of the Christian religion.Therefore, after the death of Christ, it is no longer a true religion and has thus become a false religion.
The abolition of the Old Testament law accomplished by itself through the death of Christ, was proclaimed on the day of Pentecost; however, for a time it was permitted to keep this law, which the Apostles themselves did in part, but this observance of the Old Testament law was no longer necessary. Duns Scotus puts it beautifully (4. d. 3, qu. 4, n. 5): "The Old Law was not in itself evil as it is with idolatry, and therefore did not have to be immediately rejected, but the Synagogue should have been respectfully buried, so that it might be shown that it was good in its time".
By not accepting Christ as the Messiah, the Jewish people ceased to be a chosen people and became a rejected people. They still await the coming of the Messiah, and so far this religion is a building still unfinished; but since the Messiah will no longer come, thus the building must remain unfinished, it has become a body without a spirit.
Although the Jewish religion is, by its foundation and purpose, something particularistic and national, its adherents are scattered among all nations. The whole order on which it was based, such as the ark, the temple, the sacrifices, the priests, has been gone for more than 1800 years. Since the death of Christ, there has been no true prophet to comfort the nation and herald better times. Although numerous false prophets and false messiahs arose, none of them could perform miracles or otherwise prove that they were sent from God; on the contrary, the people who believed them were thrown into greater perdition. The Mosaic law, which the Jews still keep, cannot be observed in the greater and essential part, namely as to the judicial and ceremonial law. All this makes it clear that the Jewish people with their religion have been rejected by God, as already foretold by the prophet Daniel. (Dan. 9, 26 sq)
According to God's will, this nation will last until the end of the world. The Jews, always preserving their ancient sacred Books, testify that the Messianic prophecies contained therein are authentic, that is, that the prophecies foretold something before it happened, and that they are not fabricated post factum by Christians, as St. Augustine observes in his explanation of Ps. 56:9; M. 36:666. "Therefore the Jews still exist, so that to their shame they carry our Books. For when we wish to demonstrate to the Gentiles that Christ was prophesied, we cite this very Scripture to them. And lest by chance the unbelievers should say that it is we Christians who have arranged it, and that, together with the Gospel which we preach, we have invented prophets through whom it would seem that what we preach is foretold, then we persuade them on this ground that all those Scriptures in which Christ was foretold are found in the Jews.... The Jew carries the document on the basis of which the Christian believes. The Jews have become our bookkeepers..."
source: De religione judaica postchristiana, Compendium theologiae dogmaticae generalis. Auctore P. Parthenio Minges O. F. M. Doctore ss. Theol. Et Philos. Alumno Provinciae Bavaricare. Editio secunda emendata et augmenta. Ratisbonae 1923, pp. 97-98 (nn. 162-163).
#judaism
Ecce Verbum
Photo
The soul of a woman
Catholic doctrine, already clearly contained in the Bible, teaches that the nature of woman is not inferior to that of man, that woman, like man, possesses an immortal soul, endowed with mental powers and subject to moral duties similar to those of man; that, like man, she is called to grace and to supernatural happiness, being able even to surpass him in the sublimity of God's gifts and in the greatness of her merits. The loving submission of the wife to her spouse in domestic life should not degenerate into bondage, into humiliation and oppression. While pagan civilisation degrades and corrupts woman almost as barbarously, while modern materialism and rationalism bring her back to the shamelessness of the old harems and lupanars, Catholicism, through its teachings, sacraments and religious institutions, constantly awakens in her feelings of dignity, patience, sweetness, which elevate her far above the ideal dreamt up for her by the wisest representatives of philosophy.
What we assert here is so far certain that of it no honest man would dare to deny a word. All accusations against a biblical woman, against a Christian woman, belong to the order of those which are not uttered in public and to which there is no need to respond - except with contempt. In recent times, however, it has come to be thought that the Church has not always had the same respect for woman that it does today, and that it has even denied her, or at least questioned her right to claim for herself a rational, spiritual, immortal soul similar to that of man. In support of this strange notion, a fact was cited which had been known for a long time, but in which scholars of earlier times did not see a similar allegation: namely, the treatise initiated at the Second Synod of Macon, which supposedly proves that the bishops of that time were not entirely convinced of the existence of a rational and immortal soul in woman. Let us therefore examine this allegation.
Gregory of Tours (Historia Francorum l. VIII, c. 20), a credulous and confused historian, if indeed he was even a historian, reports the fact which gave rise to this fable in this way: "At this synod (the second at Macon, held in 585, some say in 588) one of the bishops maintained that a woman could not be called a man (mulierem hominem non posse vocari). However, when other bishops explained the matter to him (ratione accepta), he agreed with their opinion (quievit); for the Old Testament Scriptures teach that God, creating man in the beginning, said: male and female he created them, and gave them the name Adam, that is, man of the earth (homo terrenus); and therefore he called woman the same as man, for he called both of them man (utrumque enim hominem dixit). Moreover, Christ the Lord is called the Son of man because He was the son of the Virgin, that is, of a woman. Finally explained by many more testimonies, the question is completed (causa quievit)". The canons of this second synod of Macon have been preserved, and on a careful reading of them it is difficult to understand why the whole dispute was initiated. It seems, therefore, to be completely incidental and in no way seems to concern a subject, otherwise not at all dogmatic, which this synod should have dealt with.
