[Fresh from consideration in the “How Is This Papal Bull Infallible” thread:]
The FIRST Vatican Council lists as one of its infallible canons the following:
- If anyone says that it is possible that at some time, given the advancement of knowledge, a sense may be assigned to the dogmas propounded by the Church which is different from that which the Church has understood and understands: let him be anathema
I would propose that this clear canon “anathematizes” anyone who would even claim it is possible that Church teaching does not or has not maintained its continuity.
Exhibit A: Is the Second Vatican Council’s teaching on “no salvation outside the Church” continuous with all that came before it?
I would submit that a Catholic must, with the assent of faith, declare that YES, it has to be continuous with all that came before, since Vatican ONE infallibly teaches that no one can say otherwise…
Thoughts or comments? Applications to other examples?