One aspect of the Catholic faith that either delights or offends people is the Church’s careful delineation of Divine Revelation—and its implications for everyday life. Doctrinal statements define those truths revealed by God. As such, we are expected to believe them and conform our lives to them—they are, by definition, the shared beliefs of anyone who claims to be Catholic.
The term “doctrine” is mostly synonymous with “dogma.” The terms are defined together in the glossary of terms found in the second edition of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Both terms refer to the formal declarations of the Church that must be held to be revealed by God and therefore true by all who claim membership in that Church. Dogma is the term I notice being used when describing the fact that a teaching is universally held by members of a church. Doctrine is the term usually used when referring to the content, or the definition, of the dogma. So, doctrinal statements define dogmas of the Church.
Doctrine comes directly from the sacred deposit of faith left to the Church from the words and teachings of Jesus Christ. Doctrine, therefore, originates in the Apostolic Tradition preserved in the Church—if a doctrine cannot be traced to antiquity and if it is not universally held within the writings of the Apostles and their immediate successors, it cannot be considered doctrine.
“When we accept the Faith which the Church proposes, we communicate directly with the Apostles… and through them we communicate with Jesus Christ, our first and only Teacher. We go to their school, as it were, and overcome the distance of centuries that separates us from them.”
Saint Pope Paul VI, Address, March 1, 1967
Doctrine, because of its origin in Apostolic Tradition, is usually defined by Biblical statements, but not always. Not everything that Jesus taught the Church can be located verbatim in the Bible—the Bible is one repository of Apostolic Tradition, but not the only source. Jesus taught and did many things that are not recorded in the Gospels—St. John even explicitly says this (John 21:25). Jesus’ great “Bible study” of the Old Testament which he gave to the disciples on the road to Emmaus is another part of Apostolic Tradition that is referenced in the Bible, but not described (Luke 24:27).
The standard that always applies is that doctrine does not contradict Scripture—doctrine is not always directly stated in the Bible, but nothing in the Bible opposes doctrinal statements. A good example of this is our doctrine about Mary’s Assumption to heaven. We hold as truth revealed by God that Mary, at the end of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heaven. While we cannot point to any one scripture verse that states this doctrine, there are hints and foreshadowing that tell us this doctrine contradicts nothing in the Bible.
First, there are two other examples of people described as being assumed into heaven—Enoch and Elijah. In the Bible, death and decay are a result of original sin. If someone was born without the stain of original sin on their soul, it logically follows that death and decay would not be part of their experience of entering heaven. There is a vision of Mary as queen of heaven, the “ark of the covenant,” in the Book of Revelation (12:1) that supports our understanding of Mary’s unique place in God’s plan of salvation. We see Mary as the exemplar, the first disciple, the one who receives first from God what is promised to all His disciples—so our doctrine of the Assumption of Mary points to the promise we have all been given regarding the “resurrection of the body.” Mary, because of her irreplaceable role as the Mother of God, has simply received “ahead of time” what we believe will be given to all who enter God’s kingdom of heaven.
This doctrine, then, describes a belief that the Catholic Church solemnly holds as a truth given us by God. It must, therefore, be held by all who profess the Catholic faith. But let’s be clear—the actual doctrinal statement is very brief, and the various ways it can be interpreted (even by saints and popes) are not doctrinal. There is room for creativity and exploration—within the boundaries of the doctrine. This ‘free play’ with limits is typical of a Catholic approach to intellectual freedom. We are free to think, but to think well, to think honestly, to think with excellence and in pursuit of truth. We are not free to misuse this freedom to create doubt, to mock, to propose ideas for the sake of novelty or notoriety, or to be “creative” to justify immoral behaviors.
Doctrinal statements don’t come out of thin air, they don’t arise out of the whim of a Pope or a Council. Doctrinal statements come out of a great deal of reflection, discussion and debate—they are rooted in prayerful reflection and submission to the Holy Spirit. When a pope wishes to declare a doctrine, he must explicitly say that he is ‘speaking from the Chair of Peter’ in union with the Apostolic successors as giving voice to the Magisterium (teaching authority) of the Church. Ecumenical Councils can also define doctrines in their official statements—but still, most of what they produce doesn’t rise to the teaching authority of doctrine. For example, there are no new doctrinal statements even in the most authoritative documents that came out of the Second Vatican Council—but the documents do use updated ways to define and defend dogmatic (doctrinal) statements (i.e. the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, Lumen Gentium).
