11-09-2026, 08:18 AM
Chapter I. General Notions.
Accretive or Objective, and Non-Accretive or Subjective Development. Revealed Truths of the Substance of Faith, and Accessory to Its Substance. Explicit and Implicit Faith.
Theologians distinguish two kinds of doctrinal development¹: the first, development simply so called (simpliciter dictum); the other, development in a qualified or relative sense (secundum quid). The first would have place, should a revelation be made of some truth that had not been before revealed, and consequently could not be believed except by means of this new revelation. The second would be, if some truth that had been before revealed, were, without any fresh revelation, more fully and distinctly explained and more clearly understood, so that what, from its having been previously revealed, was already of Divine faith quoad se, that is, regarded objectively in itself, should now come to be explicitly of faith quoad nos, that is to say, subjectively for us.² The first kind of development we may call accretive, or objective; the second, non-accretive, or subjective.
In the matter of Divine revelation we must, moreover, distinguish between those revealed truths which are said to belong to the substance of faith, and such as are termed accessory to, or connected with, its substance.
To the substance of faith belong first of all the two articles called general, regarding the existence of God, and His providential care for man's salvation. In these two, as being the primary truths of faith, are, according to the teaching of S. Thomas,³ implicitly contained all the other articles. For they are so contained, either by reason of the very nature of God, or by a positive act of His good pleasure. Thus all the articles on the Perfections of God, His Unity of Essence and Trinity of Persons are, by reason of the Divine Nature, contained in the truth of God's Existence and Being; and all the other revealed truths are, by a positive act of His good pleasure, contained in the article, that He has a providential care for man's salvation. Hence, whoever expressly believes as a truth of revelation in the existence of God, is held to believe implicitly that He is One in Essence and Three in Persons. In like manner he who expressly believes that God has a providential care for men, is held to believe implicitly in all those particular means, whereby He has of His own good pleasure decreed to lead man to salvation.
The mysteries of the Trinity, and Redemption through the Incarnate Word, are the two revealed articles called particular. These also belong to the substance of faith, though not in so strict a sense as the two general articles.
The other truths contained in the deposit of revelation are considered as accessory to the substance of faith and connected with it.
With regard to the two general articles, viz., the existence of God, and His providential care for man's salvation, which belong to the substance of faith, the common teaching of theologians is, that faith in these truths was at all times from the beginning of the world precisely the same as it is now in the Christian Dispensation, and that an explicit belief of these two truths was always obligatory as a necessary means of salvation. For, since all men, from the beginning of the world, were destined for the same beatitude as ourselves, they all had necessarily to tend towards that beatitude by means of hope; but this they could not do, unless, in a true sense, they had, at least substantially, the self-same faith with us in God, and a like hope in Him, through belief in His promise of salvation.⁴
As to the two particular articles, also belonging to the substance of faith, theology teaches that belief in Divine Redemption was, in some sense, always the same. For the revelation of this mystery was contained in the promise made by God to our first parents, was handed down by tradition even amongst the Gentiles, and was from time to time renewed with more full explanation in the written Law and the Prophets. But as this truth was not so clearly revealed before the coming of Christ, we may hold that, whilst it was believed explicitly by the patriarchs and chief teachers of the Jews, it was, for the most part, but imperfectly apprehended and only implicitly believed by the mass of the Jewish people. The same may be said generally of the mystery of the Trinity.⁵
Of revealed truths accessory to the substance of faith, there was during the Old Testament Dispensation, from time to time an objective or accretive development; that is to say, certain truths were successively revealed, which either had no way been revealed before, or, at any rate, could not be explicitly believed by all without a new revelation.
The distinction between explicit and implicit faith is thus explained according to the teaching of Suarez: Anything is believed explicitly, when it is itself the object on which the assent of faith immediately and directly falls. What is implicitly believed is not itself the immediate object of the assent of faith, but is believed only indirectly and mediately, as being contained in something else which is the immediate and direct object of the assent of faith. What is thus implicitly believed is not itself actually known at all; since the intellect does not form any special concept of a proposition said to be implicitly believed, but of that other one alone in which it is contained.
Any difference there may be in explicit faith is only one of degree. Thus it may be more or less explicit, according as the concept of a mystery is more or less clearly and perfectly formed; or, again, so far as the points known about the truth believed are many or few. But rightly considered, the difference consists in the greater or less number of actual assents, whereby the several truths belonging to one and the same mystery and article of faith are explicitly and directly believed. Or should the more or less clearness of conception be with regard to but one single integral truth, the difference then lies rather in the apprehension of the truth than in the actual assent of faith. And this clearer apprehension may be due to human industry, viz., be the result of knowledge acquired by more scientific study, wider learning, and a better understanding.
