We usually assume that no events of fundamental spiritual importance take place between Pentecost and the Second Coming. It was a revelation for me when I read a comment by JMSmith some time ago suggesting that the Great Commission has now been fulfilled. It's certainly true: the Gospel has been preached everywhere; the reason most people don't believe it is not that they haven't heard it, but that they reject it. If implicit faith / anonymous Christianity was ever a thing, it isn't anymore, as one can tell from the wicked beliefs non-Christians espouse. We are, in this way, in a fundamentally different situation than earlier Christians. The last half century of evangelization efforts (e.g. the "New Evangelization") never got off the ground because evangelization is very different from the ideological warfare our time calls for.
Another example: Father Hunwicke suggests that we are witnessing "the definitive ending of the Petrine Ministry, as a service to the Church, as we have known it". Suppose this is true. Ironically, given what liberal Catholics tend to say, this means the end of the development of doctrine. The pope's main job is to pass on the faith delivered from the Apostles without corruption. Sometimes, as the Church gains a more detailed articulation of certain doctrines, the pope will elevate some belief, an opinion long held by a segment of believers but hitherto optional, to definitive doctrine. No subsequent pope may revise such definitive acts, nor of course other Catholic teachings recognized as definitive; to attempt to do so would only render him heretical. It is true that should there be open heretics on the throne of Saint Peter and leading the Holy Office, the Holy See could no longer credibly fill this role. This would mean that unresolved issues on matters of faith and morals could no longer be resolved by ecclesiastic authority. The time of development of doctrine would have ceased. We may be approaching, or have reached, such a time.
Why would God allow this? Presumably because the development of doctrine is now complete. It's funny that no one considers this possibility, even though it is obviously suggested by the analogy of development with growth of an organism. Animals and people don't grow indefinitely; they grow until they reach maturity. The last exercise of papal infallibility came shortly before Vatican II, whose outworking eliminated first the inclination, and increasingly the credibility, to exercise ecclesiastic teaching authority. Perhaps we now know all we need to know for our salvation. The most popular heresies of our time involve denying the very words of Jesus and Saint Paul in order to promote popular sins. Existing doctrine is certainly enough to tell us what to think of this.
Even if true, this would certainly not mean that we know all there is to know about God or other matters relevant to the faith. For example, great theologians of unquestioned orthodoxy have disagreed about whether the Incarnation would have happened if man had not sinned, and as far as I know, the Magisterium has not impelled any answer. Perhaps we will never know the answer to questions like this. On the other hand, we may learn more about God from future developments in metaphysics or about the history of Israel from archeology. However, such discoveries will be affirmed only insofar as reason and evidence recommend them and not as matters of faith and ecclesial communion.
It has occurred to me that the Church is at the beginning of its own Babylonian Exile. Recall that then the Jews also suffered a fate they had thought God had promised to spare them, the apparent destruction of the Davidic monarchy. They had to carry on their traditions without the social support of having their own country. For the Jews, this ended up being a purifying experience. I do not yet see any evidence of purification in the Catholic people, but we are still at the beginning of our exile.
No comments:
Post a Comment