One single bishop, unsupported by any other bishop or episcopal delegate, comes up with the idea of raising a question which is reported by Gregory of Tours, without apparently attaching any great importance to it, which he would certainly not have failed to point out if this objection were what today's rationalists vainly want it to be. The difficulty does not concern the human and rational soul of a woman, but only the name man (homo), the application of which to a woman puzzles the Bishop -not a great theologian and a weak scholar. He confuses the word homo with the word vir, takes the name man (a human) with the name man (a male), and cannot understand how a woman could be called by the first of these names when she obviously cannot be called by the second.
🔗p.2, source
#women
Catholic doctrine, already clearly contained in the Bible, teaches that the nature of woman is not inferior to that of man, that woman, like man, possesses an immortal soul, endowed with mental powers and subject to moral duties similar to those of man; that, like man, she is called to grace and to supernatural happiness, being able even to surpass him in the sublimity of God's gifts and in the greatness of her merits. The loving submission of the wife to her spouse in domestic life should not degenerate into bondage, into humiliation and oppression. While pagan civilisation degrades and corrupts woman almost as barbarously, while modern materialism and rationalism bring her back to the shamelessness of the old harems and lupanars, Catholicism, through its teachings, sacraments and religious institutions, constantly awakens in her feelings of dignity, patience, sweetness, which elevate her far above the ideal dreamt up for her by the wisest representatives of philosophy.
What we assert here is so far certain that of it no honest man would dare to deny a word. All accusations against a biblical woman, against a Christian woman, belong to the order of those which are not uttered in public and to which there is no need to respond - except with contempt. In recent times, however, it has come to be thought that the Church has not always had the same respect for woman that it does today, and that it has even denied her, or at least questioned her right to claim for herself a rational, spiritual, immortal soul similar to that of man. In support of this strange notion, a fact was cited which had been known for a long time, but in which scholars of earlier times did not see a similar allegation: namely, the treatise initiated at the Second Synod of Macon, which supposedly proves that the bishops of that time were not entirely convinced of the existence of a rational and immortal soul in woman. Let us therefore examine this allegation.
Gregory of Tours (Historia Francorum l. VIII, c. 20), a credulous and confused historian, if indeed he was even a historian, reports the fact which gave rise to this fable in this way: "At this synod (the second at Macon, held in 585, some say in 588) one of the bishops maintained that a woman could not be called a man (mulierem hominem non posse vocari). However, when other bishops explained the matter to him (ratione accepta), he agreed with their opinion (quievit); for the Old Testament Scriptures teach that God, creating man in the beginning, said: male and female he created them, and gave them the name Adam, that is, man of the earth (homo terrenus); and therefore he called woman the same as man, for he called both of them man (utrumque enim hominem dixit). Moreover, Christ the Lord is called the Son of man because He was the son of the Virgin, that is, of a woman. Finally explained by many more testimonies, the question is completed (causa quievit)". The canons of this second synod of Macon have been preserved, and on a careful reading of them it is difficult to understand why the whole dispute was initiated. It seems, therefore, to be completely incidental and in no way seems to concern a subject, otherwise not at all dogmatic, which this synod should have dealt with.
One single bishop, unsupported by any other bishop or episcopal delegate, comes up with the idea of raising a question which is reported by Gregory of Tours, without apparently attaching any great importance to it, which he would certainly not have failed to point out if this objection were what today's rationalists vainly want it to be. The difficulty does not concern the human and rational soul of a woman, but only the name man (homo), the application of which to a woman puzzles the Bishop -not a great theologian and a weak scholar. He confuses the word homo with the word vir, takes the name man (a human) with the name man (a male), and cannot understand how a woman could be called by the first of these names when she obviously cannot be called by the second.
🔗p.2, source
#women
Ecce Verbum
God wishes all men to be saved "So what must we do, we who know that the greater number is going to be damned, and not only out of all Catholics? What must we do? Take the resolution to belong to the little number of those who are saved. You say: If Christ…
Will only a few be saved?
The perspective of Catholic theologians- a summary
The Church has not defined any truth of faith by declaring the number of people saved or condemned. It is therefore not surprising that it is the subject of investigation and dispute.
Christ himself says: Someone asked him, “Lord, are only a few people going to be saved?” He said to them, “Make every effort to enter through the narrow door, because many, I tell you, will try to enter and will not be able to. [Luke 13:23-24]
More than once, the Lord Jesus warns the faithful: "For many are called, but few are chosen" [Mt 22:14], and: "Enter through the narrow gate! For wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it” [Mt 7:13-14]
Saint Augustine, in his sermon on the Gospel quoted earlier ,concluded: "There is no doubt, however, that few are saved" [Sermon 61]. This view was very popular among the Fathers of the Church (John Chrysostom, Jerome, Gregory the Great, Ambrose).
This opinion was also shared by St. Thomas Aquinas: "because eternal happiness, consisting in the vision of God, transcends the common state of nature, even a nature deprived of grace due to original sin, therefore the saved are in the minority" [I, q.23 a.7 ad.3]
So it may seem that the answer to the question is clear. And yet, in its doctrine, the Church does not provide information about a smaller number of saved people as the truth of faith. There has even been a difference of opinion in theology that has not been resolved by the Magisterium.
Although most Catholic theologians (St. Alphonsus Ligouri, St. Bellarmin, Suarez, Cajetan, Billuart) agree that this is the universal opinion of the Fathers, it is also recognised that it is not a truth of the faith, but only a theological opinion, which is not the only acceptable one.
