Why you MUST understand what Revelation is (Fortes in Fide)
If you have a modernist conception of revelation, how can you make an act of faith – without which it is impossible to please God?
If you have a modernist conception of revelation, how can you make an act of faith – without which it is impossible to please God?
Editor’s Notes
What follows is the second of Fr Noël Barbara catecheses in Fortes in Fide, N. I Vol. I.
This catechesis on revelation – following the corresponding catechesis on faith – make it easy to see why Fr Peter Morgan felt that the French version (Forts dans la foi) was what was needed by English Catholics, following Vatican II.
As noted in the previous article, one of the most harmful effects of modernism is the dissolution of the concept of faith into a vague trust in God on the one hand, and religious sentiment on the other. This is because the notion of revelation had been similarly dissolved – and the dissolution of faith makes many almost unaware that faith is an assent to something else, namely revelation.
However, The Oath against Modernism expresses the true doctrine of both:
Fifthly, I hold with certainty and sincerely confess that faith is not a blind sentiment of religion welling up from the depths of the subconscious under the impulse of the heart and the motion of a will trained to morality; but faith is a genuine assent of the intellect to truth received by hearing from an external source. By this assent, because of the authority of the supremely truthful God, we believe to be true that which has been revealed and attested to by a personal God, our creator and Lord.
Fr Barbara provides a lucid explanation. As mentioned in the previous introduction, he leaves the Church’ role in proposing revelation to be somewhat underdeveloped – at least in the sense of overlooking the implications of the Church’s proposition as a condition sine qua non. Fr Marín-Sola’s draws out these implications further.
Finally, as previously noted, Barbara illustrates his point with the words of Dei Verbum, Vatican II’s document on revelation. This tactic – citing “good” parts of the post-conciliar “magisterium” – may have been initially attractive, but it soon fell out of favour, for reasons discussed elsewhere.
Fortes in Fide, N. I, Vol. I.
Part IV: Revelation
Some headings and line breaks added. Asterisks replaced with dividing lines. Bold formatting has been removed in quotes, and replaced with italics when used for emphasis, in which case it has been retained in italics. Footnotes ran continuously in the original, but have been reset in this piece.
It is based on the typeset version of the late James McNally. Unfortunately, at this time of republication, it has not been possible to ascertain the date of the original text.
Revelation
Faith is man’s response to the revelation made by God.
As we did in relation to the theological virtue of faith, let us now examine what revelation is.
Meaning of the word
The word “REVELATION” comes from the verb “to reveal” which etymologically means “to lift the veil”, “to disclose.” It has taken on the meaning of “to make known.”
Revelation is the manifestation of something which was hidden, up till then, by obscurity, by secrecy, or by ignorance. This manifestation comes about, according to the circumstances, either by the illumination of what was obscure, the lifting of secrecy or, again, by instruction.
Natural revelation
Revelation can be made by men who disclose to their fellow-men something which was hidden from them. This is what happens in all schools where masters teach or reveal to their pupils truths unknown to them. This is also what happens when someone reveals a secret to us, about his intimate life, for example. Without such a revelation it is impossible to know about the intimate life or the secret thoughts of anyone.
Divine revelation
Can a revelation be made by God? Can He reveal to us hidden things, hidden either because of our ignorance, or because something obscures our intelligence, or because they are mysteries?
The answer must be yes. Because if men are capable of instructing other men, we can certainly not see what could hinder God from Himself instructing us by revealing to us things which He knows.
This divine revelation seems to be both fitting and necessary
By reflecting on the possibility of a divine revelation, we are lead to the conclusion that not only is such a revelation possible, but more, that it is most fitting, and in certain cases, necessary.
In effect, although man is capable, by the natural light of reason alone, through created things to rise to the knowledge of God; even though he may arrive with certainty at a knowledge of the spiritual nature of his soul and of his own freedom, he experiences, nevertheless, real difficulties in resolving these problems correctly, and human history shows us numerous peoples, who may in other respects be cultured, who do not know the true God, but adore idols; numerous and cultured peoples who are unable to discern clearly the natural law, and who live in vice; numerous and cultured peoples who make gods of their passions, and indulge in criminal and obscene rites.