The other mode of believing, that is to say, by implicit faith, is based on various principles. First, by reason of an explicit belief of one revealed truth others are said to be believed implicitly on account of the formal object of faith, namely, the veracity of God who reveals; whereby all the truths of revelation are so connected together that it is impossible for any one to believe one article because God has revealed it, without being at once prepared to believe all other articles of His revelation when they are sufficiently proposed. And this is to believe implicitly. Whereas to deny one article of faith is implicitly to deny all, because we cannot give the adhesion of faith to the rest should we withhold it from one. Just as whoever detests one sin for God's sake, must virtually and implicitly detest all.
Secondly, a man may believe with implicit faith from his relation to others who believe explicitly. It is in this way the simple faithful are said to believe all things that the Church believes, or the Apostles taught, though they do not know actually what all these things are.
Thirdly, there may be this implicit faith by reason of some truth that is believed explicitly, and that in many ways. For example, because one proposition is contained in some other, as a conclusion in a principle from which it may be evidently drawn. Thus, he who believes that Christ is man, believes implicitly that He is visible. Or, because one proposition is connected with another in reality, or by actual identity, even though such connection cannot be known without faith. Thus he who believes that God is infinite, believes implicitly that He is Three in Persons. Or again, the particular is known in the universal, as is self-evident. And lastly, the circumstances of a revealed mystery are said to be known implicitly in its substance. Thus he who believes that Christ is the Redeemer of the world, believes implicitly that He died for the salvation of men. And such like.⁶
Footnotes
1. "From defect of our language the word development is used both for the process of development and for the result." — Newman's Development, p. 41.
2. Mazzella, De Virtutibus Infusis, p. 284.
3. S. Thomas, 2. 2. q. 1. a. 7.
4. Heb. xi. 1, 6, 13; 2 Cor. iv. 13.
5. Suarez, Disp. ii. Sect. vi. 7, 11; De Lugo, Disp. xii. n. 87.
6. Suarez, Disp. ii. sect. vi. n. 2.
Accretive or Objective, and Non-Accretive or Subjective Development. Revealed Truths of the Substance of Faith, and Accessory to Its Substance. Explicit and Implicit Faith.
Theologians distinguish two kinds of doctrinal development¹: the first, development simply so called (simpliciter dictum); the other, development in a qualified or relative sense (secundum quid). The first would have place, should a revelation be made of some truth that had not been before revealed, and consequently could not be believed except by means of this new revelation. The second would be, if some truth that had been before revealed, were, without any fresh revelation, more fully and distinctly explained and more clearly understood, so that what, from its having been previously revealed, was already of Divine faith quoad se, that is, regarded objectively in itself, should now come to be explicitly of faith quoad nos, that is to say, subjectively for us.² The first kind of development we may call accretive, or objective; the second, non-accretive, or subjective.
In the matter of Divine revelation we must, moreover, distinguish between those revealed truths which are said to belong to the substance of faith, and such as are termed accessory to, or connected with, its substance.
To the substance of faith belong first of all the two articles called general, regarding the existence of God, and His providential care for man's salvation. In these two, as being the primary truths of faith, are, according to the teaching of S. Thomas,³ implicitly contained all the other articles. For they are so contained, either by reason of the very nature of God, or by a positive act of His good pleasure. Thus all the articles on the Perfections of God, His Unity of Essence and Trinity of Persons are, by reason of the Divine Nature, contained in the truth of God's Existence and Being; and all the other revealed truths are, by a positive act of His good pleasure, contained in the article, that He has a providential care for man's salvation. Hence, whoever expressly believes as a truth of revelation in the existence of God, is held to believe implicitly that He is One in Essence and Three in Persons. In like manner he who expressly believes that God has a providential care for men, is held to believe implicitly in all those particular means, whereby He has of His own good pleasure decreed to lead man to salvation.
The mysteries of the Trinity, and Redemption through the Incarnate Word, are the two revealed articles called particular. These also belong to the substance of faith, though not in so strict a sense as the two general articles.
The other truths contained in the deposit of revelation are considered as accessory to the substance of faith and connected with it.