In the course of time, theologians began to temper their opinions by remaining consistent with doctrine, also recalling the Bible's optimistic predictions of a multitude of the saved: "Behold, I saw a great multitude which no one could count, from every nation and from all generations" [Rev 7:9].
Rev. Sieniatycki points out in his Dogmatics textbook the following words of Christ : "many are chosen, few are called", do not necessarily refer to the whole human race, but to the Jews, who then rejected Christ's instructions in greater numbers.
The eminent theologian Suarez, discussing the common opinion of the Fathers, also considered that when it comes to Christians themselves, it is more likely that the number of the saved will be greater than the condemned because of the means of grace (sacraments) present in the Church and working through the Church for others.
Eminent Thomist Fr Garrigou-Lagrange OP points out that, since Suarez, most theologians have considered it more likely that, of all the baptised (Catholics, schismatics and heretics), the saved are in the majority.
This was concurred by St. Bishop J. Pelczar, who stresses that: "there are more who, before death, repent of their sins and receive the Sacraments " [Catholic Religion]. However, it is evident that this applies to those who repent and partake in the Sacraments.
Although most theologians adopt the opinion that out of the whole human race the number of the damned may exceed the saved, many stress that when it comes to the religious and even non-Christians, the saved are very numerous (Garrigou-Lagrange, Faber, Pelczar, Pius IX).
It is also worth adding that all theologians agree that if the number of the reprobate is great, it is only because people neglect repentance and persist in their sins, and thus condemn themselves through their own fault and not because of extraordinary difficulties.
"The Church strongly recommends to all that they put their trust in the mercy of God and do not doubt that they can be saved even if they have committed the gravest sins, if only they resolve to sin no more, sincerely repent, and go receive the sacraments "[Tylka, Catholic Dogmatics].
🔗p.2 and sources
#salvation
The perspective of Catholic theologians- a summary
The Church has not defined any truth of faith by declaring the number of people saved or condemned. It is therefore not surprising that it is the subject of investigation and dispute.
Christ himself says: Someone asked him, “Lord, are only a few people going to be saved?” He said to them, “Make every effort to enter through the narrow door, because many, I tell you, will try to enter and will not be able to. [Luke 13:23-24]
More than once, the Lord Jesus warns the faithful: "For many are called, but few are chosen" [Mt 22:14], and: "Enter through the narrow gate! For wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it” [Mt 7:13-14]
Saint Augustine, in his sermon on the Gospel quoted earlier ,concluded: "There is no doubt, however, that few are saved" [Sermon 61]. This view was very popular among the Fathers of the Church (John Chrysostom, Jerome, Gregory the Great, Ambrose).
This opinion was also shared by St. Thomas Aquinas: "because eternal happiness, consisting in the vision of God, transcends the common state of nature, even a nature deprived of grace due to original sin, therefore the saved are in the minority" [I, q.23 a.7 ad.3]
So it may seem that the answer to the question is clear. And yet, in its doctrine, the Church does not provide information about a smaller number of saved people as the truth of faith. There has even been a difference of opinion in theology that has not been resolved by the Magisterium.
Although most Catholic theologians (St. Alphonsus Ligouri, St. Bellarmin, Suarez, Cajetan, Billuart) agree that this is the universal opinion of the Fathers, it is also recognised that it is not a truth of the faith, but only a theological opinion, which is not the only acceptable one.
In the course of time, theologians began to temper their opinions by remaining consistent with doctrine, also recalling the Bible's optimistic predictions of a multitude of the saved: "Behold, I saw a great multitude which no one could count, from every nation and from all generations" [Rev 7:9].
Rev. Sieniatycki points out in his Dogmatics textbook the following words of Christ : "many are chosen, few are called", do not necessarily refer to the whole human race, but to the Jews, who then rejected Christ's instructions in greater numbers.
The eminent theologian Suarez, discussing the common opinion of the Fathers, also considered that when it comes to Christians themselves, it is more likely that the number of the saved will be greater than the condemned because of the means of grace (sacraments) present in the Church and working through the Church for others.
Eminent Thomist Fr Garrigou-Lagrange OP points out that, since Suarez, most theologians have considered it more likely that, of all the baptised (Catholics, schismatics and heretics), the saved are in the majority.
This was concurred by St. Bishop J. Pelczar, who stresses that: "there are more who, before death, repent of their sins and receive the Sacraments " [Catholic Religion]. However, it is evident that this applies to those who repent and partake in the Sacraments.
Although most theologians adopt the opinion that out of the whole human race the number of the damned may exceed the saved, many stress that when it comes to the religious and even non-Christians, the saved are very numerous (Garrigou-Lagrange, Faber, Pelczar, Pius IX).
It is also worth adding that all theologians agree that if the number of the reprobate is great, it is only because people neglect repentance and persist in their sins, and thus condemn themselves through their own fault and not because of extraordinary difficulties.
"The Church strongly recommends to all that they put their trust in the mercy of God and do not doubt that they can be saved even if they have committed the gravest sins, if only they resolve to sin no more, sincerely repent, and go receive the sacraments "[Tylka, Catholic Dogmatics].
🔗p.2 and sources
#salvation
Ecce Verbum
What is Dogma? an overview, p.2 The Church was not established by Christ so that God would reveal through her new truths that he had not yet revealed. The Church is only supposed to guard the truths already revealed and infallibly instruct about them, so…
Saint Thomas Aquinas
On the development of dogmas
Introduction
The development of dogmas is an issue of major importance in modern theology. Catholic theologians, as well as theologians from the Protestant and modernist camps, are very much concerned with it today.
