DOGMA
90
DOGMA
Both classes are dogmas in the strict sense, when con-
sidered as revealed and defined. — (4) Dogmas con-
tained in the symbols or creeds of the Church are
called symbolic; the remainder are non-symbolic.
Hence all the articles of the Apostles' Creed are dog-
mas ; but not all dogmas are called technically articles
of faith, though an ordinary dogma is sometimes
spoken of as an article of faith. — (5) Finally, there are
dogmas belief in which is absolutely necessary as a
means to salvation, while faith in others is rendered
necessary only by Divine precept; and some dogmas
must be explicitly known and believed, while with
regard to others implicit belief is sufficient.
III. Objective Char.-vcter of Dogmatic Truth; Intellectual Belief in Dogma. — As a dogma is a revealed truth, the intellectual character and objective reality of dogma depend on the intellectual character and objective truth of Divine revelation. We will here apply to dogma the conclusions developed at greater length under the heading of revelation (q. v.). Are dogmas, considered merely as truths revealed by God, real objective truths addressed to the human mind? Are we bound to believe them with the mind? Should we admit the distinction between fundamental and non-fundamental dogmas?
(1) Rationalists deny the existence of Divine super- natural revelation, and consequently of religious dogmas. A certain school of mystics has taught that what Christ inaugurated in the world was "a new life". The "Modernist" theory by reason of its recent condemnation calls for fuller treatment. There are different shades of opinion among Modernists. Some of them do not, apparently, deny all intellectual value to dogma (cf. Le Roy, "Dogme et Critique"). Dogma, like revelation, they say, is expressed in terms of action. Thus when the Son of God is said "to have come down from heaven", according to all theologians He did not come down, as bodies descend or as angels are conceived to pass from place to place, but the hypostatic union is described in terms of ac- tion. So when we profess our faith in God the Father, we mean, according to M. Le Roy, that we have to act towards God as sons; but neither the fatherhood of God, nor the other dogmas of faith, such as the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Resurrection of Christ, etc. imply of necessity any objective intel- lectual conception of fatherhood, Trinity, Resurrec- tion, etc., or convey any idea to the mind. According to other writers, God has addressed no revelation to the human mind. Revelation, they say, began as a consciousness of right and wrong; and the evolution or development of revelation was but the progressive development of the religious sense until it reached its highest level, thus far, in the modern liberal and demo- cratic State. Then, according to these writers, the dogmas of faith, considered as dogmas, have no meaning for the mhid ; we need not believe them mentally; we may reject them ; it is enough if we employ them as guides for our actions. (See Modernlsm.) Over against this doctrine the Church teaches that God has made a revelation to the human mind. There are, no doubt, relative Divine attributes, and some of the dogmas of faith may be expressed under the symbol- ism of action, but they also convey to the human mind a meaning distinct from action. The fatherhood of God may imply that we should act towards Him as children towards a father; but it also conveys to the mind definite analogical conceptions of our God and Creator. And there are truths, such as the Trinity, the Resurrection of Christ, His Ascension, etc. which are absolute objective facts, and which could be be- lieved even if their practical conse(|uences were ig- nored or were deemed of little value. The dogmas of the Church, such a.s the existence of God, the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Resurrection of ('hrist, the sacra- ments, a future judgment, etc. have an objective reality and are facts as really and truly as it is a fact
that Augustus was Emperor of the Romans, and that
George Washington was first President of the United
States.
(2) Abstracting from the Church's definition, we are bound to render to God the homage of our assent to revealed truth once we are satisfieii that He has spoken. Even atheists admit, hypothetically, that it there be an infinite Being distinct from the world, we should pay Him the homage of believing His Divine word.
(3) Hence it is not permissible to distinguish re- vealed truths as fundamental and non-fundamental in the sense that some truths, though known to have been revealed by God, may be lawfully denied. But while we should believe, at least implicitly, every truth attested by the word of God, we are free to admit that some are in themselves more important than others, more necessary than others, and that an ex- plicit knowledge of some is necessary while an implicit faith in others is sufficient.
IV. DoGM.\ AND THE Church. — Revealed truths become formally dogmas when defined or proposed by the Church. There is considerable hostility, in mod- ern times, to dogmatic religion when considered as a body of truths defined by the Church, and still more when considered as defined by the pope. The theory of dogma which is here expounded depends for its ac- ceptance on the doctrine of the infallible teaching office of the Church and of the Roman pontiff. It will be sufficient to notice the following points; (1) the reasonableness of the definition of dogmas ; (2) the immutability of dogma; (.3) the necessity for Church unity of belief in dogma ; (4) the inconveniences which are alleged to be associated with the definition of dogma.
(1) Against the theory of interpretation of Scripture by private judgment. Catholics regard as absolutely unacceptable the view that God revealed a body of truths to the world and appointed no official teacher of revealed truth, no authoritative judge of contro- versy ; this view is as unreasonable as would be the notion that the civil legislature makes laws, and then commits to individual private judgment the right and the duty of interpreting the laws and deciding con- troversies. The Church and the supreme pontiff are endowed by God with the privilege of infallibility in discharge of the duty of universal teacher in the sphere of faith and morals ; hence we have an infalli- ble testimony that the dogmas defined and delivered to us by the Church are the truths contained in Divine revelation.
(2) The dogmas of the Church are immutable. Modernists hold that religious dogmas, as such, have no intellectual meaning, that we are not bound to be- lieve them mentally, that they may be all false, that it is sufficient if we use them as guides to action; and accordingly they teach that dogmas are not immuta- ble, that they should be changed when the spirit of the age is opposed to them, when they lose their value as rules for a liberal religious life. But in the Catholic doctrine that Divine revelation is addressed to the human mind and expresses real objective truth, dogmas are immutable Divine truths. It is an im- mutable truth for all time that Augustus was Emperor of Rome and George Washington first President of the United States. So according to Catholic belief, these are and will be for all time immutable truths: that there are three Persons in God, that Christ ilied for us, that He arose from the dead, that He founded the Church, that He instituted the sacraments. We may distinguish between the truths them.selves and the language in which they are expressed. The full meaning of certain revealed truths has been only gradually brought out; the truths will always remain. Lan- guage may change or may receive a new meaning; but we can always learn what meaning was attached to particular words in the past.
