Fides manducans intellectum!
Thanks, Southpaw, that is good information.  Vindicates Newman pretty throughly.  Here is what Ott says on the topic, p. 6ff:

Ludwig Ott Wrote:5. The Development of Dogma

1. Heretical Notion of Dogmatic Development

The Liberal Protestant concept of dogma (cf A. VOll Han13ck) as well as Modernism (cf. A. Loisy) assumes a substantial development of dogmas, so that the content of dogma changes radically in the course of time. Modernism poses the challenge: "Progress in the sciences demands that the conceptions of the Christian teaching of God, Creation, Revelation, Person of the Incarnate Word, Redemlption, be remolded" (cf. D 2064). Loisy declares: "As progress in science (philosophy) demands a new concept of the problem of God, so progress in historical research gives rise to a new concept of the problem of Christ and the Church." (Autour d·un petit livre, PAris 1903, XXIV.) In this view there are no fixed and constant dogmas; their concept is always developing. The Vatican Council condemned Anton Gunther's (t 1863) application of the idea of development in this sense to dogmas as heretical: Si quis dixerit, fieri posse, ut dogmatibus ab Ecclesia propositis aliquando secundum progressuln scientiae sensus tribuendus sit alius ab eo, quem intellexit et intelligit Ecclesia. If anybody says that by reason of the progress of science, a meaning must be given to dogmas of the Church other than that which the Church understood and understands them to have let him be anathema. A.S. D 1818. In the Encyclical "Humani Genens" (1950), Pope Pius XII rejected that dogmatic relativism, which would demand that dogmas should be expressed in the concepts of the philosophy ruling at any particular time, and enveloped in the stream of philosophical development: "This conception," he says, "makes dogma a reed, which is driven hither and thither by the wind" (0 3012).

'The ground for the immutability of dogmas lies in the Divine origin of the truths which they express. Divine Truth is as immutable as God Himself: "The truth of the Lord remaineth for ever" (Ps. 116, 2). "Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my word shall not pass" (Mk. 13, 31).

2. Development of Dogmas in the Catholic Sense

a) From the material side of dogma, that is, in the communication of the Truths of Revelation to hunlanity, a substantial growth took place in human history until Revelation reached its apogee and conclusion in Christ (cf. Hebr. I, I). St. Gregory the Great says: "With the progress of the times the knowledge of the spiritual Fathers increased; for, in the Science of God, Moses was more instructed than Abraham, the Prophets more than Moses, the Apostles more than the Prophets" (in Ezechielem lib. 2, hom. 4, 12).

With Christ and the Apostles General Revelation concluded. (sent. certa.)

Pope Pius X rejected the liberal Protestant and Modernistic doctrine of the evolution ot religion through" New Revelations." Thus he condemned the proposition that: It The Revelation, which is the object of Catholic Faith, was not terminated with the Apostles." D 2021.

The clear teaching of Holy Writ and Tradition is that after Christ, and the Apostles who proclaimed the message of Christ, no further Revelation will be made. Christ was the fulfillment of the Law of the Old Testament (Mt. 5, 17; 5, 21 et seq), and the absolute teacher of humanity (Mt. 23, 10: One is your master, Christ"; cf. Mt. 28, 20). The Apostles saw in Christ: the coming of the fullness of time " (Gal. 4, 4) and regarded as their task the preservation, integral and unfalsified, of the heritage of Faith entrusted to them by Christ (I Tim. 6, 14; 6, 20; 2 Tim. I, 14; 2, 2,; 3, 14). The Fathers indignantly repudiated the claim of the heretics to possess secret doctrines or new Revelations of the Holy Ghost. St. Irenaeus (Adv. haer III I; IV 35, 8), and Tertullian (De praesc. 21) stress, against the Gnostics, that the full truth of Revelation is contained in the doctrine of the Apostles which is preserved unfalsified through the uninterrupted succession of the bishops.

b) As to the Formal side of dogma, that is, in the knowledge and in the ecclesiastical proposal of Revealed Truth, and consequently also in the public faith of the Church, there is a progress (accidental development of dogmas) which occurs in the following fashion :

1) Truths which formerly were only implicitly believed are expressly proposed for belief (Cf. S. tho I; II, I, 7: quantum ad explicationem crevit numerus articulorum (fidei), quia quaedam explicite cognita sunt a posterioribus, quae a prioribus non cognoscebantur explicite. There was an increase in the number of articles believed explicitly since to those who lived in later times some were known explicitly, which were not known explicitly by those who lived before them.)

2) Material Dogmas are raised to the status of Formal Dogmas.