Evolution is the scientific buzzword of the present day, an achievement of modern knowledge in the field of biology. The postulates of evolution in nature were transferred and applied in the religious field to the evolution of dogmas. Since the problem of the development of dogmas is a thoroughly modern problem, is it possible to speak of the development of dogmas in the Middle Ages, even in the golden age of scholasticism, in the doctrine of St Thomas Aquinas, where the method of dogmatic speculation triumphed over the method of historical-critical research? Is it possible to speak at all of the development of dogmas in the Catholic Church, especially today, when the Supreme Teaching Authority, from Leo XIII onwards up to the last encyclical of Pius XI, "Studiorum Ducem" of 29 June, 1923, recommends the strict adherence to the teaching of St. Thomas, and cites his Theological Summa as a textbook for theological studies? How is progress possible under these conditions?
Yes. Progress is not only possible, it is necessary. For where there is no progress and development, there is no life, there is death. In this short paper we shall see that in the Catholic Church there has always been, and is, full dogmatic development and flourishing. We shall see that - although the subject of the development of dogmas is a favourite modern theme - St. Thomas not only recognised the development of dogmas, but that he is and has been a favourite modern theme. St. Thomas not only acknowledged the development of dogmas, but he is also a master in this field, since, in his commentary on the Sentences of Peter Lombard (III, d. 25) and in the Theological Summa (2. 2, q. 1), he wrote about the principles on which the development of dogmas must be based. Guided by these principles, one can speak of real scientific progress in the field of dogmas.
First of all, it should be noted that it is one thing to develop God's revelation and another to develop dogmas. God's revelation grew continuously from Eden until the death of the last apostle. God did not open up the entire treasure of revelation to mankind at once, but, like the best educator and the wisest teacher, He slowly and gradually revealed the mysteries of faith to mankind, lowering Himself to their mental development (St. Thomas 2. 2, q. 1, a. 7, ad 2.) Just as the sun rising in the morning does not immediately give off its full brilliance, because the eye, not yet accustomed to the light, would spontaneously close, so too God did not immediately present a perfect, finished system, but gradually prepared human reason, throwing only the seeds that were to develop over the centuries in the Church. God dealt with humanity as the Lord Jesus did with the apostles, to whom at the Last Supper he said: "I have yet much to say to you, but you cannot bear it now" (John 16, 12.) and told them to wait for the coming of the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of Truth, who would teach them everything.
St Thomas, reflecting on the growth of revelation in the Old and New Law, distinguishes between three main periods:
1° ante legem - this is the period up to Moses,
2° sub lege - this is the period of Moses,
3° sub gratia - is the Christian period
Before the fall, God revealed to Adam two main mysteries:
a) that he had elevated both him and his offspring to a supernatural state,
b) that God's justice would give everyone his due.
In the patriarchal age, from Adam to Moses and in the Mosaic period, the messianic idea begins to develop...
...
🔗 p.2 and sources
Principles of the development of dogmas
🔗 Principle I
🔗 Principle II
🔗Principle III
#dogma
On the development of dogmas
Introduction
The development of dogmas is an issue of major importance in modern theology. Catholic theologians, as well as theologians from the Protestant and modernist camps, are very much concerned with it today.
Evolution is the scientific buzzword of the present day, an achievement of modern knowledge in the field of biology. The postulates of evolution in nature were transferred and applied in the religious field to the evolution of dogmas. Since the problem of the development of dogmas is a thoroughly modern problem, is it possible to speak of the development of dogmas in the Middle Ages, even in the golden age of scholasticism, in the doctrine of St Thomas Aquinas, where the method of dogmatic speculation triumphed over the method of historical-critical research? Is it possible to speak at all of the development of dogmas in the Catholic Church, especially today, when the Supreme Teaching Authority, from Leo XIII onwards up to the last encyclical of Pius XI, "Studiorum Ducem" of 29 June, 1923, recommends the strict adherence to the teaching of St. Thomas, and cites his Theological Summa as a textbook for theological studies? How is progress possible under these conditions?
Yes. Progress is not only possible, it is necessary. For where there is no progress and development, there is no life, there is death. In this short paper we shall see that in the Catholic Church there has always been, and is, full dogmatic development and flourishing. We shall see that - although the subject of the development of dogmas is a favourite modern theme - St. Thomas not only recognised the development of dogmas, but that he is and has been a favourite modern theme. St. Thomas not only acknowledged the development of dogmas, but he is also a master in this field, since, in his commentary on the Sentences of Peter Lombard (III, d. 25) and in the Theological Summa (2. 2, q. 1), he wrote about the principles on which the development of dogmas must be based. Guided by these principles, one can speak of real scientific progress in the field of dogmas.
First of all, it should be noted that it is one thing to develop God's revelation and another to develop dogmas. God's revelation grew continuously from Eden until the death of the last apostle. God did not open up the entire treasure of revelation to mankind at once, but, like the best educator and the wisest teacher, He slowly and gradually revealed the mysteries of faith to mankind, lowering Himself to their mental development (St. Thomas 2. 2, q. 1, a. 7, ad 2.) Just as the sun rising in the morning does not immediately give off its full brilliance, because the eye, not yet accustomed to the light, would spontaneously close, so too God did not immediately present a perfect, finished system, but gradually prepared human reason, throwing only the seeds that were to develop over the centuries in the Church. God dealt with humanity as the Lord Jesus did with the apostles, to whom at the Last Supper he said: "I have yet much to say to you, but you cannot bear it now" (John 16, 12.) and told them to wait for the coming of the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of Truth, who would teach them everything.
