Changes of Roman Catholic Doctrine

[Salty]

NOTE: Those who post on this thread, should normally be Catholic,
as the question is:
If you are a RC - do you see anything incorrect on the link list?


I found this list of changes of RCC doctrine.
Timeline of Roman Catholicism

 

[Walpole]

NOTE: Those who post on this thread, should normally be Catholic,
as the question is:
If you are a RC - do you see anything incorrect on the link list?


I found this list of changes of RCC doctrine.
Timeline of Roman Catholicism

Did you post the correct link? The link you provided is just a list of Catholic beliefs. It does not contain a list of doctrines that have changed.

My suspicion is this list is intended to be a gotcha, "See, the Church didn't actually believe xyz until such and such a date!"

But perhaps you are unaware that doctrine develops. For example, it took the Church over three hundred years to develop and formulate the dogma of the Trinity. It took over four hundred years to develop and formulate the Church's Christological dogmas. These form the basis of the Christian religion and they took centuries before they were formulated, defined and declared. It also took nearly 400 years before the Church declared the canon of Scripture.

When clarifying is needed as to what is or is not the faith of the Church, a dogma is proclaimed. This has been the history of the Church even from her infancy when she proclaimed her very first dogma in Acts 16:4, whereby she declared one need not be circumcised. This precedent continued on in history, at the Councils of Nicea, Constantinople, Ephesus, Chalcedon and so on, where the doctrines of the faith were defined and defended against errors.

I'm quite certain new errors will arise which will require the Church to defend and define exactly what is or is not the faith of the Church, just as she always has throughout history.

 

[Salty]

1) correct link
2) NO - doctrine does NOT take centuries to determine.

 

[Walpole]

1) correct link
2) NO - doctrine does NOT take centuries to determine.

Google —-> The dogma of the Trinity

Google —-> The dogma of the Hypostatic Union

Google —-> The declaration of the canon of Scripture


These took centuries to develop, define and formulate and they form the basis of the Christian religion.

 

[Drifter]

I would like to know the sources that the author has used. I think Tertulian attests that the sign of the cross was an old practice even back in the 200s...

 

[Walpole]

I would like to know the sources that the author has used. I think Tertulian attests that the sign of the cross was an old practice even back in the 200s...

Correct. Tertullian lived from 155 A.D. - 240 A.D. and testified to the sign of the cross being a practice during his own time...

"In all our travels and movements, in all our coming in and going out, in putting on our shoes, at the bath, at the table, in lighting our candles, in lying down, in sitting down, whatever employment occupies us, we mark our foreheads with the sign of the cross." (Tertullian, De corona, 30)

Source


Furthermore, I'm quite shocked the poster's link does not include the year 325 A.D., when the Church declared and defined the dogma of Trinity, affirming that Christ is homooúsios (ὁμοούσιος) with the Father. This is the dogma upon which the Christian religion is based.

 

[Adonia]

1) correct link
2) NO - doctrine does NOT take centuries to determine.

What do you mean? It took like 16/17centuries before your guy came along to figure it all out.

 

[Yeshua1]

Did you post the correct link? The link you provided is just a list of Catholic beliefs. It does not contain a list of doctrines that have changed.

My suspicion is this list is intended to be a gotcha, "See, the Church didn't actually believe xyz until such and such a date!"

But perhaps you are unaware that doctrine develops. For example, it took the Church over three hundred years to develop and formulate the dogma of the Trinity. It took over four hundred years to develop and formulate the Church's Christological dogmas. These form the basis of the Christian religion and they took centuries before they were formulated, defined and declared. It also took nearly 400 years before the Church declared the canon of Scripture.

When clarifying is needed as to what is or is not the faith of the Church, a dogma is proclaimed. This has been the history of the Church even from her infancy when she proclaimed her very first dogma in Acts 16:4, whereby she declared one need not be circumcised. This precedent continued on in history, at the Councils of Nicea, Constantinople, Ephesus, Chalcedon and so on, where the doctrines of the faith were defined and defended against errors.

I'm quite certain new errors will arise which will require the Church to defend and define exactly what is or is not the faith of the Church, just as she always has throughout history.

You do realize that pretty much all of the Councils of church era and that basic doctrines were done under the eastern side of Universal Church, as Rome was not the RCC of today until in 7th Century> That virtually all so called Church fathers and theologians were of eastern not western church>

 

[Salty]

What do you mean? It took like 16/17centuries before your guy came along to figure it all out.

and just who is "My guy"?

