Hi Gregory
It seems to me that you are taking a ‘hard line’ approach to the concept of Papal Infallibility which deems any “novelty approach” to Catholic teachings as an invitation to heresy. It’s true that early in the 20th century the Vatican did censor Teilhard’s teachings, and that on this Forum Suarez has spoken favorably about some of them. As a scientist and a lifelong Roman Catholic, I see this as a welcome breath of fresh air that presages an era wherein the Vatican makes sure the Church remains relevant.
A quick glance at Wikipedia makes me think I am in good company in this regard. There is a groundswell of reputable thinkers urging change in dogma. Amazon lists a number of good books by recognized theologians, philosophers, & scientists who support a more forward-looking approach. I would recommend Ilia Delio’s “From Teilhard to Omega”, if you have not yet read it. I found the direct translation of Teilhard’s works a little opaque for my taste, but the reality of the Noosphere (sphere of ideas or ‘memes’) as the third Universal Sphere ( following the Cosmophere & Biosphere) provides a satisfying foundation for my worldview: Nothing is truly static in any of the three spheres; a changing Cosmosphere induces changes in each occupant of the Biosphere or else it becomes extinct; changes in the Biosphere induces changes in the Noosphere where current ideas (memes that support religious dogmas & govt. constitutions etc…) must change to survive.
Christian Fundamentalist may reject the concept that Dogmas must evolve if they are to survive, but this is my quite unorthodox stance.
Al Leo