St Thomas, reflecting on the growth of revelation in the Old and New Law, distinguishes between three main periods:
1° ante legem - this is the period up to Moses,
2° sub lege - this is the period of Moses,
3° sub gratia - is the Christian period
Before the fall, God revealed to Adam two main mysteries:
a) that he had elevated both him and his offspring to a supernatural state,
b) that God's justice would give everyone his due.
In the patriarchal age, from Adam to Moses and in the Mosaic period, the messianic idea begins to develop...
...
🔗 p.2 and sources
Principles of the development of dogmas
🔗 Principle I
🔗 Principle II
🔗Principle III
#dogma
Ecce Verbum
Saint Thomas Aquinas On the development of dogmas Introduction The development of dogmas is an issue of major importance in modern theology. Catholic theologians, as well as theologians from the Protestant and modernist camps, are very much concerned with…
Saint Thomas Aquinas
On the development of dogmas
The principles of development
Principle I
The Church does not create dogmas, but draws the truths of faith from the treasury of revelation.
Paul's words apply to the Church: "Guard the treasure entrusted to you" (I Tim. 6, 20.). The Vatican Council says (Session III, r. 4.), " The Holy Spirit was not promised to the successors of Peter to preach new doctrines, but so that, with His help, they should keep holy the revelation given by the apostles, guard the deposit of faith, and faithfully interpret it".
The Church does not create new truths, "does not fabricate dogmas", but draws them from the treasury of the Word of God and brings them out like an expensive pearl from the bottom of the sea and presents them to the world.
In Scripture and Tradition, however, the truths of faith are not arranged systematically, and therefore the Church, in order to explain the truths of faith to her faithful and to defend them against the attacks of unbelievers, has had to put them in order, a tjeological form, and has had to search for appropriate words in philosophical terminology. Even though none of the words can express the content of a dogma exactly, but only in an analogous way. Thus, for example, the concept of nature and person, taken from the world, truly refers to God, although the Divine nlNature and Person is infinitely superior to the human nature and person. They are therefore analogous and not an identical.
Thus, by force of fact, a dogmatic terminology was created and sanctioned by the Church, which distinguished it from the non-Catholic terminology, e.g.: ομοούσιος (co-eternal), Θεοτόκος (Godhead), Τριάς (Trinity), transsubstantiatio (transubstantiation).
This is also the way dogmas were formed. The dogma of faith is the truth revealed by God and believed by the Holy Church.
A symbol is a sum total of the revealed truths (called by St. Thomas "credibilia" or "credenda"), logically and systematically joined together in one Creed.
A symbol consists of individual articles or elements. The analogy is taken from the human body: just as the human body is composed of organically united members, and there are as many of them as there are different vital functions, so the whole of the Creed is composed of members or articles, organically and systematically joined together - and there are as many of them as there are mysteries where human reason encounters special difficulty and requires special revelation (St. Thomas 2. 2, q. 1, a. 6: "Est autem obiectum fidei aliquid non visum circa divina.... et ideo ubi occurrit aliquid speciali ratione non visum, ibi est specialis articulus").
source: 🔗
Article from the journal: "Theological Review. Quarterly scientific journal. Yearbook V (1924). Lviv, pp. 161-174. Polish Theological Society, fr. Franciszek Lisowski
Principles of the development of dogmas
🔗 Introduction
🔗Principle II
🔗Principle III
On the development of dogmas
The principles of development
Principle I
The Church does not create dogmas, but draws the truths of faith from the treasury of revelation.
Paul's words apply to the Church: "Guard the treasure entrusted to you" (I Tim. 6, 20.). The Vatican Council says (Session III, r. 4.), " The Holy Spirit was not promised to the successors of Peter to preach new doctrines, but so that, with His help, they should keep holy the revelation given by the apostles, guard the deposit of faith, and faithfully interpret it".
The Church does not create new truths, "does not fabricate dogmas", but draws them from the treasury of the Word of God and brings them out like an expensive pearl from the bottom of the sea and presents them to the world.
In Scripture and Tradition, however, the truths of faith are not arranged systematically, and therefore the Church, in order to explain the truths of faith to her faithful and to defend them against the attacks of unbelievers, has had to put them in order, a tjeological form, and has had to search for appropriate words in philosophical terminology. Even though none of the words can express the content of a dogma exactly, but only in an analogous way. Thus, for example, the concept of nature and person, taken from the world, truly refers to God, although the Divine nlNature and Person is infinitely superior to the human nature and person. They are therefore analogous and not an identical.
Thus, by force of fact, a dogmatic terminology was created and sanctioned by the Church, which distinguished it from the non-Catholic terminology, e.g.: ομοούσιος (co-eternal), Θεοτόκος (Godhead), Τριάς (Trinity), transsubstantiatio (transubstantiation).
This is also the way dogmas were formed. The dogma of faith is the truth revealed by God and believed by the Holy Church.
A symbol is a sum total of the revealed truths (called by St. Thomas "credibilia" or "credenda"), logically and systematically joined together in one Creed.
