When considering a Catholic approach to doctrine it is necessary to distinguish between ‘doctrine’ and ‘dogma’. The latter refers to those doctrines that have been ‘dogmatically defined’, that is by a form of words and explicit decree (for example the Catholic doctrine of the Immaculate conception of Mary, was dogmatically defined by Pope Pius IX in 1854).[1] Other teachings, such as elements of Eucharistic theology, have not been dogmatically defined but still exist as doctrine. In July 1998 Pope John Paul II affirmed in his Motu Proprio Ad Tuendam Fidem, that both all doctrines – those dogmatically defined as well as those not – require a “religious submission of the intellect and will”,[2] because they are teachings of truth. Therefore this requirement of Catholics is reflected in Ecclesiastical Law. [3]
Although there is considerable opposition to the role of tradition in the formulation and understanding of the role of doctrine in the modern world, it seems appropriate that tradition ought to be considered – to a greater or lesser extent – because of the human nature of “teaching and learning” about truth and about God. Although doctrine is thought to expound divine truth it does so for humanity’s sake. Tradition is characteristically anthropological, as noted by an evolutionary biologist:
The quality of man that is lacking in animals is, to be precise, not intellect but tradition – tradition as the possibility of passing on to others the product of the intellect and thus augmenting and enriching it as it is preserved from generation to generation.[4]
Indeed, doctrine is not something that is newly discovered by each successive generation of Christian scholars, but one that is “passed on” from one generation of Christians to the next. The understanding of Christianity that exists in the present day (and which is articulated in doctrine) is the product of many centuries of theological discussion and considerable discernment. The New Testament presents no conceptually advanced Christology[5] and the sixth ecumenical council – held in 680-681 AD – continued to definitively teach new truths about Christ’s nature (specifically, the nature of Christ’s human and divine wills)[6] which remain doctrinal today. It is therefore obvious that the doctrine of the modern Church is the product of lengthy historical consideration (itself tradition) and an automatic denial of the potential validity of the Patristic interpretations is a denial of the presence and action of the Holy Spirit in earlier times.[7] As such, it is necessary to acknowledge that doctrine is the product of considerable study and consideration on the part of the church over many centuries, fundamentally led by the Holy Spirit but nuanced by its sitz-im-leben.
Both the distinctively Catholic definition of Deneffe and the protestant view of Grudem represent doctrine as having been formulated by a holistic and systematic approach: in both Grudem’s affirmation that teaching comes from the “whole of the Bible” and the mutually complementary understanding of Scripture, Tradition and Magisterium as found in Catholic theology. It is clear in both cases that doctrine cannot contradict the revelation found in scripture and is an application or understanding of that revelation. Even holding that there is no further public revelation anticipated – for God has said everything in a Son[8] – this revelation has not been made “completely explicit”[9] and the doctrine of the Church serves to make the truths of revelation known to humanity.
[1] Pope Pius IX. (1854) Ineffibilis Deus. Vatican City: Catholic Truth Society. Promulgated and entered into the Acta Apostolica Sedis on December 8th 1854
[2] Second Vatican Council. (1964) Dogmatic Constitution on the Nature of the Church. [Lumen Gentium]. Vatican City: Catholic Truth Society. §25.
[3] Pontifical Council for Legislative Text. (1983) Codex Iuris Canonici. Vatican City: Catholic Truth Society. §750-752.
[4] Rustow A. (1951) Kulturtradition und Kulturkritik. Studium Generale. 4(1): 308. Translation courtesy of Ratzinger J, McCarthy MF. (1981) Formal principles of Catholicism. San Francisco: Ignatius Press.
[5] Lohse B. (1966) A Short History of Christian Doctrine. Philadephia: Fortress Press. 73.
[6] McNeil JT. (1937) The twenty ecumenical councils of the Catholic Church. Church History. 6(2): 189-190.
[7] Kesich V. (1993) The Orthodox Church and Biblical interpretation. St Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly. 37(3): 343-351
[8] Hebrews 1:1-2.
1 Timothy 6:14.
Titus 2:13.
[9] Catholic Church (1997) op cit. §66
