DOGMA
91
DOGMA
(3) We are bound to believe revealed truths irre-
spective of their definition by the Church, if we are
satisfied that God has revealed them. When they are
proposed or defined by the Church, and thus become
dogmas, we are bound to believe them in order to
maintain the bond of faith (see Heresy).
(4) Finally, Catholics do not admit that, as is some- times alleged, dogmas are the arbitrary creations of ecclesiastical authority, that they are multiplied at will, that they are devices for keeping the ignorant in subjection, that they are ol^stacles to conversions. Some of these are points of controversy which cannot be settled without reference to more fundamental ques- tions. Dogm.atic definitions would be arbitrary if there were no Divinely instituted infallible teaching office in the Church ; but if, as Catholics maintain, God has established in His Church an infallible office, dogmatic definitions cannot be considered arbitrary. The same Divine Providence which preserves the Church from error will preserve her from inordinate multiplication of dogmas. She cannot define arbi- trarily. We need only observe the life of the Church or of the Roman pontiffs to see that dogmas are not multiplied inordinately. And as dogmatic definitions are but the authentic interpretation and declaration of the meaning of Divine revelation, they cannot be considered devices for keeping the ignorant in subjec- tion, or reasonable obstacles to conversions; on the contrary, the authoritative definition of truth and condemnation of error, are powerful arguments lead- ing to the Church those who seek the truth earnestly.
V. Dogma .\nd Religion. — It is sometimes charged that in the Catholic Church, in consequence of its dogmas, religious life consists merely in speculative beliefs and external sacramental fonnalities. It is a strange charge, arising from prejudice or from lack of acquaintance with Catholic life. Religious life in con- ventual and monastic establishments is surely not a merely external fonnality. The external religious exercises of the ordinary Catholic layman, such as public prayer, confession. Holy Communion, etc. suppose carefid and serious mtemal self-examination and self-regulation, and various other acts of internal religion. We need only to observe the public civic fife of Catholics, their philanthropic works, their schools, hospitals, orphanages, charitable organiza- tions, to be convinced that dogmatic religion does not degenerate into mere external fonnalities. On the contrary, in non-Catholic Christian bodies a general decay of supernatural Christian life follows the disso- lution of dogmatic religion. Were the dogmatic sys- tem of the Cathohc Church, with its authoritative infallible head, done away with, the various systems of private judgment would not save the workl from re- lapsing into and following pagan ideals. Dogmatic belief is not the be-all and end-all of Catholic life ; but the Catholic serves God, honours the Trinity, loves Christ, obeys the Church, frequents the sacraments, a.ssists at Mass, observes the Commandments, be- cause he believes mentally in God, in the Trinity, in the Divinity of Christ, in the Church, in the sacra- ments and "the Sacrifice of the Mass, in the duty of keeping the Commandments; and he believes in them as objective immutable truths.
VI. Dogma and Science. — But, it is objected, dogma checks investigation, antagonizes independence of thought, and makes scientific theology impossible. This difficulty may be supposed to be put by Protest- ants or by unbelievers. We will consider it from both points of view.
(1) Beyond scientific investigation and freedom of thought, Catholics recognize the guiding influence of dogmatic beliefs. But Protestants also profess to adhere to certain great dogmatic truths which are sup- posed to impede scientific investigation and to conflict with the findings of modern science. Old difficulties against the existence of God or its deinonstrability.
against the dogma of Creation, miracles, the hurnan
soul, ancl supernatural religion, have been dressed in a
new garb and urged by a modern school of scientists
principally from the discoveries in geologj', paheontol-
ogy, biology, astronomy, comparative anatomy, and
physiology. But Protestants, no less than Catholics,
profess to believe in God, in the Creation, in the soul,
in the Incarnation, in the possibility of miracles ; they
too, maintain that there can be no discord between
the true conclusions of science and the dogmas of the
Christian religion rightly understood Protestants,
therefore, cannot consistently complain that Catholic
dogmas impede scientific investigation. But it is
urged that in the Catholic system beliefs are not deter-
mined by private judgment; behind the dogmas of
the Church there is the living bulwark of her episco-
pate. True, behind dogmatic beliefs Catholics recog-
nize ecclesiastical authority ; but this puts no further
restraint on intellectual freedom; it only raises the
question as to the constitution of the Church. Catho-
lics do not believe that God revealed a body of truths
to mankind and appointed no living authority to
unfold, to teach, to safeguard that body of Divine
truths, to decide controversies; but the authority of
the episcopate under the supreme pontiff to control
intellectual activity is correlative with, and arises
from their authority to teach supernatural truth.
The existence of judges and magistrates does not ex-
tend the range of our civil laws; they are rather a liv-
ing authority to interpret and apply the laws. Simi-
larly, episcopal authority has for its range the truth of
revelation, and it prohibits only what is inconsistent
with the full scope of that truth.
(2) In discussing the question with unbelievers we note that science is "the observation and classifica- tion, or co-ordination, of the individual facts or phe- nomena of nature". Now a Catholic is absolutely free in the prosecution of scientific research according to the terms of this definition. There is no prohibition or restriction on Catholics in regard to the oliservation and co-ordination of the phenomena of Nature. But some scientists do not confine themselves to science as defined by themselves. They propound theories often unwarranted by experimental observation. One will maintain as a "scientific" truth that there is no God, or that His existence is unknowable; another that the world has not been created; another will deny in the name of "science" the existence of the soul; another, the possibility of supernatural revelation. Surely these denials are not warranted by scientific methods. Catholic dogma and ecclesiastical authority limit intellectual actiWty only so far as may be necessary for safeguarding the truths of revelation. If non- believing scientists in their study of Catholicism would apply the scientific method, which consists in observ- ing, comparing, making hypotheses, and perhaps for- mulating scientific conclusions, they would readily see that dogmatic belief in no way interferes with the le- gitimate freedom of the Catholic in scientific research, the discharge of civic duty, or any other form of activ- ity that makes for true enlightenment and progress. The service rendered by Catholics in every depart- ment of learning and of social endeavour, is a fact which no amount of theorizing against dogma can set aside. (See Faith, Infallibility, Revelation, Sci- ence, Truth.)
Acta et Drcreta ConcUii Vaiicani in CoU. Lac. (Freiburg im Br., 1870-90). VII; Soarez, Ovcra Omnia: De Fide Theologial; De Lugo, Opera: De fide; Vacant. Etudes th^ologiques stir les constitxUions du concile du Vatican (Paris, 1895); _ Granderath, Constitutiones dogmaticae Sacrosancti (Eciirrwnici Conciiii Vati- cani ex ipsis ejus actis explicatfE alque illustrata: (FreiburE im Br., 1892): ScHEEBEN, Handbuch der kathotischen Dogmatik (Freiburg im Br.. 1873); Schwane, Dogmengeschiehle (2nd ed., Freiburg. 1895); Mazzella, De VirliUibm Infusis (Rome, 1884); Billot, Traclatus de Ecclesid Christi (Rome. 1903); Idem, De Virtulibus Infmis (Home, 1905); Newman, Idea of a Vniversily (London, 1899).
Daniel Coghlan.