With regard to the two general articles, viz., the existence of God, and His providential care for man's salvation, which belong to the substance of faith, the common teaching of theologians is, that faith in these truths was at all times from the beginning of the world precisely the same as it is now in the Christian Dispensation, and that an explicit belief of these two truths was always obligatory as a necessary means of salvation. For, since all men, from the beginning of the world, were destined for the same beatitude as ourselves, they all had necessarily to tend towards that beatitude by means of hope; but this they could not do, unless, in a true sense, they had, at least substantially, the self-same faith with us in God, and a like hope in Him, through belief in His promise of salvation.⁴
As to the two particular articles, also belonging to the substance of faith, theology teaches that belief in Divine Redemption was, in some sense, always the same. For the revelation of this mystery was contained in the promise made by God to our first parents, was handed down by tradition even amongst the Gentiles, and was from time to time renewed with more full explanation in the written Law and the Prophets. But as this truth was not so clearly revealed before the coming of Christ, we may hold that, whilst it was believed explicitly by the patriarchs and chief teachers of the Jews, it was, for the most part, but imperfectly apprehended and only implicitly believed by the mass of the Jewish people. The same may be said generally of the mystery of the Trinity.⁵
Of revealed truths accessory to the substance of faith, there was during the Old Testament Dispensation, from time to time an objective or accretive development; that is to say, certain truths were successively revealed, which either had no way been revealed before, or, at any rate, could not be explicitly believed by all without a new revelation.
The distinction between explicit and implicit faith is thus explained according to the teaching of Suarez: Anything is believed explicitly, when it is itself the object on which the assent of faith immediately and directly falls. What is implicitly believed is not itself the immediate object of the assent of faith, but is believed only indirectly and mediately, as being contained in something else which is the immediate and direct object of the assent of faith. What is thus implicitly believed is not itself actually known at all; since the intellect does not form any special concept of a proposition said to be implicitly believed, but of that other one alone in which it is contained.
Any difference there may be in explicit faith is only one of degree. Thus it may be more or less explicit, according as the concept of a mystery is more or less clearly and perfectly formed; or, again, so far as the points known about the truth believed are many or few. But rightly considered, the difference consists in the greater or less number of actual assents, whereby the several truths belonging to one and the same mystery and article of faith are explicitly and directly believed. Or should the more or less clearness of conception be with regard to but one single integral truth, the difference then lies rather in the apprehension of the truth than in the actual assent of faith. And this clearer apprehension may be due to human industry, viz., be the result of knowledge acquired by more scientific study, wider learning, and a better understanding.
The other mode of believing, that is to say, by implicit faith, is based on various principles. First, by reason of an explicit belief of one revealed truth others are said to be believed implicitly on account of the formal object of faith, namely, the veracity of God who reveals; whereby all the truths of revelation are so connected together that it is impossible for any one to believe one article because God has revealed it, without being at once prepared to believe all other articles of His revelation when they are sufficiently proposed. And this is to believe implicitly. Whereas to deny one article of faith is implicitly to deny all, because we cannot give the adhesion of faith to the rest should we withhold it from one. Just as whoever detests one sin for God's sake, must virtually and implicitly detest all.
Secondly, a man may believe with implicit faith from his relation to others who believe explicitly. It is in this way the simple faithful are said to believe all things that the Church believes, or the Apostles taught, though they do not know actually what all these things are.
Thirdly, there may be this implicit faith by reason of some truth that is believed explicitly, and that in many ways. For example, because one proposition is contained in some other, as a conclusion in a principle from which it may be evidently drawn. Thus, he who believes that Christ is man, believes implicitly that He is visible. Or, because one proposition is connected with another in reality, or by actual identity, even though such connection cannot be known without faith. Thus he who believes that God is infinite, believes implicitly that He is Three in Persons. Or again, the particular is known in the universal, as is self-evident. And lastly, the circumstances of a revealed mystery are said to be known implicitly in its substance. Thus he who believes that Christ is the Redeemer of the world, believes implicitly that He died for the salvation of men. And such like.⁶
Footnotes
1. "From defect of our language the word development is used both for the process of development and for the result." — Newman's Development, p. 41.
2. Mazzella, De Virtutibus Infusis, p. 284.
3. S. Thomas, 2. 2. q. 1. a. 7.
4. Heb. xi. 1, 6, 13; 2 Cor. iv. 13.
5. Suarez, Disp. ii. Sect. vi. 7, 11; De Lugo, Disp. xii. n. 87.
6. Suarez, Disp. ii. sect. vi. n. 2.
"So let us be confident, let us not be unprepared, let us not be outflanked, let us be wise, vigilant, fighting against those who are trying to tear the faith out of our souls and morality out of our hearts, so that we may remain Catholics, remain united to the Blessed Virgin Mary, remain united to the Roman Catholic Church, remain faithful children of the Church."- Abp. Lefebvre