A symbol consists of individual articles or elements. The analogy is taken from the human body: just as the human body is composed of organically united members, and there are as many of them as there are different vital functions, so the whole of the Creed is composed of members or articles, organically and systematically joined together - and there are as many of them as there are mysteries where human reason encounters special difficulty and requires special revelation (St. Thomas 2. 2, q. 1, a. 6: "Est autem obiectum fidei aliquid non visum circa divina.... et ideo ubi occurrit aliquid speciali ratione non visum, ibi est specialis articulus").
source: 🔗
Article from the journal: "Theological Review. Quarterly scientific journal. Yearbook V (1924). Lviv, pp. 161-174. Polish Theological Society, fr. Franciszek Lisowski
Principles of the development of dogmas
🔗 Introduction
🔗Principle II
🔗Principle III
Ecce Verbum
Saint Thomas Aquinas On the development of dogmas The principles of development Principle I The Church does not create dogmas, but draws the truths of faith from the treasury of revelation. Paul's words apply to the Church: "Guard the treasure entrusted…
Saint Thomas Aquinas
On the development of dogmas
The principles of development
Principle II
The essence of the articles of faith does not increase, nor does it undergo any change either by multiplication or by depletion.
This principle was developed by St. Thomas in the Theological Summa (2. 2, q. 1) in the seventh article, entitled: "Utrum secundum successionem temporum articuli fidei creverint". (Have the articles of faith increased over the years?).
Referring to the words of St Paul: "But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him." (Hebrews 11, 6.).
In these words St. Thomas sees two fundamental dogmas, two essential truths. They constitute the essence of the articles of faith, for in them all the other dogmas are contained (implicitly).
Namely, in the first truth: "that God is" contains all that is in God from eternity, and in the second: "that He is the rewarder" contains all that God has done in time for the salvation of men.
In the domain of faith, these two dogmas are analogous to the first principles (principia per se nota) in the domain of knowledge.These principles are the basis of all proof. Reason accepts them without proof, for they are so evident that they cannot be unacknowledged and are so clear that there are no clearer truths above them with which they can be proved.
Just as all natural truths can be reduced to these first fundamental truths, so all dogmas revealed by God fall within these two fundamental dogmas.
The entire revelation of the Trinity, of the unity of nature and the triplicity of persons, of the origin of the Son and the Holy Spirit, of the mutual relationship of the Divine Persons, is contained in the dogma "that God is".
The whole revelation of God about the creation of the world, its redemption by the Son of God and its sanctification by the Holy Spirit, is contained in the second dogma, "that He is the rewarder to those who seek Him".
From this, St Thomas draws the conclusion that the substance of the articles of faith does not change, does not increase, but always remains the same, although the number of articles has increased by clarifying the essential articles (🔗15)
It should be noted here that, in this seventh article, St. Thomas has in mind primarily the development of dogmas from the beginning of the world to the time of Christ the Lord and the Apostles, but since the development of dogmas after Christ it is also based on similar principles.
Catholic theologians have also applied the above principles of St Thomas to the development of dogmas after the death of the Apostles (🔗16).
In Quaestiones Disputatae, De Veritate q. 14, a. 12 St. Thomas asks: "Utrum una sit fides modernorum et antiquorum". (Was the same faith believed in the time of the Old Law as in the time of New Law?) and answers with the familiar distinction: as to substance (quantum ad substantiam) there was the same faith in the Old Law as in the New Law, and it increased only as to explanation (quantum ad explicationem).
Similarly, we read in the commentary on Sentences 3, d. 25, q. 2, a. 2, q. 1. St. Thomas relies on the authority of St. Augustine on this point. He wrote that "the same faith is both with us and with them (in the Old Covenant); the same was believed, the same was expected by all the just and holy men of those times" (Contra Faustum l. 19, c. 14).
Thus, according to St Thomas, although the number of articles was increasing, the essence of the faith always remained the same...
...
🔗 p 2, source and footnotes
Principles of the development of dogmas
🔗 Introduction
🔗Principle I
🔗Principle II
#dogma
On the development of dogmas
The principles of development
Principle II
The essence of the articles of faith does not increase, nor does it undergo any change either by multiplication or by depletion.
This principle was developed by St. Thomas in the Theological Summa (2. 2, q. 1) in the seventh article, entitled: "Utrum secundum successionem temporum articuli fidei creverint". (Have the articles of faith increased over the years?).
Referring to the words of St Paul: "But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him." (Hebrews 11, 6.).
In these words St. Thomas sees two fundamental dogmas, two essential truths. They constitute the essence of the articles of faith, for in them all the other dogmas are contained (implicitly).
Namely, in the first truth: "that God is" contains all that is in God from eternity, and in the second: "that He is the rewarder" contains all that God has done in time for the salvation of men.
In the domain of faith, these two dogmas are analogous to the first principles (principia per se nota) in the domain of knowledge.These principles are the basis of all proof. Reason accepts them without proof, for they are so evident that they cannot be unacknowledged and are so clear that there are no clearer truths above them with which they can be proved.
Just as all natural truths can be reduced to these first fundamental truths, so all dogmas revealed by God fall within these two fundamental dogmas.
The entire revelation of the Trinity, of the unity of nature and the triplicity of persons, of the origin of the Son and the Holy Spirit, of the mutual relationship of the Divine Persons, is contained in the dogma "that God is".
The whole revelation of God about the creation of the world, its redemption by the Son of God and its sanctification by the Holy Spirit, is contained in the second dogma, "that He is the rewarder to those who seek Him".