A study of the history of mankind makes us realize how fitting God’s revelation is. Reflection compels us to acknowledge its necessity.
We have mentioned above that it is not possible to know the intimate life of anyone, not even that of our best friend, unless he decides himself to reveal it to us. How much more radical and absolute, then, is the impossibility for any creature at all to know, by personal study, the intimate life of God, His nature, His designs and His will for us. If God did not take the initiative and reveal to us His intimate life, we would never know it, we could not possibly know it. In the realm of supernatural realities, divine revelation proves to be absolutely necessary.
And this is the Church’s doctrine, taught by Pope Pius IX in his allocution “Singulari quadam”, of December 1854:
“And the clients, or rather devotees, of human reason, who set it up as their unerring teacher and promise themselves every success under its guidance, have surely forgotten what a deep and severe wound was inflicted on human nature through the sin of our first parent; for darkness has clouded the mind and the will has been made prone to evil. This is the reason why the most famous philosophers of antiquity, in spite of their many splendid writings, have contaminated their doctrines with very serious errors; this is the reason for that ceaseless struggle that we are conscious of within ourselves and about which the Apostle speaks:
‘But I see another law in my members, fighting against the law of my mind.’ (Rom. VII, 23)” (Denz. 1643)
And the Pope continues:
“In reality, since it is certain that the light of reason has been dimmed, and that the human race has fallen miserably from its former state of justice and innocence because of original sin, which is communicated to all the descendants of Adam, can anyone still think that reason by itself is sufficient for the attainment of truth? If anyone is to avoid slipping and failing in the midst of such great dangers, and in the face of such weakness, dare he deny that divine religion and heavenly grace are necessary for salvation?
“To be sure, God most generously gives these helps to those who humbly and prayerfully request them - for it is written: ‘God resisteth the proud, and giveth grace to the humble.’ (James IV, 6) And for that very reason Christ our Lord turned to His Father on one occasion, and declared that the deepest secrets of truth are not manifested to the prudent and wise men of this world, who are proud of their own talent and learning, and are unwilling to render the submission implied in faith, but rather to the humble and simple men, who rely upon the revelation of divine faith for their strength and conviction. (See Matt. XI, 25; Luke X, 21)” (Denz. 1644)
This same doctrine was taken up again by the First Vatican Council:
“It is owing to this divine revelation, assuredly, that even in the present condition of the human race, those religious truths which are by their nature accessible to human reason can easily be known by all men with solid certitude and with no trace of error. This, however, is not the reason why revelation is to be called absolutely necessary; but because God of His infinite goodness, has ordained man to a supernatural end, viz., to be a sharer of divine blessings which utterly exceed the intelligence of the human mind:
‘For eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither hath it entered into the heart of man, what things God hath prepared for them that love Him.’ (I Cor. II, 9)” (Denz. 1786)
And, in a Canon, the Fathers of the First Vatican Council defined Catholic faith on this matter:
“If anyone says that it is impossible or useless for man to be taught through divine revelation about God and the worship to be rendered to Him, let him be anathema.” (Denz. 1807)
And this same doctrine, it could not be otherwise, has been restated by the second Vatican Council:
“By divine revelation God willed to make known and to communicate Himself, and the eternal decrees that are willed by Him in regard to men’s salvation, ‘that they may be sharers of those divine blessings which utterly exceed the intelligence of the human mind.’”
“The sacred Council declares that: ‘God, the beginning and end of all things, may be certainly known by the natural light of human reason.’ (See Rom. I, 20; Denz. 1785) It teaches, however, that one must attribute to His revelation that ‘even in the present condition of the human race, those religious truths which are by their nature accessible to human reason can easily be known by all men with solid certitude and with no trace of error.’” (Denz. 1786) (Dei Verbum 6)
Has there, in fact, been divine revelation?
This divine revelation, which has been seen to be possible, useful and even necessary, has it happened, or is it only an unrealised dream ?
Let us at once say, yes, it has happened. God has revealed Himself. He has revealed to us the mystery of His intimate life, and His loving plans for us.
