UR,
One of the truest examples of real development of doctrine is that of understanding the Eucharist. Paul obviously had much in the way of infused knowledge. Nobody as far as I can tell in Church history had God made it so known that he was going to win over.
Paul knew from faith and his zeal probably spread that faith in the Eucharist. All he could explain was the need to know about it and know how to partake worthily.
By the time Augustine rolls around, he's got to explain that Our Lord's flesh is real flesh and not a metaphor for some lofty spiritual ideal. He (amazingly) knew just to take it on faith that "somehow" God made it possible for Man to partake of his flesh while appearing as bread and wine. He described this as a "latent mystery"
Along comes Aquinas. He's dealing with Muslims who don't have the Jewish tradition as the Jews knew it. So, he unravels this "latent" mystery by providing a model based on reason alone, that combined with divine revelation allows one to grab hold of the faith against the testimony of the senses.
Aquinas on an Intellectual level did what Paul did when he addressed the people to the temple of the "unknown God" That was a Latent mystery to the people of Paul's day. He unwrapped it. Aquinas then did the same to the "hard saying" of Our Lord. Transubstantiation is no more or less mysterious or miraculous for Aquinas as it is for Augustine, or Paul. But Aquinas provides the argument that refutes the Lutheran heresy of "consubstantiation" or "transignification" which Paul was never questioned about.
***Paul knew from faith and his zeal probably spread that faith in the Eucharist.***
I believe you are reading that into the historical material. Though Paul addressed the communion and held it in the highest regard, Paul was all about PREACHING the message of the Gospel.
***Along comes Aquinas. He's dealing with Muslims who don't have the Jewish tradition as the Jews knew it. So, he unravels this "latent" mystery by providing a model based on reason alone,****
Never the less, Paul, who was much closer to living Greek philosophy than Aquinas, cut the knees out from under the Greeks in 1st Corinthians. There is no such thing as reason alone. Christianity is a revealed religion.
***Aquinas on an Intellectual level did what Paul did when he addressed the people to the temple of the "unknown God" That was a Latent mystery to the people of Paul's day. He unwrapped it. Aquinas then did the same to the "hard saying" of Our Lord.***
Bad analogy. The Greeks were just guessing about the unknown God. Had God needed philosophy to unwrap Gospel mysteries He would have given us a Greek apostle. (Besides, how much unwraping does "Take up your cross" or "Love you neighbor" need anyway???)
It may be that Medieval Scolasticism was more isogesis than exogesis - reading Greek ideas into the Scriptures.