Friday, May 27, 2022

The Sacrae Theologiae Summa on the Deposit of Faith and the Cessation of Public Revelation

In the Sacrae Theologiae Summa, we have the following affirmations of the cessation of public revelation with the death of the last apostle and how the deposit of faith is something that will never be added to:

 

762. Scholium 2. The understanding which the Apostles had of the deposit of faith—was it more perfect than what is had today by the Church, or was it not?

 

Straub, n. 221; Palmieri, Prolog. § 30; Dorsch p. 766, and others respond affirmatively. To prove this they appeal to John 14:26; 15:15; 16:12-15; Acts 1:8; 1 Cor. 2:6-12; 7:40; 2 Cor. 4:6; 11:6; Gal. 1;16; Eph. 3:3-5.

 

They confirm the same idea from Irenaeus: R 213, 242; from Tertullian: 2 298. They add further from Irenaeus: “For we have not known the disposition of our salvation form others, but from those through whom the Gospel came to us . . . the foundation and pillar of our faith. For it is not allowed to say that before they preached they had perfect knowledge . . . afterwards they were endowed with the power from on high of the descending Holy Spirit; they were filled with all things and had perfect knowledge” (St. Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. 3,1-2: MG 7,844).

 

Likewise from Tertullian: “They are wont to say that the Apostles did not know everything . . . But who of sound mind can believe that they did not know, whom the Lord gave us as Teachers . . . who explained certain obscure things to them separately, while saying to them it is given to them to know hidden things that he could not make known to the people? Was something hidden from Peter, called the rock of the Church to be built, who received the keys of the kingdom of heaven and the power of binding and loosing in heaven and on earth? And was something hidden from John, very much loved by the Lord, who leaned on his breast, and to whom alone the Lord manifested the traitor Judas, and whom in his place he designated as the son of Mary? What did he now want them to know, to whom he also showed his glory, and Moses and Elijah, and also the voice of the Father from heaven? . . . . On one occasion he had said clearly: ‘I have yet many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now’ (John 16:12); nevertheless he added: ‘When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth’; here he shows that those men were ignorant of nothing, to whom he had promised that they would obtain all truth through the Spirit of truth” (Tertullian, De praescript. C.22: ML 2,34).

 

There is also Epiphanius: “The words ‘he will guide you into all the truth’ (John 16:13) can refer to the heavenly gift which they were going to receive, that indeed the Holy Spirit was going to dwell in them, who would clearly declare everything to them that they were able to understand in this life” (St. Epiphanius, Haer. 66 n. 61: MG 42,122).

 

St. Thomas agrees: “Those who were closer to Christ, either before, like John the Baptist, or later, like the Apostles, had a fuller knowledge of the faith” (S. Th. I-II, q. 106, a. 4 and ad 2, II-II, a. 1, a. 7 ad 4; q. 176, a. 1 ad1).

 

Therefore it seems necessary to say that the Apostles had a fuller and more profound knowledge of the deposit of revelation simply, although with some limitations, and in some things they did not define it as explicitly as the later Church did, as the circumstances required, and as she often had to do. (Joachim Salaverri and Michaele Nicolau, Sacrae Theologiae Summa, 4 vols. [trans. Kenneth Baker; Keep the Faith, Inc., 2015], 1B-290-91)

 

740. Definition of terms. Revelation is attesting speech, whereby God manifested truths to men. In it a twofold main aspect is usually distinguished—one formal and the other objective. a) Revelation formally is the attesting speech of God itself, b) Objective revelation consists in the truths made known to men by God by means of an attesting speech.

 

Revelation according to its destination again is distinguished into two forms: a) Private Revelation is that which is given to a private person and for his good, b) Public Revelation is that which is imposed by God on society and must be embraced for the good of its members. This public revelation is divided again into particular and universal: α) Particular is the public revelation, which is destined for a particular people, like the revelation of Moses in the Old Testament. β) Universal is the public revelation, which is given to all men of all peoples, like the Christian revelation of the New Testament.

 

741. This Christian revelation is said to have been completed with the Apostles. But this can be understood in three ways: a) Revelation would be completed personally with the Apostles, if all of it were given immediately to the persons of the Apostles. b) Revelation would be said to be completed temporally with the Apostles, if all of it were given within the time in which the Apostles lived on this earth, namely, until the death of the Apostle John. c) Revelation would be said to be completed with the Apostles virtually, if every revealed truth, although the revelation was given immediately to someone among the faithful, but had to be acknowledged as such by one of the Apostles.

 

742. State of the question. In the thesis we are treating objective public and universal. Revelation, and so we say: “Revelation constituting the object of the Catholic faith.” We are saying that it was completed with the Apostles, not necessarily personally, but at least temporally and virtually, so that after the death of St. John the Apostle there is then no more objective, public and universal divine revelation. (Ibid., 281-82)

 

[Objection] Without new revelations dogmatic progress cannot take place. But dogmatic progress does take place. Therefore, there are also new revelations.

