12/03/2006 The Development of Doctrine, Is Catholic teaching a corruption of the “simple” Gospel ? (Part 1)
Brendan Murphy
https://www.osv.com/OSVNewsweekly/ByIssue/Article/TabId/735/ArtMID/13636/ArticleID/9477/The-Development-of-Doctrine.aspx https://www.osv.com/OSVNewsweekly/ByIssue/Article/TabId/735/PID/13636/authorid/1038/AuthorName/BrendanMurphy/Default.aspx Our Protestant brothers and sisters often wonder at the complexity of Catholic doctrine.
In particular, they may find it difficult to reconcile what they view as the “simplicity” of Jesus’ teachings with those of the Church today.
These Christians recognize — and Catholics acknowledge — that not all the Church’s teachings are explicitly found in Scripture or the preaching of the early Fathers.
Some doctrines were not stated fully and clearly until much later in the life of the Church.
As a result, many Protestants conclude that Catholic teaching is a corruption of the original Gospel message.
Catholics, on the other hand, see the doctrines of the Church as the necessary and logical development of the Gospel.
Their growth in richness and complexity represents the change from an embryonic form into maturity.
But how are we to demonstrate whether or not a particular doctrine (or body of doctrines) is a genuine development and not a corruption of the Christian faith?
One Catholic theologian who sought to provide an answer to this question was the eminent English convert Cardinal John Henry Newman (1801-1890).
Newman identified seven “notes” or characteristics of authentic developments, as opposed to doctrinal corruptions, in his famous work “Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine”
(University of Notre Dame, 1989; page numbers below refer to citations from this edition). Let’s examine these characteristics one at a time.
Unity of Type:
The first note of genuine development Newman calls unity of type.
He considered this first criterion the most important of the seven.
What he means by type is the external expression of an idea.
The unity or preservation of type refers to the continual presence of a main idea despite its changing external expression.
When we see change in the teaching on a subject, can we discern nevertheless that the main idea remains unchanged?
If so, we know that the change is a genuine development, not a corruption.
Newman warns that the presence of any alteration in the external expression of an idea shouldn’t lead us to conclude that it’s a corruption, instead of a development, of the essential idea.
To illustrate this point, he uses the “analogy of physical growth, which is such that the parts and proportions of the developed form, however altered, correspond to those which belong to its rudiments” (p. 171).
In this sense, a full-grown bird is the development of an egg and not its corruption, even though they bear little physical resemblance to one another.
Newman offers the further caveat that many times “real perversions and corruptions are often not so unlike externally to the doctrine from which they come, as are changes which are consistent with it and true developments” (p. 176).
In fact, according to Newman, a major source of religious corruption is clutching too tightly to doctrines at one stage of their development and refusing to allow their future growth.
He notes that some of the Jewish religious leaders of Jesus’ time illustrated this problem. Christ frequently condemned them for following the letter of the law, but not its spirit — that is, its development.
Continuity of Principles:
The second note of genuine development is continuity of principles.
Newman insists that for a development to be faithful, it must preserve the principle with which it started.
While doctrine may grow and develop, principles are permanent.
Newman identifies the Incarnation as the fundamental truth of the Gospel.
Then he goes on to identify nine principles of the Christian religion: dogma, faith, theology, sacraments, Scripture and its mystical interpretation, grace, asceticism, the harm of sin, and the potential of matter to be sanctified.
In reference to these principles, Newman says:
“While the development of doctrine in the Church has been in accordance with, or in consequence of, these immemorial principles, the various heresies.
Which have from time to time arisen, have in one respect or other, as might be expected, violated those principles with which she rose into existence, and which she still retains.”
(p. 354)
The fifth-century theological movement known as Pelagianism provides an example of teaching that contradicted one of these principles.
Pelagians denied the reality of original sin and, as a consequence, denied that our salvation required any grace beyond what is already given us in human nature.
As a result, the Church recognized the movement as a heretical corruption rather than a development of the Christian faith, and so condemned its teachings.
Power of Assimilation:
The third note of genuine development is power of assimilation.
In introducing this criterion, Newman notes that in the physical world living things are characterized by growth, not stagnancy, and that this growth comes about by making use of external things.
For example, as human beings we grow by taking into our bodies external realities such as food, water and air.
In Newman’s terminology, then, when we make use of these re-sources we are assimilating them.
The food, water and air we consume don’t change who or what we are in any meaningful way.
Rather, they serve a valuable function in that they ensure our continued growth and vitality.
For Newman, a true doctrinal development is capable of assimilating external realities (such as non-Christian philosophical concepts, customs or rites) without in any way violating its principles.
In fact, in the process of assimilation it’s the external realities themselves that are transformed (once they are assimilated), not the doctrine.
In Newman’s view, the more powerful, independent and vigorous the idea, the greater its power to assimilate external ideas and concepts without losing its identity.
In the ancient Church, for example, Christian theology came to make use of philosophical terms and categories from contemporary Greek culture.
These forms of thought were employed to refine the precision of doctrinal formulations, helping the Church to define more clearly what she believed.
(End Part 1)