La evolución homogénea del dogma católico

17. EVOLUTION IN GENERAL.—The name evolution, just like the synonymous names development, unfolding, and progress, taken in general, signifies nothing other than growth or increase of any being whatsoever. Hence the problem that today we discuss under the modern names of progress or development or evolution of dogma or of faith, the ancient Scholastics discussed under the title of growth or increase of faith: Whether the articles of faith have "grown" according to the succession of times; "Whether through the succession of times faith has 'advanced'"¹

18. HOMOGENEOUS EVOLUTION AND TRANSFORMIST EVOLUTION IN MATERIAL BEINGS.—In every material being there are two things: its matter and its specific nature.

Therefore, the growth or evolution of material being can occur in two ways: 1st, growth in matter, without changing its specific nature; 2nd, growth in matter, while at the same time changing its specific nature.

The first growth is called homogeneous evolution; the second, transformational evolution. The reason it is called transformational is because the change of nature entails a change of substantial form and not merely of matter.

Clear examples of homogeneous material evolution are found in the small shrub, which grows and becomes a leafy tree, or in the child, who develops and becomes an adult. There is an increase or evolution of matter, while the same specific nature remains.

No less clear examples of transformist evolution we have in the ape that, according to Darwin's theory, became man; in the clay that God transformed into the body of our first father Adam; in the tree onto which the gardener grafts a branch of a different species; in the living being that dies. In all these examples, the change is not limited to matter, but also extends to the specific nature or substantial form.

Preserving, then, or not preserving the same specific nature is the distinguishing feature between homogeneous evolution and transformist evolution in material beings.

19. APPLICATION TO DOCTRINES.—Just as in material beings there are two elements, namely: matter and specific nature, so also in every doctrine there are two things: first, the words or formulas; second, their sense or signification. What matter is in material beings, words or formulas are in doctrines. What specific nature or substantial form is in material beings, sense is in doctrines. Hence the common saying that in doctrines the words are the material element and the sense is the formal element.

Therefore, growth or evolution in doctrines can also be of two kinds: 1st, growth or evolution of formulas, but with the same meaning remaining; 2nd, with the same meaning not remaining.

In the first case, evolution is homogeneous. In the second, evolution is transformist.

Therefore, preserving or not preserving the same meaning is the distinction between homogeneous evolution and transformist evolution in doctrines.

Hence comes the traditional formula of the homogeneous evolution of Catholic dogma given by the Lérins author and consecrated by the Vatican Council: "Let it grow, therefore... but "in the same sense". Development, yes, but in the same sense.

20. WHEN THE SAME MEANING REMAINS.—The meaning of a doctrine through the various formulas remains the same when the meaning of the later formulas does not come from outside, but was already implicitly contained in the earlier formulas. The meaning does not remain the same in the contrary case, that is, when the meaning of the later formulas was not implicitly contained in the earlier formulas, but is a contrary or, at least, diverse meaning from that which the earlier formulas contained.

To clearly understand when the sense of one formula is or is not implicitly contained in the sense of another, it is appropriate to distinguish well, with St. Thomas and St. Bonaventure, three kinds of senses or concepts: a) explicative concepts; b) diverse concepts; c) contrary concepts.

They are called explicative concepts those that emerge entirely from one another provided our intellect fully penetrates all their content.

They are called diverse concepts those that do not and cannot derive one from another, however much they interpenetrate, although they also do not oppose or destroy one another.

Concepts are called contrary when they not only do not arise from one another, but rather mutually destroy each other, being incompatible with one another.

Examples of explicative concepts, which the ancients also called by the Latin name of conformable (consonant) concepts, we have in the concepts of absolute immutability and eternity or of spirituality and immortality. By merely penetrating well the concept of absolute immutability, the concept of eternity emerges. By merely penetrating well the concept of spirituality, that of immortality emerges. They are but partial aspects of a total concept².

Examples of diverse concepts we have in the concepts of science and virtue, or quantity and quality, or color and taste. However much one penetrates the concept of science, the concept of virtue will never emerge from it; nor from the concept

Neither from quantity will that of quality come; nor from the concept of color will that of taste come. However, although those concepts do not derive from one another, and therefore are not explanatory, neither do they oppose one another, and therefore they are not yet contrary, but simply diverse.

Examples of contrary concepts we have in the concepts of spiritual and material, or of necessary and contingent, or of black and white. These concepts not only do not arise one from another, just as differing concepts do not arise, but they exclude one another in the same subject or in the same doctrinal formula.

All this, which because of its importance or our lack of conciseness has taken us quite a few paragraphs to explain, had been condensed by Saint Thomas and Saint Bonaventure into very few words. The question we discuss today about whether new dogmas are possible, the Scholastics discussed under the heading of whether one can add (to add) something to the revealed deposit. Here is the objection and the response: “On the contrary: it is said in Revelation, last chapter, 18: if anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues. I reply: to add is twofold: either something that is contrary or diverse, and this is erroneous; or that which is contained implicitly, by expounding, and this is praiseworthy³. There is an addition in which what is added is contrary; and there is one in which what is added is diverse; and there is one in which it is consonant. The first addition is of error; the second, of presumption; the third, of faithful instruction, because it explains what was implicit”⁴.

21. EXPLANATORY EVOLUTION AND SUBSTANTIAL EVOLUTION.—Whenever, then, the concepts of successive formulas are neither contrary nor even diverse, but mutually implicit (consonant), the evolution is in the same sense and, therefore, homogeneous. In the contrary case, the evolution is transformational.

When doctrinal evolution is homogeneous because the formulas are implicitly contained within one another, the ancient theologians called it explicative evolution (quoad explicationem); when it is heterogeneous or transformist because they are not implicitly contained, they called it substantial evolution (quoad substantiam).

Therefore, what distinguishes homogeneous or explanatory evolution from transformist or substantial evolution, when it comes to doctrines, is the implicit containment or lack thereof of the meaning of later formulas within that of the earlier formulas or starting point.