 

I distinguish the major. In revelation which constitutes the object of Catholic faith, conceded; in the understanding, declaration and proposing of the revealed deposit, denied. I also distinguish the minor and deny the consequent and the consequence. (Ibid., 291)

 

The following is a selection of statements from Councils and Popes also affirming this (all of which are relevant to the scope and limits of the development of doctrine within Catholicism):

 

The Council of Trent (1546-1563)

 

Session IV (April 8, 1546)

 

783 [DS 1501] The sacred and holy ecumenical and general Synod of Trent, lawfully assembled in the Holy Spirit, with the same three Legates of the Apostolic See presiding over it, keeping this constantly in view, that with the abolishing of errors, the purity itself of the Gospel is preserved in the Church, which promised before through the Prophets in the Holy Scriptures our Lord Jesus Christ the Son of God first promulgated with His own mouth, and then commanded “to be preached” by His apostles “to every creature” as the source of every saving truth and of instruction in morals [Matt. 28:19 ff.; Mark 16:15], and [the Synod] clearly perceiving that this truth and instruction are contained in the written books and in the unwritten traditions, which have been received by the apostles from the mouth of Christ Himself, or from the apostles themselves, at the dictation of the Holy Spirit, have come down even to us, transmitted as it were from hand to hand, [the Synod] following the examples of the orthodox Fathers, receives and holds in veneration with an equal affection of piety and reverence all the books both of the Old and of the New Testament, since one God is the author of both, and also the traditions themselves, those that appertain both to faith and to morals, as having been dictated either by Christ’s own word of mouth, or by the Holy Spirit, and preserved in the Catholic Church by a continuous succession. And so that no doubt may arise in anyone’s mind as to which are the books that are accepted by this Synod, it has decreed that a list of the Sacred books be added to this decree.

 

Vatican 1 (1869-70):

 

1800 [DS 3020] [The true progress of knowledge, both natural and revealed]. For, the doctrine of faith which God revealed has not been handed down as a philosophic invention to the human mind to be perfected, but has been entrusted as a divine deposit to the Spouse of Christ, to be faithfully guarded and infallibly interpreted. Hence, also, that understanding of its sacred dogmas must be perpetually retained, which Holy Mother Church has once declared; and there must never be recession from that meaning under the specious name of a deeper understanding [can. 3]. “Therefore … let the understanding, the knowledge, and wisdom of individuals as of all, of one man as of the whole Church, grow and progress strongly with the passage of the ages and the centuries; but let it be solely in its own genus, namely in the same dogma, with the same sense and the same understanding.”

 

1818 [DS 3043] 3. If anyone shall have said that it is possible that to the dogmas declared by the Church a meaning must sometimes be attributed according to the progress of science, different from that which the Church has understood and understands: let him be anathema.

 

1836 [DS 3069] [Argument from the assent of the Church]. To satisfy this pastoral duty, our predecessors always gave tireless attention that the saving doctrine of Christ be spread among all the peoples of the earth, and with equal care they watched that, wherever it was received, it was preserved sound and pure. Therefore, the bishops of the whole world, now individually, now gathered in Synods, following a long custom of the churches and the formula of the ancient rule, referred to this Holy See those dangers particularly which emerged in the affairs of faith, that there especially the damages to faith might be repaired where faith cannot experience a failure. The Roman Pontiffs, moreover, according as the condition of the times and affairs advised, sometimes by calling ecumenical Councils or by examining the opinion of the Church spread throughout the world; sometimes by particular synods, sometimes by employing other helps which divine Providence supplied, have defined that those matters must be held which with God’s help they have recognized as in agreement with Sacred Scripture and apostolic tradition. [DS 3070] For, the Holy Spirit was not promised to the successors of Peter that by His revelation they might disclose new doctrine, but that by His help they might guard sacredly the revelation transmitted through the apostles and the deposit of faith, and might faithfully set it forth. Indeed, all the venerable fathers have embraced their apostolic doctrine, and the holy orthodox Doctors have venerated and followed it, knowing full well that the See of St. Peter always remains unimpaired by any error, according to the divine promise of our Lord the Savior made to the chief of His disciples: “I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and thou, being once converted, confirm thy brethren” [Luke 22:32].

 

Pius IX (1846-1878):

 

“Qui pluribis,” November 9, 1846:

 

1636 [DS 2777] And with no less deceit certainly, Venerable Brothers, those enemies of divine revelation, exalting human progress with the highest praise, with a rash and sacrilegious daring would wish to introduce it into the Catholic religion, just as if religion itself were not the work of God but of men, or were some philosophical discovery which can be perfected by human means [cf. n. 1705]. Against such unhappily raving men applies very conveniently, indeed, what Tertullian deservedly made a matter of reproach to the philosophers of his own time: “Who have produced a stoic and platonic and dialectic Christianity.” And since, indeed, our most holy religion has not been invented by human reason but has been mercifully disclosed to men by God, thus everyone easily understands that religion itself acquires all its force from the authority of the same God speaking, and cannot ever be drawn from or be perfected by human reason.

