The Latin quoted in the title of this post—known as the ‘Vincentian Canon’ and/or 'Vincent's Rule'—was translated into English by Heurtley as: “which [faith] has been believed everywhere, always, and by all” (A Commonitory, NPNF - XI.132). This canon/rule was first expressed in the Commonitorium written by Vincent of Lerins, and was essentially a threefold test for identifying true doctrines from heretical ones.
Vincent discerned that heretical doctrines/teachers tended be geographically localized, rather than dispersed throughout all the Christian regions; as such, ‘everywhere' (ubiquity) was one of the tests. Another test was ‘always', which meant for Vincent that true doctrines originated in antiquity (apostolic times), and do not emerge at a later date—e.g. the Montanists, Arians, Donatists, Apollinarians, Nestorians. And finally, concerning the ‘by all' test, Vincent primarily had the bishops convened at the Ecumenical Councils in mind (though not exclusively so).
Unfortunately, Vincent’s canon/rule has historically been misused and misunderstood. An excellent antidote to such abuses is Thomas G. Guarino’s above pictured book, Vincent of Lérins and the Development of Doctrine (2013 – Google preview). One of the most important points made by Guarino is that Vincent has a ‘second rule’, and that one must correctly identify this ‘second rule’ in order to properly interpret Vincent’s ‘first rule’; note the following:
A second essential element in interpreting the Vincentian canon is that his first rule must always be taken in conjunction with the Lérinian’s “second rule”: over time growth undoubtedly occurs in Christian doctrine. (Page 6)
I shall turn to the pen of Vincent himself to expound on what he meant concerning the development/growth of Christian doctrine. From his A Commonitory we read:
But some one will say perhaps, Shall there, then, be no progress in Christ's Church? Certainly; all possible progress. For what being is there, so envious of men, so full of hatred to God, who would seek to forbid it? Yet on condition that it be real progress, not alteration of the faith. For progress requires that the subject be enlarged in itself, alteration, that it be transformed into something else. The intelligence, then, the knowledge, the wisdom, as well of individuals as of all, as well of one man as of the whole Church, ought, in the course of ages and centuries, to increase and make much and vigorous progress; but yet only in its own kind ; that is to say, in the same doctrine, in the same sense, and in the same meaning. (NPNF - XI.147, 148)
And:
From doctrine which was sown as wheat, we should reap, in the increase, doctrine of the same kind — wheat also; so that when in process of time any of the original seed is developed, and now flourishes under cultivation, no change may ensue in the character of the plant. There may supervene shape, form, variation in outward appearance, but the nature of each kind must remain the same. God forbid that those rose-beds of Catholic interpretation should be converted into thorns and thistles. God forbid that in that spiritual paradise from plants 'of cinnamon and balsam darnel and wolfsbane should of a sudden shoot forth.
Therefore, whatever has been sown by the fidelity of the Fathers in this husbandry of God's Church, the same ought to be cultivated and taken care of by the industry of their children, the same ought to flourish and ripen, the same ought to advance and go forward to perfection. For it is right that those ancient doctrines of heavenly philosophy should, as time goes on, be cared for, smoothed, polished; but not that they should be changed, not that they should be maimed, not that they should be mutilated. They may receive proof, illustration, definiteness; but they must retain withal their completeness, their integrity, their characteristic properties. (NPNF - XI.147, 148)
Another important part of Guarino’s book is his analysis of Newman’s theory of development as it relates to Vincent’s. More on this at a later date, the Lord willing…
Grace and peace,
David
3 comments:
A recent article in the Jesuit periodical, America, highlights the German "Synodal Path", and a letter from 74 bishops around the world warning against it for reasons that anyone who would maintain the Catholic principles of St. Vincent Lerins would readily agree. Here is what Bishop Georg Batzing, president of the Conference of German bishops says according to the article:
The German bishops are keenly aware of the concerns of other conferences about the direction their Synodal Path is taking. Limburg Bishop Georg Bätzing, president of the German bishops’ conference, has admitted that there were highly divergent opinions on issues such as blessing ceremonies for same-sex couples or the ordination of women as deacons or priests.
A faithful Catholic wonders why Rome seems eager to suppress the desires of laypeople and priests who want to hold firm to traditional Catholic liturgy and doctrine while allowing this kind of conversation to be held publicly by the prelates of Germany. Traditionalist Catholics are constantly criticized for their "rigidity" by Pope Francis. One wonders what the Holy Father would think of St. Vincent? One further wonders what he thinks of the German Synod itself?
