Skip to main contentAccessibility feedback

Do Catholics Change Their Teachings Over Time?

In this video, a caller asks Dr. Karlo Broussard and Cy Kellett about the difference between the development of doctrine and if Catholic doctrine has changed over time.

Transcript:

Caller: He said doctrine has never changed in the Catholic Church, but doctrine has been developed. Now, my question is, what is the standard to know whether doctrine has been changed versus developed?

Karlo: Okay, great question. All right. So first of all, the first question to ask would be, what did this individual mean by doctrine? Now, a charitable reading of that statement would be, I’m assuming that by doctrine never changing, he means teachings within the infallible category. So any teaching that has been set forth by the Church in an infallible way, meeting the conditions for the charism of infallibility to be present there and take place where the Holy Spirit protects the Church from error, then it is true. No doctrine has ever changed if we mean by doctrine, teachings within the infallible teaching category.

Now, with regard to doctrine outside of the infallible category, that category of fallible teaching, fallible doctrine that in principle is subject to change, and you may very well find some change in non-infallible Church teaching.

Now, what would be such a change? That would be X to not X or not X to X. Right? So, you know, it would be some statement like, okay, this is true. And then later it would be, this is not true, or reverse that this is, you know, this is not true. And then later the Church coming around and saying it is true.

So here’s a hypothetical possibility. So it is, at one time it was part of ordinary Church teaching, which means non-infallible category. We’re outside of that infallible category. We’re in the fallible teaching category, okay? Where the Church and her ordinary teaching was supporting the idea of the limbo of the children, like an unbaptized infant existing in the afterlife, neither heaven nor hell, natural bliss kind of thing, okay?

And at one time, the Church in her ordinary teaching was supporting that idea. Like if you go publicly and deny that, you’re being too rash and you need to be quiet. That’s what the Church basically said many years ago. Now, it’s kind of like this debate of a theological opinion. Well, Catholics would be permitted to hold that idea, and other Catholics would be permitted to not hold that idea. We can kind of like present our arguments back and forth and disagree.

But now, let’s say, hypothetically, this hasn’t happened yet, Scott, but it could technically in principle happen where the Church would come out in her ordinary teaching, let’s say the Pope and the encyclical. It’s not infallible. He’s not like going to say, hey, you Catholics, you need to believe what I say here under the pain of mortal sin for the sake of salvation. But he just presents it in his ordinary teaching that the limbo of the children does not exist. That would actually be a change in doctrine in teaching.

Now remember, we’re still in the non-infallible category. We’re in the fallible category. But nevertheless, that would be a change. That’s an example of a change going from X to not X in this case.

Now here would be an example for a development of doctrine. Consider this, Scott. In the early Church, from the mid-second century A.D. 150, we have Justin Martyr, say, reflecting on Mary as the new Eve, untying what, undoing what the first Eve did. Through Eve, she was a virgin and her disobedience brought death. Mary, a virgin, through her obedience brings life. And that life is Jesus Christ.

Saint Irenaeus of Lyon in A.D. 180 to 185, right? Late second century. He teaches the same idea, Mary the new Eve.

Okay, so here’s development of doctrine. The Church in her wisdom and through her saints and through the theologians, through her prayer, through her liturgy, reflects on that principle, on that theme of Mary, the new Eve. And then as she reflects on that theme of Mary, the new Eve, she has and attains a more penetrating knowledge of what that teaching, what that idea entails, like baked into the idea, or the idea is pregnant with further meanings, further implications.

What would those further implications be from Mary as the new Eve? Well, given biblical typology, the first Eve was created immaculately, free from original sin. And if Mary is the new Eve, like these early Christians said, then it would follow that Mary also would be free from original sin upon her creation, hence the Immaculate Conception.

Notice there, Scott, there has not been a change in teaching. There has been a more penetrating knowledge coming to see that which is baked into a certain idea present in the early Christian faith and seeing the implications of that idea.

Now, of course, this is not just the second century. We can argue for a new Eve motif or theme being present in Scripture itself in Genesis 3:15. So we see the new Eve present in divine revelation itself. But then the Church sees pregnant with that idea, pregnant with the further truth, sees Mary’s Immaculate Conception baked into that divinely revealed truth of Mary being the new Eve, and then comes to a greater light and an understanding of that divine revelation involving and including Mary’s Immaculate Conception.

That would be an example of a development of doctrine. What do you think of that, Scott?

I’m sorry? What do you think of that, Scott? Is that helpful?

Caller: That is very helpful. I really appreciate you taking the time.

Karlo: You’re welcome, my friend. Thanks for calling. We appreciate you.

Cy: Absolutely. Scott, thanks for the call. Appreciate that. Go ahead and give us a call again in the future. This was a really great conversation, very informative.

We’re a nonprofit —no ads, just truth. Will you help us stay that way?
Enjoying this content?  Please support our mission!Donatewww.catholic.com/support-us