From this, St Thomas draws the conclusion that the substance of the articles of faith does not change, does not increase, but always remains the same, although the number of articles has increased by clarifying the essential articles (🔗15)
It should be noted here that, in this seventh article, St. Thomas has in mind primarily the development of dogmas from the beginning of the world to the time of Christ the Lord and the Apostles, but since the development of dogmas after Christ it is also based on similar principles.
Catholic theologians have also applied the above principles of St Thomas to the development of dogmas after the death of the Apostles (🔗16).
In Quaestiones Disputatae, De Veritate q. 14, a. 12 St. Thomas asks: "Utrum una sit fides modernorum et antiquorum". (Was the same faith believed in the time of the Old Law as in the time of New Law?) and answers with the familiar distinction: as to substance (quantum ad substantiam) there was the same faith in the Old Law as in the New Law, and it increased only as to explanation (quantum ad explicationem).
Similarly, we read in the commentary on Sentences 3, d. 25, q. 2, a. 2, q. 1. St. Thomas relies on the authority of St. Augustine on this point. He wrote that "the same faith is both with us and with them (in the Old Covenant); the same was believed, the same was expected by all the just and holy men of those times" (Contra Faustum l. 19, c. 14).
Thus, according to St Thomas, although the number of articles was increasing, the essence of the faith always remained the same...
...
🔗 p 2, source and footnotes
Principles of the development of dogmas
🔗 Introduction
🔗Principle I
🔗Principle II
#dogma
Ecce Verbum
Saint Thomas Aquinas On the development of dogmas The principles of development Principle II The essence of the articles of faith does not increase, nor does it undergo any change either by multiplication or by depletion. This principle was developed by…
Saint Thomas Aquinas
On the development of dogmas
The principles of development
Principle III (with conclusions)
The development of dogmas is not accomplished by new revelation, but by a thorough knowledge and clarification of the truths of faith contained in the treasury of revelation.
This thought is developed by St. Thomas in the Theological Summa (2. 2, q. 11, a. 2) (23).
Since there can no longer be new revelation, as the essence of the articles of faith does not change, it would seem that the development of dogmas is impossible. This, however, is not the case. It is enough to compare the Apostles' Creed with the Tridentine Creed in order to see the wonderful and simply enormous development of dogmas. For the seed, sown by the hand of God, must grow, otherwise it would have no life.
This development took place in three ways:
1. some truths were initially given in a simple and popular way, and the Church put them into a scientific garment, e.g. from the simple and short words: "Go into all the world, make disciples of all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit", the dogma of the Trinity was formed. The Apostolic Creed put it briefly, but already at the Council of Nicea 325 ομοούσιος was added, because of the Arian heresy, i.e. that the Son is co-eternal with the Father; at the Council of Constantinople I in r. 381,because of the Macedonian heresy it was added that the Holy Spirit is God; when the origin of the Holy Spirit from the Son was denied, 'Filioque' was added; finally, at the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215, the relation of nature to the divine persons was further clarified.
2 The second way of development is when the Church either removes doubts as to whether a teaching falls within revelation, e.g. the infallibility of the Pope, teaching ex cathedra - or when it settles a dispute as to how certain words are to be understood, e.g. that the words: "this is my body" mean transubstantiation - or when it rules that certain words are most appropriate to express a dogma, e.g. "transubstantiatio".
3.The third and most beautiful way in which dogmas are developed is when the Church brings a certain truth, revealed "implicitly", which has hitherto remained hidden, and gives it "explicitly" to the faithful to believe.
It is a development similar to that of a plant. Just as a small seed potentially contains everything that belongs to a plant, but slowly, gradually, under the influence of various conditions do the individual parts develop in a planned way until they form an organic, harmonious whole, so it is with dogma. The Divine Sower sowed a seed in the soil of the Church; under the grace of the Holy Spirit the truths present themselves to our eyes, at first vague and then more and more clearly. The general outlines appear slowly and more truth emerges, matures to become dogmatic, and finally the Church, declares the truth in question as dogma (Rademacher, Der Entwicklungsgedanke in Religion und Dogma, 71.).
Christ the Lord compared his Church to a mustard seed that grows into a large tree. It is not necessary to have in mind only the numerical growth of the faithful, but Christ the Lord was also concerned with another growth, "that we may all come together in the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God.... tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive... and by speaking the truth in love, that we may grow in Him in all things, who is the head of Christ" (Ef. 4, 13. 14. 15). , i.e. our virtue and faith should grow.
🔗p.2
🔗p.3
🔗p.4
🔗 conclusions, source
Principles of the development of dogmas
🔗 Introduction
🔗Principle I
🔗Principle II
#dogma
On the development of dogmas
The principles of development
Principle III (with conclusions)
The development of dogmas is not accomplished by new revelation, but by a thorough knowledge and clarification of the truths of faith contained in the treasury of revelation.
This thought is developed by St. Thomas in the Theological Summa (2. 2, q. 11, a. 2) (23).
Since there can no longer be new revelation, as the essence of the articles of faith does not change, it would seem that the development of dogmas is impossible. This, however, is not the case. It is enough to compare the Apostles' Creed with the Tridentine Creed in order to see the wonderful and simply enormous development of dogmas. For the seed, sown by the hand of God, must grow, otherwise it would have no life.
