Apophatic theology, known as the Via Negativa in Latin, and apophatic language involves the use of negations to express divine things, for example, God is unchanging, God cannot be circumscribed, there is no place where God is not, there is nothing that God does not know, and there is no limit to His potential abilities, which are ways of saying God is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow, God is omnipresent, God is omniscient and God is omnipotent, but for some divine characteristics, we have to use negation - for example, I said God cannot be circumscribed; I could also say God is inscrutable, and in these cases, and even more subtle cases, we actually have to resort to the Via Negativa The Eastern Orthodox greatly prefer the Via Negativa or Apophatic Theology as they call it, liturgically, in sermons, in theological writing, and indeed, in any situation where it is applicable (for example, to ecclesiology) and believe that even where positive affirmations are possible, they tend to be limiting, in that they do not as fully express the extent of the explicitly or implicitly defined characteristics of God.
But this is a preference, to avoid heresy and theological divergence, and one which I think works, given that nothing like the Protestant Reformation ever happened in the Orthodox church, because there never occurred the kind of doctrinal shifts we see in the Roman Catholic Church. This is likely the result of both the widespread use of Apophatic language and theology in Eastern Orthodox Christianity, idea of the development of doctrine embraced by the Roman Catholic Church, for the first time visibly, in the Ninth Century, with the insertion of the Filioque into the creed, in the ninth century, one of a series of events that started a deterioration of relations with the Eastern Orthodox Church, which as stated, rejects the idea of the development of doctrine, but rather regards the Apostolic faith as received by the Church as immutable.
Among Protestant churches, some embrace the idea of doctrinal development, such as the majority of the mainline Protestant churches in the North America (denominations like the Episcopal Church, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, the United Church of Canada, and the United Methodist Church, as well as most of the Calvinist churches, like the Presbyterian Church in America, the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, the United Church of Christ, and most churches descending from the Dutch Reformed Church, owing to the principle of Semper Reformanda (always reforming), whereas some Calvinist churches reject it, such as the Reformed Presbyterian Church in North America, one of the “Covenanting Presbyterian” churches that started when the Covenanters broke away from the established Church of Scotland over issues largely related to development of the doctrine in the Church of Scotland. In addition, many traditional and conservative Protestant churches such as the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod, the traditional Quakers who practice waiting worship, the Old Order Mennonites, and the Continuing Anglican Churches, also either officially reject or unofficially eschew doctrinal development.
This seems to be a good argument against doctrinal development, and in favor of apophatic theology, because the combination of these has spared the Eastern Orthodox Church from any schisms since the break with Rome in 1054, related to any aspect of their faith, with the exception of controversial changes to the liturgy in the Russian Orthodox Church in the 17th century, and controversial changes to the liturgical calendar, in all of the canonical Orthodox churches except for those of Russia (and Ukraine, Belarus, etc.), Serbia, and Jerusalem. This is in contrast to the Roman Catholic Church, where liturgical developments such as refusing communion to the laity in both kinds combined with doctrinal developments, most notably, the idea that the liturgy could only be celebrated in the three Sacred Languages of Latin, Greek and Hebrew or Aramaic, and also in Galgolithic, but only by the church in what is now Croatia, purgatory and the sale of indulgences, came together to cause the Protestant reformation, in stages, first with John Wycliffe, the Lollards and the Waldensians, and later, Jan Hus and the Moravian Church, and then, most successfully, Martin Luther, followed by John Calvin and Thomas Cranmer. Then, another schism occurred in the Roman Catholic Church in the mid 19th century, when the Archbishop of Utrecht and a small number of other Catholics broke away from the Roman Church due to the development of the doctrine of Papal Infallibility. Most of these Old Catholics however retained the idea of doctrinal development, and the Union of Utrecht expelled from its membership the Polish National Catholic Church and the Norwegian Catholic Church in 2003, because the latter churches rejected doctrinal development and disagreed with the other churches of the Union of Utrecht, by refusing to adopt gay marriages. Then, in the Roman Catholic Church, doctrinal development at Vatican II combined with increasingly radical changes to the liturgy, starting with those under Pope Pius XII, and reaching their fullest extent with the Novus Ordo Missale in 1969, caused a large schism where traditional Catholics broke away into many smaller groups, such as the Society of St. Pius X, which in turn experienced a schism resulting in the much smaller Society of St. Pius V.
The Eastern Orthodox Church has avoided these schisms by and large through a combination of the idea that the Deposit of Faith delivered once from the Apostles cannot be changed, and furthermore, a general aversion to change in liturgical practices and other actions that could cause disruption, and the use of Apophatic Theology to provide a more unified and in-depth understanding of the mysteries of God, such as the unknowable essence of God the Father, the Holy Trinity, the Incarnation of God the Son, our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, and the actions of the Holy Spirit, through the use of Apophatic Theology and Apophatic Language wherever possible, since it is much easier to say, based on scriptural revelation and the traditional Patristic interpretations, to say what God is not, and to say what God is using affirmations rather than negations is difficult, in some cases impossible, and can lead directly to schisms over doctrine.
Indeed, there was a schism in the 1890s in the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod, which largely embraces the idea of doctrinal immutability, but not the Apophatic Method, over an obscure issue which, if defined apophatically, probably would not have caused a controversy. As it was, several congregations left the Synod and formed another denomination, the Protest-Ant Lutheran Church, which still survives today, albeit with just a handful of parishes.