This divine revelation is a historical fact. We encounter it in the history of mankind. It is spread over very many centuries, and shows itself to us in the form of the marvelous events which make up the history of the Patriarchs, of the Prophets, of Israel, of Jesus Christ, God made man, and of the Catholic Church.
Although spread over so many centuries, these marvelous events are connected one with another, and the chain they form together is the indisputable mark of the direct intervention of God in mankind’s history, made in order to reveal His will for us.
Here is the teaching or the Second Vatican Council on the subject:
“That He might make known unto us the mystery of His will according to His good pleasure which He hath purposed in Him” (Eph. I, 9), whereby men through Jesus Christ, the Word made flesh, have access to the Father in the Holy Ghost, and become partakers of the divine nature. (See Eph. II, 18; II Peter I, 4) By this revelation the invisible God (See Col. I, 15; I Tim. I, 17) out of the abundance of His love, speaks to men, as to friends (See Ex. XXXIII, 11; John XV, 14-15), and is conversant with them (Bar. III, 38) that He may invite them to share His company and admit them to it.
“The divine plan of revelation is realized in deeds and words that are closely interconnected, so that the deeds wrought by God in the history of salvation manifest and reinforce the teaching and realities signified by the words, while the words proclaim the deeds and cast light upon the mystery contained in them. The profound truth conveyed by this revelation, whether it concerns God or man’s salvation, shines forth for us in Christ Who is at once the Mediator and the fullness of revelation in its entirety.” (Dei Verbum. 2)
Some important points
From the data of human history we can establish certain things:
In this marvelous history of revelation God manifests Himself in two ways:
In a direct way, as when He reveals His mind to someone directly, either Himself or through an Angel;
In an indirect way, as when he uses a man chosen by Him to reveal His mind to other men.
This revelation made by God is concerned with:
Truths of the natural order which man could discover by the natural light of reason alone;
Truths of the absolutely supernatural order, which man is not only incapable of discovering by himself, but is also incapable of verifying or understanding when they have been revealed to him.
This divine revelation:
Is only found among the Patriarchs, from Adam to Abraham, in Israel up to the coming of Jesus Christ, and in the Catholic Church;
It progressed in its historical development;
It came to an end with the Apostles.
In all this history of revelation, the Prophets who were sent to bring to men the divine revelation, all presented themselves as coming “by the will of Yahweh.”
“The Lord took me when I followed the flock”, said Amos to Amasias, priest of the king of Israel, “and the Lord said to me: ‘Go, prophesy to my people Israel’.” (Amos VII, 15)
Isaias heard the voice of the Lord speaking to him: “Whom shall I send? And who shall go for us?” “Lo, here I am, send me”, replied Isaias. And the Lord said: “Go, and thou shalt say to this people... ” (Isaias VI, 8-9)
There was the same mission for Jeremias: “For thou shalt go to all that I shall send thee, and whatsoever I shall command thee, thou shalt speak.” (Jeremias I, 7)
Ezechiel explained: “And I heard him speaking to me, and saying: ‘Son of man, I send thee to the children of Israel, to a rebellious people, ... and they to whom I send thee are children of a hard face, and of an obstinate heart, and thou shalt say to them, thus saith the Lord God’.” (Ezechiel II, 2-4)
These texts and other similar ones are evidence that these messengers had not only an intimate conviction that they were doing God’s work, but also an objective certainty of a mandate received from the Lord himself.
And thus their words, sometimes moving, must not be considered, as “explosions of their religious consciousness, or of their subconscious minds”, in the modernist sense or as “the elaboration of their fervent and turbulent religious outlook.” Their words must be taken for what they were in reality, namely, the authentic echoes of Yahweh.