 

[Yeshua1]

and just who is "My guy"?

Calvin or Luther, both shunned by RCC!

 

[Adonia]

and just who is "My guy"?

Come on, I am sure you know the history of the Baptist faith tradition. But in case you are having a senior moment that would be one named John Smythe, the former Anglican priest who came up with the Baptist doctrine. The others (Luther etc) just did not go far away enough from orthodox doctrine, hence his new "Baptist" doctrine.

 

[Adonia]

Calvin or Luther, both shunned by RCC!

No, YOUR Grand Poobah - John Smythe.

 

[Salty]

Come on, I am sure you know the history of the Baptist faith tradition. But in case you are having a senior moment that would be one named John Smythe, the former Anglican priest who came up with the Baptist doctrine. The others (Luther etc) just did not go far away enough from orthodox doctrine, hence his new "Baptist" doctrine.

I am not worried about "Baptist Tradition" I am concerned about Bible Doctrine!

And since there are scores of Baptist groups - with so many different beliefs- which one are you referring to?

 

[Adonia]

I am not worried about "Baptist Tradition" I am concerned about Bible Doctrine!

And since there are scores of Baptist groups - with so many different beliefs- which one are you referring to?

Which bible doctrine? While some basic Christian doctrine is shared, each faith tradition has sort of come up with their own.

All the Baptist groups have the same basic doctrine don't they, I mean things like baptismal immersion and Communion as just a symbol? So I would be referring to them all, each one derived from the first Baptist John Smythe.

 

[Drifter]

I am not worried about "Baptist Tradition" I am concerned about Bible Doctrine!

And since there are scores of Baptist groups - with so many different beliefs- which one are you referring to?

Salty, I think what development amounts to is the search for the words to express the eternal truths. How is God three and one? How can Christ be a man and the Second Person at the same time? Come to think of it, what in the heck does Person even mean anyway?

Baptist Christians, and everyone else, owe a big, fat doctrinal debt to the first centuries of Christianity for tackling these issues and it’s important to give credit where credit is due. I don’t think there are many Christians today who read Scripture without the fathers secretly holding their hand.

 

[atpollard]

Wow, this went downhill fast.

On the link in the OP ...
It really only states dates that the Catholic Church made common beliefs “official”. One can argue that “indulgences” (for an example) are a doctrine added by the Catholic Church to the Apostolic Church of the First Century, but the fact that it was not challenged, and the Church responded until some date centuries later, or the fact that some council a millennium later reaffirmed it, does not prove that it was not a First Century belief. It only proves that it was not officially affirmed until sometime later. The assumption of Mary, as another example, clearly has a tradition that goes back before the official adoption as dogma in 1950. So the Catholics are correct to ask what exactly the time line proves about anything.

On BAPTISM ...
“1. Concerning baptism, baptise thus: Having first rehearsed all these things, "baptise, in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost," in running water;” - Didache (First Century)

 

[Salty]

Which bible doctrine? While some basic Christian doctrine is shared, each faith tradition has sort of come up with their own.

All Bible Doctrine

All the Baptist groups have the same basic doctrine don't they, I mean things like baptismal immersion and Communion as just a symbol? ....

There are Baptist who do not see the necessity of immersion. I suppose most Baptists see Communion as a symbol - but there are other aspects of Communion that many Baptists disagree on.
There are Baptists who think abortion is acceptable.
There are Baptists who see the leadership of churches in different forms.

Just take a look in the Baptists section here on BB and you will see may different opinions -
Some Baptists despise the "Sinners prayers" Others believe it is sufficient
Some Baptists have no problem with hom0xexual marriage - many are against it.
Some Baptists accept evolution- some believe in the "age" others are strict 7 day creation.
Some Baptists are 0 point Calvinists - others are 6 points of Calvinists and everything in between
Some think its wrong to have Sunday School, or music, or to seperate children from the adults
Some believe its wrong to eat in a church building - Some believe we must observe foot washing
Others do not permit women to speak during a church service or to vote in a business meeting.

and these are just the tip of the Baptist Doctrine Iceberg.