3) To facilitate general Wlderstanding, and to avoid misunderstandings and distortions, the ancient truths which were always believed, e.g., the Hypostatic Union (unio hypostatica), Transubstantiation, etc., are formulated in new, sharply defined concepts.

4) Questions formerly disputed are explained and decided, and heretical propositions are condemned. Cf. St. Augustine, De civ. Dei 2, I ; ab adversario mota quaestio discendi existit occasio (a question moved by an adversary gives an occasion for learning).

The exposition of the dogmas in the given sense is prepared by theological science and promulgated by the Teaching Authority of the Ch\ll:ch under the direction of the Holy Ghost (Jolm 14, 26). These new expositions of dogmatic truth are motivated, on the one hand, by the natural striving of man for deeper understanding of Revealed Truth, and on the other hand by external influences. such as the attacks arising from heresy and unbelief: theological controversies, advances in philosophical knowledge and historical research, development of the liturgy, and the general assertion of Faith expressed therein.

Even the Fathers stress the necessity of deeper research into the troths of Revelation, of clearing up obscurities. and of developing the teachings of Revelation. Cf. the classical testimony of St. Vincent Lerin (t before 450). But perhaps someone says: Will there then be no progress in the religion of Christ? Certainly there should be, even a great and rich progress . . . only, it nlust in truth be a progress in Faith and not an alteration of Faith. For progress it is necessary that something should increase of itself, for alteration, however, that something should change from one thing to the other." (Commonitorium 23.) Cf. D 1800.

There may be also a progress in the confession of faith of the individual believer through the extension and deepening of his theological knowledge. The basis for the possibility of this progress lies in the depth of the truths of Faith on the one hand. and on the other in the varying capacity for perfection of the human reason.  Conditions making for a true progress in the knowledge of Faith by individual persons are. according to the declaration of the Vatican Council, zeal, reverence and moderation: aim sedule. pie et sobrie quaerit. D 1796.
Reply
(10-27-2012, 01:52 PM)SouthpawLink Wrote: Permit me to quote from Very Rev. Tanquerey's A Manual of Dogmatic Theology
Wow, thanks
Where'd you get an electronic, OCRed version of this?
Thanks
Reply
(10-27-2012, 03:16 PM)Geremia Wrote:
(10-27-2012, 01:52 PM)SouthpawLink Wrote: Permit me to quote from Very Rev. Tanquerey's A Manual of Dogmatic Theology
Wow, thanks
Where'd you get an electronic, OCRed version of this?
Thanks

You're quite welcome!  No, I copied it by hand (er, keyboard); it took me about an hour!  :LOL:
Reply
(10-26-2012, 10:43 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote:
(10-26-2012, 10:04 PM)Geremia Wrote: So, one can be saved by denying them and thus by denying the infallibility of the popes when they make ex cathedra statements pertaining to faith or morals?

Yes.
Anathema sis.
(10-26-2012, 10:04 PM)Geremia Wrote:
Quote:But there can be no penalties of those who are no longer members of the Church, assuming that only mortally sinning against the faith excommunicates them; the Church wouldn't have such jurisdiction over them.

Well, to be precise, the Roman Church still claims jurisdiction over heretics. In fact, that was the basis upon which inquisitorial trials could be conducted and penalties imposed.
Wasn't it more coercion than penalties? There is no penalty worse than excommunication.
(10-26-2012, 10:43 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote:
Quote:What if some of them were inculpably ignorant? How would they know they're condemned until a dogma was defined?

"The faith which was once delivered unto the saints" (Jude 1:3) was based upon Christ's divine sonship, preached by the Apostles and handed down to us in the Scriptures. It's absurd to keep insisting on the fiction that there could ever be Christians before Nicea who didn't believe in the divinity of Christ.
It's absurd to keep insisting on your own private interpretations of everything.
(10-26-2012, 10:43 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: That's almost like a Dan Brown argument.
And this is an ad hominem argument.
(10-26-2012, 10:43 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote:
Quote:Again, I ask: Why do you prefer your own private judgment to the infallible statements and interpretations of the Popes?

