AN ESSAY ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE

__________________

A Bookrevew

Presented to

Dr. M. Yarnell

Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary

__________________

In Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements for SYSTH 3114

__________________

by

Heinrich Kehler

September 18, 2008

 

 

 

John Henry Newman. An Essay of the Development of Doctrine. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 2005. 445 pp. $19.75.

 

F. Schleiermacher and John H. Cardinal Newman are in general incomparable and totally different. However, both of them have a common inquiry concerning the development of doctrine. In §25.2, Schleiermacher introduces this discussion with the statement: "Let us then start from the facts that the system of doctrine in our Church all over is not a thing absolutely settled, and that it may indeed be asserted that its distinctive character has not yet become fully manifest in doctrine." But although they had this common inquiry both of them reach to a different conclusion.

John Henry Cardinal Newman (February 21, 1801 – August 11, 1890) grew up in an Anglican context and tradition. While being an Anglican priest and teaching at Oxford, he struggled with principles of ecclesiastical authority in the Anglican Church. Who is authorized to make doctrines? Has not the Anglican Church lost their authority to raise dogmas by leaving the Roman Catholic Church? This led him to write his work An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine in which he confirmed the tenability of the universal status of the Roman Catholic Church and all Catholic doctrines.

In this book Newman deals with his questions, whether a dogma changes and if it changes, which institution or by what authority to this change is allowed to take place. What are developments, and what are corruptions? How can we distinguish between heresy and development?

In the first chapters (I. – III.), Newman explains his method and some principles about the development of doctrines. After that, in chapter IV., he illustrates some of the developed doctrines like Infant Baptism, worshipping the Saints, the Papal Supremacy, etc. In chapter V., he establishes seven criteria to distinguish between genuine developments and corruptions before he explains them in detail. These criteria are as following: preservation, continuity of principles, the power of assimilation, logical sequence, anticipation of the future development, conservative action upon the past and the chronic vigour. In the following, I want to summarize the description of six of the seven criteria which are the content of chapters VII. – XII.

In chapter VII., Newman exposes his second criterion to distinguish a development from a corruption, the "continuity of principles". After mentioning nine principles (Dogma, Faith, Theology, Sacrament, Mysticism, Grace, Ascetism, Malignity and Sanctification), he goes deeper in four of them: Faith, Theology, Scripture, and Dogma. According to Newman, "the principle that doctrines are only so far to be considered true as there are logically demonstrated…" is opposed (antagonistic) to the principle of faith (p. 327). He argues against the assertion of J. Locke that whether a revelation is from God or not must be judged by reason. Newman does not want to assume that there should be no verifying of "the intellectual basis of Christianity". But one has not "to wait for logical proof before believing..." (p. 330). He desires to see the intellectual proof come as a reward. After shortly dealing with the principle of "Theology" he goes on by considering the principle of Scripture. The mystical interpretation of Scripture has to be preferred, and here one can see a continuing tradition of interpreting Scripture form the Church Fathers up the present. If someone condemns this method of interpreting Scripture, he condemns most of the antiquity (p. 346). Lastly, he deals with the principle of "Dogma". According to Newman, it is the duty of every Christian to witness "against all opinions which are contrary to what he had received in his baptismal catechizing…" (p. 348). If principles like these are respected then a changing of a doctrine is a development and not a corruption.

In the VIII. chapter, Newman expresses the "third note" of a true development of doctrine – the "assimilative power". Among the different opinions through different ages, the Church has the task to purify, assimilate, transmute, and take into itself "the many-coloured beliefs, forms of worship, codes of duty, schools of thought…" (p. 357). She has to reject "evil without sacrificing the good…" (p. 365). In this process the Church can change heathen superstitions into Christian superstitions, heathen appointments into spiritual rites and practices (379).

In a "logical sequence" one doctrine leads to another doctrine – this is the very essence of chapter IX. Here Newman expands six doctrines (Pardons, Penances, Satisfactions, Purgatory, Meritorious Works and Monastic rules), which are clearly a later development of the Roman Catholic Church. Defending their status as dogmas, he counts them as genuine and true developments as they come out of a logical progress from former doctrines.

From the argument of the "logical sequence" Newman, in chapter X., shifts to the argument of "anticipation of Future". A developing doctrine, while in its beginning stages, gives some idea of where it would end in the future. Here he gives some brought elaborated descriptions of those doctrines in the Roman Catholic Church which are not brought out of Scripture but are based on later developments such as worshipping the Saints, Relics and Angels, the nobility of a virgin life, and the role of Mary as the mother of Christ.

