Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!samsung!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!psuvax1!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: mlawless@amo.wichita.ncr.com (Mike Lawless) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: open communion Message-ID: Date: 4 Mar 90 01:58:10 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: NCR Corporation, Wichita, Kansas Lines: 46 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu In article oracle@eleazar.dartmo > > When you say that "the Roman Catholic Church teaches that revelation > ended with the death of the last apostle", I think (?) you were referring > to the fact that there haven't been any scriptural references to revelation > since the death of the apostles, and thus a special KIND of revelation was > lost. (Scriptural documentation was sort of difficult after the Bible was > judged to be "complete", as such. There aren't many provisions for amending > Scripture. :) ) > However, I see no indication that the Church believes ALL revelation to > be "deceased." It may be a matter of perspective. > Briefly, the Catholic Church teaches that the "deposit of faith" was complete at the time of the death of the last Apostle. However, the Church makes a distinction between this type of revelation (I forget the exact term for it) and "private revelation" (visions, miracles, etc. which have occurred since). The former are articles of faith which all the faithful are bound to accept, while nobody is every required to accept any kind of private revelation. The church, in certain cases, declares after much investigation whether a particular private revelation is "worthy of belief," and also occasionally declares certain alleged private revelations to be fradulent. One criterion used in making such determinations is whether the private revelation supports or contradicts established doctrine (which for the purposes of this discus- sion includes both the Bible and oral Tradition, which are considered equally valid sources of revelation). The church does not introduce "new" doctrine, whether based on private revelation or otherwise; the church can and does "develop" doctrine, which is defined as working to develop a fuller, more accurate understanding of various elements of the existing deposit of faith; this is done with the assistance of the charism of infallibility of the Pope, and the world's bishops teaching in union with him. However, this charism is not the same thing as inspiration or visions; it is simply preservation from teaching error by the power of the Holy Spirit. They still must rely on the use of their own intellects in order to develop doctrine. One important reason for the development of doctrine is the adaptation of existing articles of faith to changing cultural conditions; for instance, in vitro fertilization was unheard of until recently, so scripture or Tradition do not address it directly. The church must decide how existing doctrine is to be applied to such situations. This is not "new doctrine"; it is new application of existing doctrine. -- Mike Lawless, NCR E&M Wichita, Box 20 (316) 636-8666 (NCR: 654-8666) 3718 N. Rock Road, Wichita, KS 67226 Mike.Lawless@Wichita.NCR.COM {ece-csc,hubcap,gould,rtech}!ncrcae!ncrwic!Mike.Lawless {sdcsvax,cbatt,dcdwest,nosc.ARPA}!ncr-sd!ncrwic!Mike.Lawless