[Pope Paul VI cited St. Vincent of Lerins standard about doctrine]: “‘What has been believed everywhere, always, by everyone’ must be preserved as part of the deposit of faith. … The Creed does not change, it does not get out of date. It does not disintegrate.”
Pope Saint Paul VI, General Audience, September 29, 1976
Doctrines are rarely promulgated, because our Apostolic Tradition has already defined the most central and critical elements of our faith within our Creedal statements and in the councils of the early Church’s history. But some wonder why certain doctrinal statements come so late in the game. Why, for example, is our doctrinal statement about the canon of Sacred Scripture not defined until the Council of Trent (beginning in 1545)? Because doctrinal statements are defensive by nature.
I liken it to the way parents “define the dogma” of house rules. As the kids grow up, kids tend to push the boundaries and see what they can get away with. So, the doctrine of curfew, for example, must be more carefully defined. “A curfew of 10pm means you are walking in the door at 10, not that you are calling me by 10 and telling me why you’ll be late.” Parents are faced with defining a house rule when kids try to push past it, use it in ways it’s not meant to be used, or try to “water it down.” The Church defines doctrine in the same way—as long as the beliefs are already shared, used correctly and not “interpreted” in untrue ways, the Church is content with leaving some things “unsaid” because “everyone knows it already.”
The Church’s work in the late 200’s and early 300’s to define the doctrine concerning Jesus Christ is a great example. As false teachings arose about Jesus—that he was simply a human adopted by God as His “son,” or that he was God who only appeared to be human but wasn’t really a human person—the Church needed to carefully and explicitly state her belief about Jesus being truly human and truly divine. She spoke the truths revealed to her by God, held since Apostolic times, and universally confessed by the Church as a whole. But she used new methods to define this ancient doctrine—including newly developed philosophical terms that helped the Church better describe the belief in two natures (human and divine) as a “hypostatic union” within the one person of Jesus Christ. This philosophical language is certainly not found in the New Testament writings, but it is rooted in, doesn’t contradict, and is an expression of the Gospel declaration of who Jesus is.
Doctrinal statements of the Church make use of advances in intellectual and pedagogical theory. Ancient doctrines are reformulated with updated language and insights in books like our Catechism of the Catholic Church. The term “Catechism” refers to an authoritative collection of doctrinal teaching. Our latest universal (for the entire Church, not one written for a particular location or culture) Catechism was released in 1994—the first universal Catechism released since the time of the Counter Reformation in the late 1500’s! The new Catechism of the Catholic Church is an absolute treasure for all Catholics—it incorporates the writings of the Second Vatican Council and extensive Scriptural references in order to explain and illustrate doctrines.
Many seem intimidated by the Catechism, but I highly encourage any person to open it up and read it—it is absolutely accessible to the average adult Catholic, especially with the resources available in the Second Edition which include a very helpful glossary and great index. If you don’t wish to purchase the Catechism, the entire document is available for reference on many Catholic websites, including the Vatican’s website and the U.S. Catholic Bishop’s website.
The Catechism is arranged in such a way as to allow a person to explore topics of interest to them—you do not have to open it at the beginning and read it straight through (that’s fine, to do, of course!). Once the reader gets used to the organization of the Catechism and the style of numbering paragraphs, it is simple to navigate. The Catechism’s organization is instructive in itself—the mystery of our Catholic faith is described in terms of what we profess (our Creed) in Part I, how we celebrate and worship in Part II, how we behave and make moral choices in Part III, and how we communicate with God in prayer in Part IV. This is the same organization found in the ancient Catechisms of the Church.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church contains doctrinal statements, but it also offers instructions and guidance at a lower level of authority. This can frustrate some people who simply want a clear list of the Church’s doctrinal statements and nothing else—no gray areas and no “suggestions.” But the faith is too complex and the Body of Christ is too diverse for this simplistic approach. A human body has systems and organs that are absolutely central to life—the brain, the heart, the lungs. Other parts of the human body might not be essential, but allow a person to live a fuller, more enjoyable life—eyes, arms, and legs, for example. The same might be said of the teachings of the Catholic Church—the doctrinal statements comprise the essential organs necessary for life. The other teachings lead to a fullness of life, expressing vibrancy and capacities far beyond simply “surviving.” I suppose one can be Catholic without praying the Rosary or adopting certain prayer techniques such as Lectio Divina or following the “rules” of our great saints and founders of religious orders. But that kind of Catholicity is impoverished and sterile. Life is richer and faith is more lively when one goes beyond the “bare bones” doctrines.