It's logically, historically and scripturally untenable for the Papal office to be invested in any kind of infalibility as it claims to have since the First Vatican Council. I have been slowly but steadily convinced of this.
Anathema sis.
Reply
(10-27-2012, 03:57 PM)SouthpawLink Wrote:
(10-27-2012, 03:16 PM)Geremia Wrote:
(10-27-2012, 01:52 PM)SouthpawLink Wrote: Permit me to quote from Very Rev. Tanquerey's A Manual of Dogmatic Theology
Wow, thanks
Where'd you get an electronic, OCRed version of this?
Thanks

You're quite welcome!  No, I copied it by hand (er, keyboard); it took me about an hour!  :LOL:
I just copy and pasted my Ott quotations from Biblia/Logos; I think you can get a free trial subscription. They have many excellent, OCRed books.
Reply
(10-27-2012, 02:20 PM)Parmandur Wrote: Thanks, Southpaw, that is good information.  Vindicates Newman pretty throughly.  Here is what Ott says on the topic, p. 6ff:

Ludwig Ott Wrote:5. The Development of Dogma

1. Heretical Notion of Dogmatic Development

The Liberal Protestant concept of dogma (cf A. VOll Han13ck) as well as Modernism (cf. A. Loisy) assumes a substantial development of dogmas, so that the content of dogma changes radically in the course of time. Modernism poses the challenge: "Progress in the sciences demands that the conceptions of the Christian teaching of God, Creation, Revelation, Person of the Incarnate Word, Redemlption, be remolded" (cf. D 2064). Loisy declares: "As progress in science (philosophy) demands a new concept of the problem of God, so progress in historical research gives rise to a new concept of the problem of Christ and the Church." (Autour d·un petit livre, PAris 1903, XXIV.) In this view there are no fixed and constant dogmas; their concept is always developing. The Vatican Council condemned Anton Gunther's (t 1863) application of the idea of development in this sense to dogmas as heretical: Si quis dixerit, fieri posse, ut dogmatibus ab Ecclesia propositis aliquando secundum progressuln scientiae sensus tribuendus sit alius ab eo, quem intellexit et intelligit Ecclesia. If anybody says that by reason of the progress of science, a meaning must be given to dogmas of the Church other than that which the Church understood and understands them to have let him be anathema. A.S. D 1818. In the Encyclical "Humani Genens" (1950), Pope Pius XII rejected that dogmatic relativism, which would demand that dogmas should be expressed in the concepts of the philosophy ruling at any particular time, and enveloped in the stream of philosophical development: "This conception," he says, "makes dogma a reed, which is driven hither and thither by the wind" (0 3012).

'The ground for the immutability of dogmas lies in the Divine origin of the truths which they express. Divine Truth is as immutable as God Himself: "The truth of the Lord remaineth for ever" (Ps. 116, 2). "Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my word shall not pass" (Mk. 13, 31).

2. Development of Dogmas in the Catholic Sense

a) From the material side of dogma, that is, in the communication of the Truths of Revelation to hunlanity, a substantial growth took place in human history until Revelation reached its apogee and conclusion in Christ (cf. Hebr. I, I). St. Gregory the Great says: "With the progress of the times the knowledge of the spiritual Fathers increased; for, in the Science of God, Moses was more instructed than Abraham, the Prophets more than Moses, the Apostles more than the Prophets" (in Ezechielem lib. 2, hom. 4, 12).

With Christ and the Apostles General Revelation concluded. (sent. certa.)

Pope Pius X rejected the liberal Protestant and Modernistic doctrine of the evolution ot religion through" New Revelations." Thus he condemned the proposition that: It The Revelation, which is the object of Catholic Faith, was not terminated with the Apostles." D 2021.

The clear teaching of Holy Writ and Tradition is that after Christ, and the Apostles who proclaimed the message of Christ, no further Revelation will be made. Christ was the fulfillment of the Law of the Old Testament (Mt. 5, 17; 5, 21 et seq), and the absolute teacher of humanity (Mt. 23, 10: One is your master, Christ"; cf. Mt. 28, 20). The Apostles saw in Christ: the coming of the fullness of time " (Gal. 4, 4) and regarded as their task the preservation, integral and unfalsified, of the heritage of Faith entrusted to them by Christ (I Tim. 6, 14; 6, 20; 2 Tim. I, 14; 2, 2,; 3, 14). The Fathers indignantly repudiated the claim of the heretics to possess secret doctrines or new Revelations of the Holy Ghost. St. Irenaeus (Adv. haer III I; IV 35, 8), and Tertullian (De praesc. 21) stress, against the Gnostics, that the full truth of Revelation is contained in the doctrine of the Apostles which is preserved unfalsified through the uninterrupted succession of the bishops.

b) As to the Formal side of dogma, that is, in the knowledge and in the ecclesiastical proposal of Revealed Truth, and consequently also in the public faith of the Church, there is a progress (accidental development of dogmas) which occurs in the following fashion :

1) Truths which formerly were only implicitly believed are expressly proposed for belief (Cf. S. tho I; II, I, 7: quantum ad explicationem crevit numerus articulorum (fidei), quia quaedam explicite cognita sunt a posterioribus, quae a prioribus non cognoscebantur explicite. There was an increase in the number of articles believed explicitly since to those who lived in later times some were known explicitly, which were not known explicitly by those who lived before them.)

