Bishop Sanborn responds to the "rupture theology" article
#41
(06-03-2009, 10:15 PM)newschoolman Wrote: Here is the section from "Rupture Theology" dealing with docrinal development.  I don't see anything that remotely promotes evolution of dogma.  On the contrary, it is directly contradicted.

Quote:Tradition and Doctrinal Development

Characteristics that divide “progressive” and “reactionary” rupture theologians can also be noted in their understanding and approach to sacred Tradition and the development of doctrine.  The former tendency seeks “progress” by creating artificial novelties that more or less deliberately and explicitly reject the past (i.e., sacred Tradition and doctrinal development admit substantial change according to this view).  In this sense, progressive rupture theologians “need to be reminded that Vatican II embraces the entire doctrinal history of the Church.  Anyone who wishes to be obedient to the Council has to accept the faith professed over the centuries…”

The tendency for reactionary rupture theologians, on the other hand, is to seek a past state while rejecting a present state that has not been recognized or appreciated as an organic development of the same substantial reality.  Tradition, according to this view, is understood in a limited or narrow sense that corresponds to an “inert” conception of the deposit of faith rather than a living and organic deposit.  Therefore, the risk inherent in this view is to confuse accidental change with substantial change.  

Each variety of rupture theology, therefore, carries its own risks and dangers.  The progressive, for example, will seek progress by cutting down and uprooting the oak tree in order to pave the way for new designs and the man-made structures of the future.  The reactionary, on the other hand, not recognizing the oak tree for what it really is, will cut it down and uproot it while searching for the acorn of the past.  In either case the result is practically the same insofar as each will “sever the roots from which the tree draws its life.”

Did you miss this?

"But such are not the stakes in Vatican II. We are dealing with a moral teaching, namely religious liberty, and a dogmatic teaching, namely the nature of the Catholic Church, its government and structure, and the fact that it is the unique means of salvation."
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: Bishop Sanborn responds to the "rupture theology" article - by lamentabili sane - 06-03-2009, 10:17 PM



Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)