The function of this Supplementary Catechism is to inform, and not to opine: there are some merits in the concept of doctrinal development, and it does appear to have occurred to a limited extent in the early Church, especially in the Ecumenical Councils, mainly to formalize in writing doctrines previously agreed to orally by a majority of bishops. However, since that time, it does appear that a combination of the concepts of Apophatic Language, Thought and Theology, and Immutable Doctrine from the unchanging Apostolic deposit of faith, does dramatically reduce the risk of schisms. As a secondary observation, avoiding radical liturgical changes in established parishes reduces the risk of schism, as these changes can be so annoying as to interfere with the ability of the laity to worship, as observed by CS Lewis, which can cause a schism.
But this is a preference, to avoid heresy and theological divergence, and one which I think works, given that nothing like the Protestant Reformation ever happened in the Orthodox church, because there never occurred the kind of doctrinal shifts we see in the Roman Catholic Church. This is likely the result of both the widespread use of Apophatic language and theology in Eastern Orthodox Christianity, idea of the development of doctrine embraced by the Roman Catholic Church, for the first time visibly, in the Ninth Century, with the insertion of the Filioque into the creed, in the ninth century, one of a series of events that started a deterioration of relations with the Eastern Orthodox Church, which as stated, rejects the idea of the development of doctrine, but rather regards the Apostolic faith as received by the Church as immutable.
Among Protestant churches, some embrace the idea of doctrinal development, such as the majority of the mainline Protestant churches in the North America (denominations like the Episcopal Church, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, the United Church of Canada, and the United Methodist Church, as well as most of the Calvinist churches, like the Presbyterian Church in America, the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, the United Church of Christ, and most churches descending from the Dutch Reformed Church, owing to the principle of Semper Reformanda (always reforming), whereas some Calvinist churches reject it, such as the Reformed Presbyterian Church in North America, one of the “Covenanting Presbyterian” churches that started when the Covenanters broke away from the established Church of Scotland over issues largely related to development of the doctrine in the Church of Scotland. In addition, many traditional and conservative Protestant churches such as the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod, the traditional Quakers who practice waiting worship, the Old Order Mennonites, and the Continuing Anglican Churches, also either officially reject or unofficially eschew doctrinal development.
This seems to be a good argument against doctrinal development, and in favor of apophatic theology, because the combination of these has spared the Eastern Orthodox Church from any schisms since the break with Rome in 1054, related to any aspect of their faith, with the exception of controversial changes to the liturgy in the Russian Orthodox Church in the 17th century, and controversial changes to the liturgical calendar, in all of the canonical Orthodox churches except for those of Russia (and Ukraine, Belarus, etc.), Serbia, and Jerusalem. This is in contrast to the Roman Catholic Church, where liturgical developments such as refusing communion to the laity in both kinds combined with doctrinal developments, most notably, the idea that the liturgy could only be celebrated in the three Sacred Languages of Latin, Greek and Hebrew or Aramaic, and also in Galgolithic, but only by the church in what is now Croatia, purgatory and the sale of indulgences, came together to cause the Protestant reformation, in stages, first with John Wycliffe, the Lollards and the Waldensians, and later, Jan Hus and the Moravian Church, and then, most successfully, Martin Luther, followed by John Calvin and Thomas Cranmer. Then, another schism occurred in the Roman Catholic Church in the mid 19th century, when the Archbishop of Utrecht and a small number of other Catholics broke away from the Roman Church due to the development of the doctrine of Papal Infallibility. Most of these Old Catholics however retained the idea of doctrinal development, and the Union of Utrecht expelled from its membership the Polish National Catholic Church and the Norwegian Catholic Church in 2003, because the latter churches rejected doctrinal development and disagreed with the other churches of the Union of Utrecht, by refusing to adopt gay marriages. Then, in the Roman Catholic Church, doctrinal development at Vatican II combined with increasingly radical changes to the liturgy, starting with those under Pope Pius XII, and reaching their fullest extent with the Novus Ordo Missale in 1969, caused a large schism where traditional Catholics broke away into many smaller groups, such as the Society of St. Pius X, which in turn experienced a schism resulting in the much smaller Society of St. Pius V.
The Eastern Orthodox Church has avoided these schisms by and large through a combination of the idea that the Deposit of Faith delivered once from the Apostles cannot be changed, and furthermore, a general aversion to change in liturgical practices and other actions that could cause disruption, and the use of Apophatic Theology to provide a more unified and in-depth understanding of the mysteries of God, such as the unknowable essence of God the Father, the Holy Trinity, the Incarnation of God the Son, our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, and the actions of the Holy Spirit, through the use of Apophatic Theology and Apophatic Language wherever possible, since it is much easier to say, based on scriptural revelation and the traditional Patristic interpretations, to say what God is not, and to say what God is using affirmations rather than negations is difficult, in some cases impossible, and can lead directly to schisms over doctrine.
Indeed, there was a schism in the 1890s in the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod, which largely embraces the idea of doctrinal immutability, but not the Apophatic Method, over an obscure issue which, if defined apophatically, probably would not have caused a controversy. As it was, several congregations left the Synod and formed another denomination, the Protest-Ant Lutheran Church, which still survives today, albeit with just a handful of parishes.
The function of this Supplementary Catechism is to inform, and not to opine: there are some merits in the concept of doctrinal development, and it does appear to have occurred to a limited extent in the early Church, especially in the Ecumenical Councils, mainly to formalize in writing doctrines previously agreed to orally by a majority of bishops. However, since that time, it does appear that a combination of the concepts of Apophatic Language, Thought and Theology, and Immutable Doctrine from the unchanging Apostolic deposit of faith, does dramatically reduce the risk of schisms. As a secondary observation, avoiding radical liturgical changes in established parishes reduces the risk of schism, as these changes can be so annoying as to interfere with the ability of the laity to worship, as observed by CS Lewis, which can cause a schism.