The economy of salvation announced, narrated and explained by the sacred authors, appears then in the books of the Old Testament as the true word of God. For this reason, these divinely inspired books have an imperishable value:
“For, what things soever were written, were written for our learning: that through patience and the comfort of the scriptures, we might have hope.” (Rom. XV, 4)
“The sacred Council, devoutly attentive to the word of God and confident in proclaiming it, pays homage to the words of St. John when he says: “We declare unto you the Life eternal, which was with the Father, and hath appeared to us: that which we have seen and have heard we declare unto you, that you also may have fellowship with us, and our fellowship may be with the Father and with His Son Jesus Christ.” (I John I, 2-3)” (Dei Verbum 1)
How is such a revelation of truths of an absolutely supernatural order possible?
Our intelligence can, in fact, only receive and understand ideas expressed in words of human speech.
This is why God adapted Himself to the human intelligence of His Prophets in revealing to them His mysteries. The Greek Fathers called this adaptation “Synkatabasis”, meaning that God condescends to reveal the truth to us in terms adapted to this end. It would clearly be absurd to think that the God Who made us, could not instruct us.
“In holy Scripture, therefore, God’s truthfulness and holiness being always safeguarded, there is made known the wonderful “condescension” of the eternal Wisdom “that we may be able to apprehend God’s ineffable generosity whereby, in His providential care for human nature, He has adapted His speech to our needs.” (St. John Chrysostom) God’s words expressed in human language are made like to human discourse, as formerly the eternal Father’s Word, having taken upon Himself the weakness of a human nature, was made like unto men.” (Dei Verbum 13)
What proofs have we of the truth of revelation?
In the earlier discussion on faith we saw that, faced with divine revelation, man must adhere to it by faith. But there is a problem here.
We can easily understand, in the case of an immediate revelation, that the beneficiary of it will find in the manifestation itself, of which he is the object, certainty of its reality. At the same time that it enlightens his mind, the divine communication establishes very great certitude in the recipient. Never have any doubts crossed the minds of those who have received such divine communications.
But, in the case of indirect revelation, that is, when God reveals Himself to men through the intermediary of a prophet (who is one who speaks in the name of another), how will men know for certain that the supposed prophet has truly spoken in God’s name?
It is only too obvious that, if faith is the only reasonable attitude man can adopt before God, caution, reserve and prudence are absolutely necessary in the case of anyone who claims to come in the name of God. But this prudence, reserve and caution are not an insult to God. Quite the contrary. Rather they witness to the natural feeling which we have for God’s infinite wisdom, Who would not send a prophet without giving him some external signs, both certain and adapted to every intelligence, of his divine mission.
And such is, indeed, God’s way of doing things. We read of it in the Bible from the sending of His very first messenger to men (Exodus IV, 1-10). In the Gospels, Jesus invokes these same signs to underline the guilt of those who had not received Him (See John XV, 24; V, 36; X, 25). In the First Vatican Council’s Dogmatic Constitution on Faith, the Church teaches us:
“In order that the obedience of our faith might be in harmony with reason (See Rom. XII, 1) God willed that to the interior help of the Holy Ghost there should be joined exterior proofs of His revelation, to wit, divine facts, and especially miracles and prophecies, which, as they manifestly display the omnipotence and infinite knowledge of God, are most certain proofs of His divine revelation adapted to the intelligence of all men.” (Denz. 1790)
In two canons the Fathers of the Council give us the teaching of the Church on this important point:
“If anyone shall say that divine revelation cannot be made credible by outward signs, and therefore that men ought to be moved to faith solely by the internal experience of each, or by private inspiration; let him be anathema.” (Denz. 1812)
“If anyone shall say that miracles are impossible, and therefore that all the accounts regarding them, even those contained in Holy Scripture, are to be dismissed as fabulous or mythical; or that miracles can never be known with certainty, and that the divine origin of Christianity is not rightly proved by them; let him be anathema.” (Denz. 1813)
What are the signs which God gives to his representatives to make them acceptable among men?
The Church, taking into account the requirements of common sense, tells us that the signs are at once:
external, that is, subject to the senses and thus verifiable;
most certain, leaving no room for doubt;
adapted to the intelligence of all. For, when God sends a prophet to an entire people, all the people must be able to be convinced that the prophet comes from God.
These exterior signs, very certain and adapted to all intelligences, are prophecies, miracles, the history of Israel, the life of Jesus Christ, the expansion and perennial character of the Church.