We have a clue about what, regarding the German Synod, Pope Francis might find to be critical about. A private correspondence among the Polish bishops about the alarming state of affairs in Germany was made public in July of 2019. In the same year, the pope responded to the Polish criticism as indicated by this article in the Jesuit journal:
In March, after a critical letter by the Polish bishops became public, Matteo Bruni, Vatican spokesman, told KNA Pope Francis had not changed his position since a June 2019 letter to Catholics in Germany.
In his 2019 letter, Pope Francis emphasized that taking a synodal path is a process that must be guided by the Holy Spirit with patience and not a “search for immediate results that generate quick and immediate consequences.” Transformation “calls for pastoral conversion,” he said.
It would seem that according to this letter, the writer, Pope Francis, continues to approve of the ideological direction of the German Synod. The only disapproval he offers would not be about blessing homosexual unions, or the possible ordination of women to the priesthood. No, these would apparently be appropriate through deeper insight into Sacred Tradition and legitimate development of the dogmatic and moral laws of the Church. It is not "the results" or "the consequences" for which the Germans strive that trouble Pope Francis. Rather, it is that the Germans seem overly eager, to want to achieve them too quickly. Only with time and patience does Francis see the same favorable "transformation" the Germans are impatient to see.
---to be continued
---continued from above
I would be happy to think that mine is a misread. What do you think David? Does the Pope in Rome or the majority of bishops of the German Synod take care to observe the principles of legitimate doctrinal development sccording to St. Vincent of Lerins? It seems to me that they have an agenda, without much regard for anything that Rome has said about these things for the first 2,000 years of the Church. The parties concerned seem to only have ears for what Rome says or silently allows to be questioned today. They disregard the Catechism of Pope John Paul II regarding homosexual acts. They also disregard his exhortation, Ordinatio Sacerdotalis declaring the certainty that women cannot ever be ordained:
Wherefore, in order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance, a matter which pertains to the Church's divine constitution itself, in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32) I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church's faithful.
Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, May 22, 1994, Paragraph 4
Can we really doubt what the Apostles, the Fathers of the Church, the Doctors of the Church, and every pope until 2013 might say about the matters that are for no good reason, the subject of "highly divergent opinions" by the German Synodal path of bishops?
St. Vincent of Lerins, ora pro nobis.
Here is a link to the article in the Jesuit journal:
https://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2022/04/12/bishops-concern-german-synodal-path-242810
Hi Rory,
Happy Easter, He is Risen!
Thanks much for taking the time to comment. This thread is certainly germane to the ongoing event known as Der Synodaler Weg—a series of conferences concerning the Catholic Church in Germany that began 12-01-2019, and is scheduled to terminate in 2023.
In the conference held in early 02/2022, some of the controversial issues that the majority of the participants endorsed included the ordination of female deacons and priests, public blessings of homosexual partnerships, married priests, and a radical reform of the Catechism of the Catholic Church teachings on sexual ethics.
In your post, you asked:
==Does the Pope in Rome or the majority of bishops of the German Synod take care to observe the principles of legitimate doctrinal development sccording to St. Vincent of Lerins?==
My answer: an unequivocal NO!
You then wrote:
==It seems to me that they have an agenda, without much regard for anything that Rome has said about these things for the first 2,000 years of the Church. The parties concerned seem to only have ears for what Rome says or silently allows to be questioned today. They disregard the Catechism of Pope John Paul II regarding homosexual acts. They also disregard his exhortation, Ordinatio Sacerdotalis declaring the certainty that women cannot ever be ordained…==
Concerning homosexuality, one could add another 1,500 plus years, for the Mosaic Law clearly condemned “homosexual acts”, a fact that nearly 2,000 years of Christian tradition recognized as Divinely revealed truth, and fully embraced.
As for the ordination of woman, it is literally shocking to me that a mere 25 years later Francis would call into question the absolute/clear teaching of JPII in his Apostolic letter of May 22, 1994—a teaching that was clearly taught from apostolic times up to the 21st century with NO divergence within Catholic Tradition.
You ended your post with:
==Can we really doubt what the Apostles, the Fathers of the Church, the Doctors of the Church, and every pope until 2013 might say about the matters that are for no good reason, the subject of "highly divergent opinions" by the German Synodal path of bishops?==
To do so, one might as well question pretty much EVERY doctrine that has been promulgated by the Catholic Magisterium. IMO, no reason/s would remain to prevent one from questioning the doctrine of the Trinity, Deity of Jesus, two natures of Jesus, bodily resurrection of Jesus, Mary as Theotokos, et al.
Grace and peace,
David
Post a Comment