And this does not consider how we do certain things, for example missions - some groups have a central
clearing house to support missions - other - each church will partially support many missionaries,
some do not see a need for Sunday night service -ect, ect, ect

 

[Adonia]

All Bible Doctrine



There are Baptist who do not see the necessity of immersion. I suppose most Baptists see Communion as a symbol - but there are other aspects of Communion that many Baptists disagree on.
There are Baptists who think abortion is acceptable.
There are Baptists who see the leadership of churches in different forms.

Just take a look in the Baptists section here on BB and you will see may different opinions -
Some Baptists despise the "Sinners prayers" Others believe it is sufficient
Some Baptists have no problem with hom0xexual marriage - many are against it.
Some Baptists accept evolution- some believe in the "age" others are strict 7 day creation.
Some Baptists are 0 point Calvinists - others are 6 points of Calvinists and everything in between
Some think its wrong to have Sunday School, or music, or to seperate children from the adults
Some believe its wrong to eat in a church building - Some believe we must observe foot washing
Others do not permit women to speak during a church service or to vote in a business meeting.

and these are just the tip of the Baptist Doctrine Iceberg.

And this does not consider how we do certain things, for example missions - some groups have a central
clearing house to support missions - other - each church will partially support many missionaries,
some do not see a need for Sunday night service -ect, ect, ect

Thank you for the clarification.

 

[Walpole]

You do realize that pretty much all of the Councils of church era and that basic doctrines were done under the eastern side of Universal Church, as Rome was not the RCC of today until in 7th Century> That virtually all so called Church fathers and theologians were of eastern not western church>

It appears you are talking out of your hat again, making it up as you go. I suggest you Google ---> Latin Church Fathers. Here are a few of them, all the from the West...

St. Irenaeus c. 130-200 A.D.
Tertullian c. 155-220 A.D.
Pope St. Corneilius d. 253 A.D.
St. Cyprian of Carthage d. 258 A.D.
Pope St. Dionysisus d. 268 A.D.
St. Hilary of Poitiers 315-368 A.D.
Pope St. Damasus d. 384 A.D.
St. John Cassian 360-435 A.D.
St. Jerome 343-420 A.D.
St. Ambrose 340-397 A.D.
St. Augustine 354-430 A.D.
Pope St. Leo the Great 390-461 A.D.
St. Prosper of Aquitaine 390-463 A.D.
St. Peter Chrysologus 400-450 A.D.
St. Vincent of Lerins d. 450 A.D.
St. Benedict 480-546 A.D.
Pope St. Gregory the Great 540-604 A.D.
St. Isidore of Seville 560-636 A.D.


As for the Church Councils that took place in the East, here is how they referred to the Bishop of Rome...

RE: Nicea ---> “As soon as the evil of heresy began to reach that pitch which the Arian blasphemy has now attained, three hundred and eighteen of our Fathers were selected by the most holy bishop of Rome to deliberate the subject at Nicea.” (Theodoret, Ecclesiastical History, II, 22, Dam. Ad Epist.)


First Council of Constantinople, Canon 3, 381 A.D. ---> “Because it is new Rome, the bishop of Constantinople is to enjoy the privileges of honour after the bishop of Rome.”


Council of Ephesus, Session 3, 431 A.D. ---> "There is no doubt, and in fact it has been known in all ages, that the holy and most blessed Peter, prince and head of the Apostles, pillar of the faith and foundation of the Catholic Church, received the Keys of the Kingdom from our Lord Jesus Christ, the Savior and Redeemer of the human race, and to him was given the power of loosing and binding sins; who down even to this day and forever both lives and judges in his successors."


Council of Chalcedon, Session 3, 451 A.D. ---> "Wherefore the most holy and blessed Leo, archbishop of the great and elder Rome, through us, and through this present most holy synod together with the thrice-blessed and all-glorious Peter the Apostle, who is the Rock and foundation of the Catholic Church, and the foundation of the orthodox faith, hath stripped him [Dioscorus, bishop of Alexandria] of his episcopate, and hath alienated from him all hieratic worthiness."


Chalcedon Fathers to Pope Leo the Great, Epistle 98 ---> “You [Pope Leo] are set as an interpreter to all of the voice of blessed Peter, and to all you impart the blessings of that Faith.”


Ibid ---> “Knowing that every success of the children rebounds to the parents, we therefore beg you to honor our decision by your assent, and as we have yielded agreement to the Head in noble things, so may the Head also fulfill what is fitting for the children.”

 

[Yeshua1]

No, YOUR Grand Poobah - John Smythe.

My founder and leader is Jesus Christ, not any Pope or church!