Prophecy
By prophecy must be understood, the announcement made in advance of a free future event.
It is clear that the announcement of an inevitable future event, that is of an event resulting from the causes which produce it, is necessarily excluded. Such a prophecy would prove the ability of the person who makes it, but would not prove that it was an intervention of God. It is sufficient, in fact, simply to know the causes in order to forecast and so announce, even a long time in advance, a future event which will necessarily take place. It is so, for example, with the announcement of an eclipse of the sun, the passage of a meteor, or a weather forecast.
But, if the future event is not determined by its causes, if it could very well happen by some other means than it does happen, if it depends on an absolutely free decision, then the foreknowledge and announcement of such an event would be absolutely impossible for any creature, and possible only to God, for Whom the future is as much present as the present time is. It is prophecy, understood in this way, which we hold to be an external sign, most certain and within the reach of every intelligence.
Miracles
By miracles are to be understood those “marvelous” acts, (that is, acts which surprise, astonish and compel attention) which, being the work of God, show forth His almighty intervention. Miracles, thus understood, are divided into two categories, according to the degree of certainty which they engender:
First category
Miracles of this category are acts which, of their nature, cannot be the work of any creature. They demand divine omnipotence. Their verification creates an absolute certainty of God’s intervention.
Into this first category come the miracles where something is created which previously did not exist, such as the multiplication of the loaves; the instantaneous changing of one substance into another, without chemical or other intervention, such as the changing of water into wine at Cana; the raising to life of a dead man, when death has really taken place.
Second category
The miracles in this category are those which, by their nature, do not require the omnipotence of God, but which being contrary to the laws of nature entitle us to conclude God has intervened.
The verification of such acts, which are contrary to the laws of nature, also creates a certainty of God’s intervention, but not in such an absolute manner as in the case of miracles of the first category.
The content of revelation is unchangeable
Divine revelation is not the teaching to us of some philosophical discovery, a discovery which would be of necessity imperfect because of human origin, and thus perfectible by human methods.
By divine revelation it is the very mind of God which we know, and this, perfect in itself, cannot change. Such is the authentic teaching of the Catholic Church on this point.
Modernist error, on the other hand, affirms: “The dogmas which the Church teaches as revealed are not truths which come from heaven, but are an interpretation of religious facts, which the human mind has acquired by laborious efforts.” This proposition has been condemned (Denz. 2022); and the contrary is, therefore, true: The dogmas which the Church teaches as revealed are truths which have come from heaven, and are not an interpretation of religious facts which the human mind has acquired by laborious efforts.
Through the First Vatican Council, the Church taught:
“The doctrine of faith which God has revealed has not been proposed, like a philosophical invention, to be perfected by human ingenuity; but has been delivered as a divine deposit to the Spouse of Christ, to be faithfully kept and infallibly declared. Hence, also, that meaning of the sacred dogmas is perpetually to be retained which our holy Mother the Church has once declared; nor is that meaning ever to be departed from, under the pretence or pretext of a deeper comprehension of them.” (Denz. 1800)
Also:
“If anyone shall assert it to be possible that sometimes, according to the progress of science, a sense is to be given to doctrines propounded by the Church different from that which the Church has understood and understands: let him be anathema. (Denz. 1818)
It is to the Church that God has entrusted the deposit of revelation
We repeat again the teaching of the First Vatican Council:
“The doctrine of faith which God has revealed has not been proposed, like a philosophical invention, to be perfected by human ingenuity; but has been delivered as a divine deposit to the Spouse of Christ, to be faithfully kept and infallibly declared.”