This development took place in three ways:
1. some truths were initially given in a simple and popular way, and the Church put them into a scientific garment, e.g. from the simple and short words: "Go into all the world, make disciples of all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit", the dogma of the Trinity was formed. The Apostolic Creed put it briefly, but already at the Council of Nicea 325 ομοούσιος was added, because of the Arian heresy, i.e. that the Son is co-eternal with the Father; at the Council of Constantinople I in r. 381,because of the Macedonian heresy it was added that the Holy Spirit is God; when the origin of the Holy Spirit from the Son was denied, 'Filioque' was added; finally, at the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215, the relation of nature to the divine persons was further clarified.
2 The second way of development is when the Church either removes doubts as to whether a teaching falls within revelation, e.g. the infallibility of the Pope, teaching ex cathedra - or when it settles a dispute as to how certain words are to be understood, e.g. that the words: "this is my body" mean transubstantiation - or when it rules that certain words are most appropriate to express a dogma, e.g. "transubstantiatio".
3.The third and most beautiful way in which dogmas are developed is when the Church brings a certain truth, revealed "implicitly", which has hitherto remained hidden, and gives it "explicitly" to the faithful to believe.
It is a development similar to that of a plant. Just as a small seed potentially contains everything that belongs to a plant, but slowly, gradually, under the influence of various conditions do the individual parts develop in a planned way until they form an organic, harmonious whole, so it is with dogma. The Divine Sower sowed a seed in the soil of the Church; under the grace of the Holy Spirit the truths present themselves to our eyes, at first vague and then more and more clearly. The general outlines appear slowly and more truth emerges, matures to become dogmatic, and finally the Church, declares the truth in question as dogma (Rademacher, Der Entwicklungsgedanke in Religion und Dogma, 71.).
Christ the Lord compared his Church to a mustard seed that grows into a large tree. It is not necessary to have in mind only the numerical growth of the faithful, but Christ the Lord was also concerned with another growth, "that we may all come together in the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God.... tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive... and by speaking the truth in love, that we may grow in Him in all things, who is the head of Christ" (Ef. 4, 13. 14. 15). , i.e. our virtue and faith should grow.
🔗p.2
🔗p.3
🔗p.4
🔗 conclusions, source
Principles of the development of dogmas
🔗 Introduction
🔗Principle I
🔗Principle II
#dogma
gloriesofdivineg00sche.pdf
34.3 MB
The Glories of Divine Grace
Rev. M.J.Scheeben
The book describes the immense gift of grace won for us by the Savior and the inconceivable power this grace gives to our lives. Among the mysteries of faith, the doctrine of grace occupies a preeminent place. It’s at the heart of Christianity because grace is how God comes to us and how we embrace God. To take this gift of divine grace for granted or to let it go to waste is an offense against God. Fr. Matthias J. Scheeben’s insights into the glories of divine grace reveal a man who knew this gift intimately and cherished it wisely.
Matthias Joseph Scheeben (1835–1888) was a German priest and scholar whose theology points to the inner coherence of the Christian faith and its supernatural mysteries. Hans Urs von Balthasar credited Scheeben as “the greatest German theologian to date.” He received praise from Pope Pius XI in 1935. Scheeben is one of the most important and underappreciated theologians of the last one hundred and fifty years.”
#grace
Rev. M.J.Scheeben
The book describes the immense gift of grace won for us by the Savior and the inconceivable power this grace gives to our lives. Among the mysteries of faith, the doctrine of grace occupies a preeminent place. It’s at the heart of Christianity because grace is how God comes to us and how we embrace God. To take this gift of divine grace for granted or to let it go to waste is an offense against God. Fr. Matthias J. Scheeben’s insights into the glories of divine grace reveal a man who knew this gift intimately and cherished it wisely.
Matthias Joseph Scheeben (1835–1888) was a German priest and scholar whose theology points to the inner coherence of the Christian faith and its supernatural mysteries. Hans Urs von Balthasar credited Scheeben as “the greatest German theologian to date.” He received praise from Pope Pius XI in 1935. Scheeben is one of the most important and underappreciated theologians of the last one hundred and fifty years.”
#grace
Ecce Verbum
gloriesofdivineg00sche.pdf
On the acquisition of grace
1.We do not do it by our own efforts
2.How to prepare to receive grace
3.On the correct understanding of "merit" and that we cannot speak of deserving grace
4.The reasons why God gives grace
🔗The Glories of Divine Grace, Rev. M.J.Scheeben
pages 347-352
#grace
1.We do not do it by our own efforts
2.How to prepare to receive grace
3.On the correct understanding of "merit" and that we cannot speak of deserving grace
4.The reasons why God gives grace
🔗The Glories of Divine Grace, Rev. M.J.Scheeben
pages 347-352
#grace
Ecce Verbum
gloriesofdivineg00sche.pdf
Grace comes about through faith
1. Who is righteous in the eyes of God
2. The twofold function of faith
3.The relationship of charity and faith in relation to justification
4. Charity presupposes faith
🔗The Glories of Divine Grace, Rev. M.J.Scheeben
pages 416-418
more:
🔗Ratzinger: St Paul speaks of faith that works through charity (living faith)
#grace #justification
1. Who is righteous in the eyes of God
2. The twofold function of faith
3.The relationship of charity and faith in relation to justification
4. Charity presupposes faith
🔗The Glories of Divine Grace, Rev. M.J.Scheeben
pages 416-418
more:
🔗Ratzinger: St Paul speaks of faith that works through charity (living faith)
#grace #justification