Pope Francis celebrates the beatification Mass of Blessed Paul VI in St. Peter's Square at the Vatican Oct. 19. The Mass also concluded the extraordinary Synod of Bishops on the family. (CNS photo/Paul Haring)
During
the extraordinary Synod of Bishops on the family at the Vatican, the
phrase “doctrinal development” was bandied about by some bishops. For
instance, Reinhard Cardinal Marx of Germany, responding to a question at
a press conference last Friday, said that church doctrine can change over
time: "Saying that the doctrine will never change is a restrictive view of things..." The Church's doctrine, Cardinal Marx added, “doesn't depend on
the spirit of time but can develop over time.”
There is, unfortunately, a lack of clarity in Cardinal Marx’s statements, for he seems to identify
development with change. Is development of doctrine the same as a change in doctrine? Can Church doctrine change over time?
More precisely, does doctrinal development mean that doctrines may
change over time in the sense of being substantially transformed,
implying a change in the very essence of the teaching? For instance,
could so-called “same-sex unions” one day be seen as a legitimate
development of the Church’s teaching on marriage? If so, would this
development really be legitimate? Rather, wouldn’t it be a corruption of
dogma since it asserts the contrary of the teaching’s essence on
marriage that regards sexual differentiation as a fundamental
prerequisite for attaining the two-in-one-flesh union of marriage (Gen
1:27, 2:24).
The issue is not whether doctrines can
develop. For instance, Gerhard Cardinal Müller, the Prefect of the
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, is not arguing against
doctrinal development, as some of his critics have implied. In his just published book, The Hope of the Family (Ignatius, 2014), he affirms that
“dogma develops and is evolving.” Yet, he rightly sees that doctrinal
development has to be homogeneous with the essential principles of the
teaching. Thus, doctrinal development, according to Müller, cannot be
legitimate when it occurs “in a way that contradicts basic principles
[of the teaching] [. . .] that would conclude or affirm the contrary.”
This important point has been obscured or even lost in the recent discussion about
doctrinal development.
But this point has not been lost in the Church’s
teaching regarding doctrinal development. This teaching has its roots in
the work of the fifth century monk, Vincent of Lérins (see Commonitórium primum, 23). Vincent wrote: “Therefore, let there be growth and abundant
progress in understanding, knowledge, and wisdom, in each and all, in
individuals and in the whole Church, at all times and in the progress of
ages, but only with the proper limits, i.e., within the same dogma, the
same meaning, the same judgment [eodem sensu eademque sententia].”
In a nutshell, development may only legitimately occur within the
boundaries of the doctrine because only then will it not conclude or
affirm the contrary of the teaching. Vincent’s point here is supported
by a distinction he insists on between progress and change. Vincent writes: “But it [progress of religion] must be such as may be truly a progress of the faith, not a change; for when each several thing is improved in itself, that is progress; but when a thing is turned out of one thing into another, that is change.” This is the main Lérinian point that Cardinal Müller made.
This Lérinian point was affirmed by Vatican Council I (1869-1870) in Dei filius,
the Dogmatic Constitution on the Catholic Faith (Denzinger 3020).
Significantly, Pope St. John XXIII also appealed to this Lérinian point in his
opening address at Vatican II, Gaudet Mater Ecclesia. In that famous statement at the beginning of the Council, he said: “The deposit
or the truths of faith, contained in our sacred teaching, are one thing,
while the mode in which they are enunciated, keeping the same meaning
and the same judgment [eodem sensu eademque sententia], is
another.” Again, doctrinal development cannot be legitimate when it
would conclude or affirm the contrary of the truth of its basic
principles.
But of course this Lérinian point does not mean that
we cannot grow in our understanding of the doctrine. Vincent affirms
that doctrine develops and is progressing. Nor does it mean that we
cannot formulate the truth of this doctrine differently—always with the
aim of keeping the same meaning and the same judgment. We may come to
deepen our understanding of the doctrine and then formulate it in a new
way that may more effectively communicate to the surrounding culture.
But on this view the truth itself does not vary with time and place,
but only the formulations.
What is essential for properly
addressing the question regarding the nature of doctrinal continuity,
between that which is unalterable (unchangeable) and alterable? The
brief answer to this question here must be that we distinguish between
propositions and sentences, between form and content, context and
content, linguistic formulation and propositional truth.
Propositions—contents of thought that are true or false, expressible in
various languages, but more than mere words, expressing possible, and if
true, actual states of affairs—do not vary as the language in which
they are expressed varies (propositions are not linguistic entities).
Because dogmatic truths are unalterable truths, we can appreciate that
truths of faith are more than their linguistic expression, and hence we
should never attribute the relativity characteristic of language to
propositional truths of faith.
So, how does Pope
Francis stand with respect to the question of doctrinal development?
What is his response to the question as to how we can allow for
legitimate pluralism and authentic diversity within a fundamental
doctrinal unity? Briefly put, he is a Lérinian. He writes (in On Heaven and Earth, a work
co-authored with Rabbi Skorka): “In the
third and fourth centuries the revealed truths of faith were
theologically formulated and transmitted as our nonnegotiable
inheritance.” He is quick to add, however:
That
does not mean that throughout history, through study and investigation,
other insights were not discovered about these truths: such as what
Christ is like, or how to configure the Church, or how and what should
be true Christian conduct, or what are the commandments. All of these
are enriched by these new explanations. There are things that are
debatable, but—I repeat—this inheritance is not negotiable. The content
of a religious faith [fides quae creditor] is capable of being deepened through human thought, but when that deepening is at odds with the inheritance, it is a heresy.
Yes,
Bergoglio resists doctrinal rigidity, immobilism at the level of
theological formulation or expression. He explains: “At any rate,
religions refine certain expressions [of the truth] with time,
even though it is a slow process because of the sacred bond that we have
with the received inheritance [of revelation].” Thus, Bergoglio affirms
here a growth of human understanding, its refinement, maturation, and
development of the dogmas of the Christian religion. Still, in his view,
truth itself is unchangeable, but “we grow in the understanding of the
truth”, as he says in his August 2013 interview, “A Big Heart Open to
God”. In that interview, Pope Francis cites the passage from the Commonitórium primum cited above. This passage seems to be a favorite of Bergoglio/Francis because it is also cited in On Heaven and Earth
He
continues: “St. Vincent of Lérins makes a comparison between the
biological development of man and the transmission from one era to
another of the deposit of faith, which grows and is strengthened with
time. Here, human self-understanding changes with time and so also human
consciousness deepens. . . . So we grow in the understanding of the
truth. . . .Even the forms for expressing truth can be multiform, and
this is indeed necessary for the transmission of the Gospel in its timeless meaning.”
Notice that Francis does not hold the truth itself to be variable with
time and place, but only the formulations, namely, “the forms for
expressing truth . . . in order to develop and deepen the Church’s
teaching.”
Like Pope John XXIII, Pope Francis, and Gerhard
Cardinal Müller, let’s strive to be clear about the Church’s Lérinian understanding of
doctrinal development, especially when discussing the weighty matters addressed in the just concluded Synod, with an eye toward the Synod of Bishops in 2015.