In 1950, in his encyclical Humani Generis, the great Pope Pius XII took up again this traditional doctrine and reaffirmed it when he spoke of “the Church, (which) by our Lord Christ’s own appointment, is authorized to guard and to interpret the whole deposit of divine revelation.” (Denz. 2315)
In its dogmatic constitution on the Church, the First Vatican Council presents the Church as the faithful guardian of the word of God, and as the permanent and visible proof of the divinity of revelation:
“And that we may be able to satisfy the obligation of embracing the true faith and of constantly persevering in it, God has instituted the Church through His only-begotten Son, and has bestowed on it manifest marks of that institution, that it may be recognized by all men as the guardian and teacher of the revealed Word; for to the Catholic Church alone belong all those many and admirable tokens which have been divinely established for the evident credibility of the Christian Faith.” (Denz. 1793, 1794)
Theologians have, without doubt an important role to play in the Church. Pius IX indicated their responsibility “to show how and where the teaching given by the Living Voice of the Church is contained in Scripture and in our sacred tradition, be it explicitly or implicitly.” (Pius IX, Inter gravissimas, 1870) But, in order to fulfil this task fruitfully, theologians must themselves give interior assent to the teachings of the Church’s magisterium (see Denz. 1683) and, moreover, they must in their own research, be guided by the same magisterium. This magisterium must be for every theologian, in matters of faith and morals, the proximate and universal rule of truth. For side by side with these hallowed sources (that is, Scripture and Tradition), God has given His Church a Living Voice; thus He would make clear to us, unravel for us, even what was left obscure in the deposit of faith and only present there implicitly.” (See Denz. 2313, 2314)
On this subject, the Second Vatican Council said:
“God in His supreme kindness so disposed that the truths He had revealed for the salvation of all peoples, should persist forever in their entirety, and should be handed on to all future generations. Therefore, Christ Our Lord, in Whom the complete revelation of the most high God is fully accomplished (see 2 Cor. I, 30; III, 16; IV, 6), gave command to His Apostles that the Gospel, first promised by the Prophets, and later fulfilled by Him and promulgated by His own lips, should be preached by them to all men as the source of all saving truth, and of all instruction in morals, thus communicating the divine gifts to their hearers.
“This work was faithfully performed, first by the Apostles, who by their oral preaching, their examples and their institutions handed on what they had received either from Christ’s lips, from their association with Him, and from His work, or from what they had learned from the promptings of the Holy Ghost. Later, the work was carried on by those Apostles and members of the apostolic circle, who under the inspiration of the same Holy Ghost set down the message of redemption in writing.
“In order that the whole living Gospel might be forever preserved in the Church, the Apostles left as their successors, the Bishops “entrusting to them their own position as a teaching body” (St. Irenaeus). Hence sacred tradition and the Holy Scriptures of each of the two Testaments resemble a mirror in which the Church, during her journeyings on earth, contemplates God, from whom she receives all things, until she may be brought to see Him, face to face, as He is (see 1 John III, 2).” (Dei Verbum, 7)
The place of reason in the study of divine revelation
Among revealed truths there are some which are essentially supernatural. God alone knows them in His divine intelligence; for us, with our human intelligence, they are necessarily incomprehensible.
What part will our human intelligence play in our adherence to the revelation of essentially supernatural truths?
It will be threefold:
In receiving the revelation.
It is our human intelligence which receives the announcements by means of which God communicates to us His knowledge of these truths.
In trying to reach some understanding of these truths.
Even though revealed, these truths remain mysteries to us, being completely incomprehensible to our created intelligence, though we can nevertheless, arrive at some understanding of them. First of all, by understanding the meaning of the words and the statements formulating these mysteries; then, thanks to analogies with things known naturally, we are able to reach some measure of understanding of them.
“True and sound philosophy rightfully occupies a distinguished position, since philosophy should diligently seek truth and correctly and thoroughly cultivate and enlighten human reason which, though darkened by the sin of the first man, has by no means been destroyed. Moreover, philosophy’s task is to ascertain the object of rational knowledge and many truths, to understand them well, and to look to their progress. By means of arguments sought from reason’s own principles, philosophy should demonstrate, vindicate, and defend a large number of these truths which faith also proposes for belief; such as, the existence of God, His nature, and His attributes. In this fashion, philosophy must prepare the way for a more correct grasp of these dogmas by faith, and also for some sort of rational understanding of those more hidden dogmas, which can be known originally only by faith.” (Denz. 1670)
“Reason, indeed, enlightened by faith, when it seeks earnestly, piously and calmly, attains by a gift from God some, and that a very fruitful understanding of mysteries; partly from the analogy of those things which it naturally knows, partly from the relations which the mysteries bear to one another and to the last end of man: but reason never becomes capable of apprehending mysteries as it does those truths which constitute its proper object. For the divine mysteries by their own nature so far transcend the created intelligence that, even when delivered by revelation and received by faith, they remain covered with a veil of faith itself, and shrouded in a certain degree of darkness, so long as we are pilgrims in this mortal life, not yet with God: for we walk by faith, and not by sight (II Cor. V, 6 et seq).” (Vat. Council I, Denz. 1796)
In defending the deposit of faith.
