sign in sign up
<<
Home , Dogma

chapter SIX

The Development of

For the doctrine of the which God has revealed is put forward not as some philosophical discovery capable of being perfected by human intel- ligence, but as a divine deposit committed to the spouse of Christ to be faithfully protected and infallibly promulgated. Hence, too, that meaning of the sacred is ever to be maintained which has once been declared by Holy mother Church, and there must never be any abandonment of this sense under the pretext or in the name of a more profound understanding. May understanding, and wisdom increase as ages and centuries roll along, and greatly and vigorously flourish, in each and all, in the indi- vidual and the whole Church: but this only in its own proper kind, that is to say, in the same doctrine, the same meaning, and the same judgment (in eodem scilicet dogmate, eodem sensu, eademque sententia).1 Why is the issue of doctrinal development worth studying? In what respects is it a significant, or even a crucial, issue for theology, and, indeed, for faith? . . . For Catholic theology, the issue of doctrinal development is vital to the justification of specifically Catholic Christian doctrinal insights, vis-à-vis the serious objections to these which other historic Christian communities can lodge. For it may be said that certain elements met with in Catholic teaching today, such as, for example, the doctrine of Purgatory, were not found in the early Church, or, at any rate, can be found there only with difficulty. But if an aspect of the public faith of the Church today was not a constitutive part of the original apostolic preaching, at least, not in any obvi- ous sense, how can this aspect be supported, or even tolerated?2

1 Vatican I, Dogmatic Constitution on the Catholic Faith, Dei Filius, Chapter 4, On Faith and , nos. 13–14. The last sentence of this quotation refers the reader to Vincent of Lérins (died c. 445), The Commonitory of Vincent of Lerins: A New Translation, Fur- nished with an Introduction, Bp. Jeff; and Appendix from Bishop Beveridge, and Notes by the Translator (Baltimore: Joseph Robinson, 1847), Chapter XXIII, §28, “Of what kind of Improvement Christian Doctrine is susceptible,” 66–72. For a magisterial study of this work by Vincent of Lérins, see Thomas G. Guarino, Vincent of Lérins and the Development of Christian Doctrine (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2013). 2 Aidan Nichols, O.P., From Newman to Congar, 1. Most of the systematic theological attention, in the nineteenth century, to the issue of doctrinal development was given by Catholic theologians such as (1801–1890), An Essay on the Develop- ment of Christian Doctrine, 9th ed. (London: Longmans, Green, 1894; originally published, 1845), and Johann Adam Möhler (1796–1838), Symbolism, translated James Burton Robert- son (New York: Crossroad, 1997; originally published, 1832). See also, Scottish Presbyterian James Orr (1844–1913), Progress of Dogma (Old Tappan, New Jersey: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1901). the development of dogma 395

Berkouwer on Dogmatic Development

In his 1940 book on Catholicism, De Strijd Om Het Roomsch-Katholieke Dogma, Berkouwer devotes an entire chapter to the “Evolution of Dogma.”3 He begins by stating exactly the nature of dogma. Berkouwer understands that by Roman Catholic standards a dogma is taken to be a “religious that has been revealed by God and is proposed by the Church as matters to be believed as divinely revealed. These are the two essential marks of dogma: that it lies contained in divine revelation, and that it is proclaimed by the church” (SRKD, 169).4 In short, a dogma is nothing other than the Church’s infallible teaching of what God has revealed by of being contained in the Word of God; it is also defined by a solemn judgment as a divinely revealed truth either by the papal magisterium or an , or by the ordinary and universal Magisterium.5 Some examples of such dogmas would be “the articles of faith of the [Nicene] creed, the various Christological dogmas, the doctrine of the institution of the sacra- ments by Christ and their efficacy with regard to grace; the doctrine of the real and substantial presence of Christ in the Eucharist and the sacrificial nature of the Eucharistic celebration,” and so many more.6 Berkouwer is sensitive to the distinction between the exercise of the extraordinary Magisterium of the papacy and of an ecumenical council, on the one hand, and that, on the other, of the ordinary and universal Magisterium of the Bishops in communion with Peter. Given that dis- tinction, Berkouwer notes that “the official proclamation by the church is not strictly necessary for the presence of dogma” (SRKD, 169n2).7 In

3 Berkouwer, SRKD, 168–205. 4 Similarly, Henri Rondet, S.J., states, “Doctrine is an official expression of a particular truth contained in Revelation which, once defined by the teaching authority, cannot be called in question” (Do Dogmas Change? Translated by Dom Mark Pontifex [New York: Hawthorn Books, 1961], 10). 5 Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, “Doctrinal Commentary on the Profession of Faith’s Concluding Paragraphs, Professio Fidei,” 1998, no. 5. Appendix H in Dulles, Mag- isterium, 163–173. Online: http://www.ewtn.com/library/curia/cdfadtu.htm. 6 “Doctrinal Commentary, no. 11. 7 In this connection Berkouwer cites Vatican I, Dogmatic Constitution on the Catholic Faith, Dei Filius, Chapter 3, On Faith: “Wherefore, by divine and Catholic faith all those things are to be believed which are contained in the word of God as found in Scripture and tradition, and which are proposed by the Church as matters to be believed as divinely revealed, whether by her solemn judgment or in her ordinary and universal magisterium” (no. 8). Thus, according to Vatican I, the absence of a defining act, what Berkouwer calls “kerkelijke fixeering” (ecclesiastical determination), is not a necessary condition to hold that a dogma is to be believed as divinely revealed. Still, although Berkouwer recognizes