 

The False Freedom of Science (against James Frohschammer), from the epistle "Gravissimas Inter," to the Archbishop of Munich-Freising, December 11, 1862:

 

1673 [DS 2856] Adhering to these and other almost innumerable divine texts, the Holy Fathers, in transmitting the teaching of the Church, have constantly taken care to distinguish the knowledge of divine things which is common to all by the power of natural intelligence, from the knowledge of those things which is received on faith through the Holy Spirit; and they have continuously taught that through this (faith) those mysteries are revealed to us in Christ which transcend not only human philosophy but even the angelic natural intelligence, and which, although they are known through divine revelation and have been accepted by faith, nevertheless, remain still covered by the sacred veil of faith itself, and wrapped in an obscuring mist as long as we are absent from the Lord in this mortal life. [DS 2857] From all this, it is clear that the proposition of Frohschammer is wholly foreign to the teaching of the Catholic Church, since he does not hesitate to assert that all the dogmas of the Christian religion without discrimination are the object of natural science or philosophy, and that human reason, cultivated so much throughout history, provided these dogmas have been proposed to reason itself as an object, can from its own natural powers and principle, arrive at the true understanding concerning all, even the more hidden dogmas [see n. 1709].

 

“Syllabus of Errors,” December 8, 1864:

 

1706 [DS 2906] 6. The faith of Christ is opposed to human reason; and divine revelation is not only of no benefit to, but even harms the perfection of man (1 [see n. 1635] 26).

 

Pius X (1903-1914):

 

The Errors of the Modernists, on the Church, Revelation, Christ, the Sacraments, from the Decree of the Holy Office, "Lamentabili," July 3, 1907:

 

2020 [DS 3420] 20. Revelation could have been nothing other than the consciousness acquired by man of his relation to God.

 

2021 [DS 3421] 21. Revelation, constituting the object of Catholic faith, was not completed with the apostles.

 

2054 [DS 3454] 54. The dogmas, the sacraments, the hierarchy, as far as pertains both to the notion and to the reality, are nothing but interpretations and the evolution of the Christian intelligence, which have increased and perfected the little germ latent in the Gospel.

 

The False doctrines of the Modernists, from the Encyclical, "Pascendi dominici gregis," September 8, 1907

 

2094 [DS 3493] Moreover, to complete this whole subject of faith and its various branches, it remains for us, Venerable Brethren, to consider finally the precepts of the modernists on the development of both.—Here is a general principle: In a religion which is living nothing is without change, and so there must be change. From here they make a step to what is essentially the chief point in their doctrines, namely, evolution. Dogma, then, Church, worship, the Books that we revere as sacred, even faith itself, unless we wish all these to be powerless, must be bound by the laws of evolution. This cannot appear surprising to you, if you bear in mind what the modernists have taught on each of these subjects. So, granted the law of evolution, we have the way of evolution described by the modernists themselves. And first, as regards faith. The primitive form of faith, they say, was crude and common to all men, since it had its origin in human nature and human life. Vital evolution contributed progress; to be sure, not by the novelty of forms added to it from the outside, but by the daily increasing pervasion of the religious sense into the conscience. Moreover, this progress was made in two ways: first, in a negative way, by eliminating anything extraneous, as for example, that might come from family or nation; second, in a positive way, by the intellectual and moral refinement of man, whereby the notion of the divine becomes fuller and clearer, and the religious sense more accurate. The same causes for the progress of faith are to be brought forward as were employed to explain its origins. But to these must be added certain extraordinary men (whom we call prophets, and of whom Christ is the most outstanding), not only because they bore before themselves in their lives and works something mysterious which faith attributed to the divinity, but also because they met with new experiences never had before, corresponding to the religious needs of the time of each.—But the progress of dogma arises chiefly from this, that impediments to faith have to be overcome, enemies have to be conquered, objections have to be refuted. Add to this a perpetual struggle to penetrate more deeply the things that are contained in the mysteries of faith. Thus, to pass over other examples, it happened in the case of Christ: in Him that divine something or other, which faith admitted, was slowly and gradually expanded, so that finally He was held to be God.—The necessity of accommodating itself to the customs and traditions of the people especially contributed to the evolution of worship; likewise, the necessity of employing the power of certain acts, which they have acquired by usage.—Finally, the cause of evolution as regards the Church arose in this, that she needs to be adjusted to contemporary historical conditions, and to the forms of civil government publicly in vogue. This do they think regarding each. But before we proceed we wish that this doctrine of necessities or needs be well noted; for beyond all that we have seen, this is, as it were, the basis and foundation of that famous method which they call historical.

 

The Oath Against the Errors of Modernism, from Motu proprio, "Sacrorum antistitum," September 1, 1910

 

3541] Fourthly, I accept sincerely the doctrine of faith transmitted from the apostles through the orthodox fathers, always in the same sense and interpretation, even to us; and so I reject the heretical invention of the evolution of dogmas, passing from one meaning to another, different from that which the Church first had; and likewise I reject all error whereby a philosophic fiction is substituted for the divine deposit, given over to the Spouse of Christ and to be guarded faithfully by her, or a creation of the human conscience formed gradually by the efforts of men and to be perfected by indefinite progress in the future.

 

Pius XII (1939-1958)

 

Humani generis, August 12, 1950

 

To the Magisterium Christ the Lord confided the whole deposit of faith, namely, the Sacred Writings and divine Tradition to guard and to defend and to interpret.