This is one of the most important works which Christian thought must do: it must preserve the knowledge given by God Himself concerning His own intimate life, and about His mysterious designs in our regard, and must keep watch to see that nothing happens to corrupt or alter it.
“The great councils of the 4th and 5th centuries, writes Georges Goyau, may be accused of subtlety, for fixing these truths in certain formulas which aim, not at making the doctrine of the Trinity comprehensible, but rather at keeping free of any adulteration what the blessed Trinity had made known about Itself. Mankind, however, owes to these councils all that it can glimpse of God’s intimate life and, in this work, they were assisted by the Holy Ghost, God thus continuing, through their agency, to speak of Himself.” (Catholicisme, p. 11)
“The Old Testament”, said St. Gregory of Nazianzus, “preached clearly the Father, and more obscurely the Son. The New Testament has manifested the Son, and has indicated the divinity of the Holy Ghost. Now, the Holy Ghost dwells in us, and manifests Himself to us more clearly.” (Orat. XXXI, cited by Goyau)
Obligation of enquiring into revelation and of adhering to it by faith
It is evident that faced with the fact of religion, which will sooner or later necessarily confront him, the normal man will try to deal with the problem of revelation in his life.
Catholic doctrine teaches that man has an obligation to enquire into this problem, and to study, with the care given to solving important matters, the many proofs which accompany divine revelation, and to adhere to it by faith.
“To guard against any deception and error in so important a matter, human reason should undoubtedly inquire with all diligence into the fact of divine revelation, to make sure that God has spoken, and to be able to pay Him a reasonable service, as the Apostle so wisely teaches (see Rom. XII, 1).” (Pius IX, Denz. 1637)
“Man being wholly dependent upon God, as upon his Creator and Lord, and created reason being absolutely subject to uncreated truth, we are bound to yield to God, by faith in His Revelation, the full obedience of our intelligence and will.” (Vatican I, Denz. 1789)
“If anyone shall say that human reason is so independent that faith cannot be enjoined upon it by God; let him be anathema. (Vatican I, Denz. 1810)
The study of divine revelation concerns not only those who are in error outside the way of salvation. It is necessary also for the sons of the Church who, so that they may render to God a “reasonable service” (Rom. XII, 1) must study, each according to his ability, all that the Church proposes for their belief, with divine and Catholic faith, as having been divinely revealed. (See Vatican 1, Denz. 1792)
Father Noël BARBARA.
HELP KEEP THE WM REVIEW ONLINE WITH WM+!
As we expand The WM Review we would like to keep providing free articles for everyone.
Our work takes a lot of time and effort to produce. If you have benefitted from it please do consider supporting us financially.
A subscription gets you access to our exclusive WM+ material, and helps ensure that we can keep writing and sharing free material for all.
You can see what readers are saying over at our Testimonials page.
(We make our WM+ material freely available to clergy, priests and seminarians upon request. Please subscribe and reply to the email if this applies to you.)
Subscribe to WM+ now to make sure you always receive our material. Thank you!
Read Next:
Follow on Twitter, YouTube and Telegram:
Do you know *who* we're supposed to be "fortes in fide" against? Leo. Literally the prowling "Leo" in 1 Pt 5:8-9.
Thank you very much!
So the hermeneutics of continuity is the denial of divine revelation. Synodality is the denial of apostolicity, that is, the hierarchy and the magisterium. The latter is of course completely justified, since they have eradicated, almost completely destroyed the hierarchy, so what else could they call themselves than a synodal, or congregational "church"?