2) Material Dogmas are raised to the status of Formal Dogmas.

3) To facilitate general Wlderstanding, and to avoid misunderstandings and distortions, the ancient truths which were always believed, e.g., the Hypostatic Union (unio hypostatica), Transubstantiation, etc., are formulated in new, sharply defined concepts.

4) Questions formerly disputed are explained and decided, and heretical propositions are condemned. Cf. St. Augustine, De civ. Dei 2, I ; ab adversario mota quaestio discendi existit occasio (a question moved by an adversary gives an occasion for learning).

The exposition of the dogmas in the given sense is prepared by theological science and promulgated by the Teaching Authority of the Ch\ll:ch under the direction of the Holy Ghost (Jolm 14, 26). These new expositions of dogmatic truth are motivated, on the one hand, by the natural striving of man for deeper understanding of Revealed Truth, and on the other hand by external influences. such as the attacks arising from heresy and unbelief: theological controversies, advances in philosophical knowledge and historical research, development of the liturgy, and the general assertion of Faith expressed therein.

Even the Fathers stress the necessity of deeper research into the troths of Revelation, of clearing up obscurities. and of developing the teachings of Revelation. Cf. the classical testimony of St. Vincent Lerin (t before 450). But perhaps someone says: Will there then be no progress in the religion of Christ? Certainly there should be, even a great and rich progress . . . only, it nlust in truth be a progress in Faith and not an alteration of Faith. For progress it is necessary that something should increase of itself, for alteration, however, that something should change from one thing to the other." (Commonitorium 23.) Cf. D 1800.

There may be also a progress in the confession of faith of the individual believer through the extension and deepening of his theological knowledge. The basis for the possibility of this progress lies in the depth of the truths of Faith on the one hand. and on the other in the varying capacity for perfection of the human reason.  Conditions making for a true progress in the knowledge of Faith by individual persons are. according to the declaration of the Vatican Council, zeal, reverence and moderation: aim sedule. pie et sobrie quaerit. D 1796.

Can you explain to me how this backs up your claims?  Unless I've misunderstood you, it's doing the exact opposite.
Reply
(10-27-2012, 04:27 PM)Geremia Wrote:
(10-26-2012, 10:43 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote:
(10-26-2012, 10:04 PM)Geremia Wrote: So, one can be saved by denying them and thus by denying the infallibility of the popes when they make ex cathedra statements pertaining to faith or morals?

Yes.
Anathema sis.
(10-26-2012, 10:04 PM)Geremia Wrote:
Quote:But there can be no penalties of those who are no longer members of the Church, assuming that only mortally sinning against the faith excommunicates them; the Church wouldn't have such jurisdiction over them.

Well, to be precise, the Roman Church still claims jurisdiction over heretics. In fact, that was the basis upon which inquisitorial trials could be conducted and penalties imposed.
Wasn't it more coercion than penalties? There is no penalty worse than excommunication.
(10-26-2012, 10:43 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote:
Quote:What if some of them were inculpably ignorant? How would they know they're condemned until a dogma was defined?

"The faith which was once delivered unto the saints" (Jude 1:3) was based upon Christ's divine sonship, preached by the Apostles and handed down to us in the Scriptures. It's absurd to keep insisting on the fiction that there could ever be Christians before Nicea who didn't believe in the divinity of Christ.
It's absurd to keep insisting on your own private interpretations of everything.
(10-26-2012, 10:43 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: That's almost like a Dan Brown argument.
And this is an ad hominem argument.
(10-26-2012, 10:43 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote:
Quote:Again, I ask: Why do you prefer your own private judgment to the infallible statements and interpretations of the Popes?

It's logically, historically and scripturally untenable for the Papal office to be invested in any kind of infalibility as it claims to have since the First Vatican Council. I have been slowly but steadily convinced of this.
Anathema sis.

Vetus Ordo has now publically denied several ex cathedra articles of faith that all must hold under pain of damnation. He should stop participating in theological threads or be banned. This is a Catholic forum.
Reply
Well, I got a bit carried away in the exchanges with Geremia and Doce Me.

I'm sorry, I did not intend to be hostile.
Reply
(10-27-2012, 10:27 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: Well, I got a bit carried away in the exchanges with Geremia and Doce Me.

I'm sorry, I did not intend to be hostile.

Ok.
Reply
(10-27-2012, 10:27 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: Well, I got a bit carried away in the exchanges with Geremia and Doce Me.

I'm sorry, I did not intend to be hostile.

I just detected strong disagreement.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)