The sixth principle of a genuine developed doctrine is that it "conserves actions on its past". Newman writes that "… a true development is that which is conservative of its original, and a corruption is that which tends to its destruction…" (p. 419). That is, although a doctrine develops through the time, in its development it always conserves and preserves the original idea.

In the last chapter, chapter XII., Newman characterizes a development as genuine if it has chronicle vigor and survives through all the attacks and offenses which have come up from time to time. Newman defends the Roman Catholic Church by arguing that she endured although there were hard times where she was nearly wrestled down. Newman writes that "… her wonderful revivals, while the world as triumphing over her, is a further evidence of the absence of corruption in the system of doctrine and worship into which she has developed." (p. 444). He continues, "She pauses in her course, and almost suspends her functions; she rises again, and she is herself once more; all things are in their place and ready for action." (p. 444).

Critical Evaluation

As I mentioned in the introduction, Newman and Schleiermacher found their answers in total different ways. While the question on the development of doctrines drove Schleiermacher into the modern philosophical direction, Newman decided to answer the question out of the Roman Catholic perspective.

First of all, Newman, in his observation that doctrines truly develop through time, is right. No one can ignore that doctrines from the first churches up to the present have changed. In fact, it is a great challenge to deal with this phenomenon because the next arising questions are very crucial. Are these developments inspired like the Holy Scriptures? Is not only Scripture inspired and are the later developed doctrines, weather good and useful or not, a product of human fallible theological thinking which has to be revised from time to time? Newman sees the developments of doctrine as part of the inspiration by the Holy Spirit just as the Bible is inspired. However, not everyone in the Roman Catholic Church is infallible in his teaching. By counting only the Pope as inspired, if declaring doctrines ex cathedra, he limits infallibility only to the Pope. Furthermore, only the true Church, the Roman Catholic Church in Newman's opinion, is the place where true developments can occur. In this way Newman gets to be very exclusive. True development of doctrines cannot take place outside the Roman Catholic Church because all the protestant and other Churches have separated themselves from her and thus separated from the original Church. From a protestant point of view Newman's exclusive attitude should be doubted. Claiming that still up to the present we have infallible inspiration, like Scripture, and asserting that the Roman Catholic Church is the only place for it, is very venturous.

Another point in which Newman should be impeached is that in most of his argumentations he deals mainly with the early church fathers and not with the Bible. Surely, in his concept of defining development with the argument of ongoing inspiration beyond the Scriptures of the NT it all does make sense. But this whole concept should be distrusted since the canon of the inspired Scriptures was approved in the fourth century – in a time where the Church was still one Church and later became the Roman Catholic Church.

Third, for the argument of "chronic vigour" Newman should be complimented as well as scrutinized. Newman is right to assert that the genuine doctrines until the present have always overcome various assaults through history. However, the question is whether false doctrines, or corruptions, as he names not genuine developments of doctrines, always cease to exist during the time? Are old doctrines right only because they survived during the time? Is the ceasing existence of a doctrine always an evidence for being corrupt?

Lastly, the argument of "assimilating power"
should be revised critically. Undoubtingly, there are some elements in Christian tradition which have their origin in non-Christian cultures (for example, diverse philosophical concepts which were adopted into Theology). Maybe these elements are not always wrong but are at times helpful. Yet the process of assimilating things from Non-Christian origins is very hazardous. Often developments assimilating foreign elements go in wrong directions and so they remove Christian doctrines from their origin. Out of such assimilating developments there came doctrines like Purgatory, worshipping Angels, Saints and Relics, praying to Mary, etc. It is a tragedy that the Roman Catholic Church counts these developments as genuine and defends them as an inspired development.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Newman's thoughts and arguments should be highly respected because he faces a very crucial subject and seeks to answer hazardous questions. It should also be highly regarded that Newman's questions arose out of the earnest attempt to find the real origin of Christian Doctrine in order to prove whether developments were genuine or corrupt. To my regret, Newman took a wrong direction in his questioning. On the one hand, however, Newman in his thoughts should be honored. Yet on the other hand they should be reviewed with great caution.

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Schleiermacher, Friedrich. The Christian Faith. Translated by H. R. Mackintosh. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1956.