Teachings that aren’t doctrinal statements (not dogmatic) often apply doctrine to particular situations in the world. A good example is the application of church teachings regarding the dignity of the human person to particular scientific methods of medical research. In these applications, we are expected as Catholics to learn church teachings and to have, as our ‘default mode,’ the willingness to adopt them. But, we can, in good conscience, ascertain a more appropriate alternative to the application of doctrine—one that necessarily still holds to the foundational truths of our faith and yet reaches a different conclusion as to its application in a particular situation.
The Church’s teachings concerning “Just War” theory and pacifism illustrate these efforts to apply doctrine to complex social situations. The Fifth Commandment, “Thou shalt not kill,” includes the doctrine of not destroying innocent human life. Yet, in defense of the common good and when preventing someone from killing innocent victims, the Church holds that it is morally permissible to kill an aggressor if there are no other means available to protect innocent life. It is also morally permissible to choose pacifist means as well. The choice is left open to the individual—as long as one continues to work from within the boundaries of “Thou shall not kill.” We need to remain in creative dialogue with those who interpret and apply doctrine in different ways—to refrain from making judgments and fomenting division. This is one way to observe Jesus’ command to love one another and to be one Body—the tension of varying interpretations can increase strength and mobility in the Body of Christ, just as “resistance training” can help the physical body. Our shared doctrine allows this creative tension to lead us all to search deeper into the mind and heart of God without sundering the Body through schism.
But our shared doctrine is not the essence of our faith—we do not profess our faith IN the creed at our Baptism. We profess our faith in God through the Creed. We are a religion of a relationship with God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. We are not a religion of a book, a moral code, or even a doctrine. When faith becomes only allegiance to doctrine, it can become fanatical and barren of life—the bones without the flesh. But faith without doctrine has no strength, no structure—only softness and weakness—it’s flesh without the bones.
So, to be Catholic is to declare one’s adherence and obedient submission to the doctrines of the faith. This is repugnant to many modern Catholics, who subscribe to our culture’s relativistic attitude that there are no absolute truths and no objective source of truth, so one is free to make up one’s own truth. It is also repugnant to those who wish to behave in ways forbidden by doctrine—in order to rationalize “sin,” one simply says that the doctrine isn’t doctrinal and therefore one is free to ignore it.
The virtues of humility, obedience and courage are all required to adhere to doctrine. We need others to support us, and we need to support each other. Many could live the truths of the faith if they were admonished and corrected and guided by those who can speak the truth in love. Others need assurance and encouragement so they can find the courage to “swim against the stream” of worldly attitudes that exonerate and even celebrate sin as an exercise of freedom. Our doctrines provide the means and tools necessary for a full and joy-filled and fruitful life—but only if they are learned, remembered, put to use and shared.
Others find it repugnant to adhere to doctrines when some leaders and teachers at the highest levels in the church have failed to obey them or who have sinned grievously even as they claim to belong to and represent the Church. This is a particularly painful reality in the Church—and has been in every age, if we honestly confront our history. We claim to be one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church, founded by Jesus Christ on the Apostles—yet we are filled with sinners and with sinful institutions that protect and justify some sinners. What does this mean for those of us seeking to get to heaven by adhering to the doctrines of this sinful Church?
It means perseverance. It means courage. It means putting first things first and clinging to the truth even when that truth is preserved by the truly sinful. It means allowing no sinner and no sin committed against us or against other innocents to keep us from finding the fullness of life promised to us. It means allowing God to work good out of every situation, and trusting that, in the end, God’s just judgment will prevail. It means, inconceivably, that we pray for the conversion and salvation of those sinning within the Body of Christ—praying as Jesus did on the cross, “Father, forgive them…” It means finding within ourselves the capacity to locate the diamonds of our doctrine even when they’re buried in the mud of human sinfulness—and not mistaking their value because of where they were found.
It’s not easy. But Jesus told us as much: “In the world you have tribulation; but be of good cheer, I have overcome the world” (John 16:13). The Church holds up for us the ideal, the vision, the splendor of the goal—and then patiently and mercifully allows us to grow to our full stature in Christ. We who believe, including our leaders, all fall short of the perfection and holiness to which we are called. I recommend paying more attention to the leadership of Mary, Mother of the Church, and of the saints in heaven than to any crop of leaders current or historical—the “heavenly hierarchy” can sustain, inspire and intercede for us with true power. I recommend seeking the quiet, marginalized, ignored and energetic “nobodies” present in every parish, present throughout the world, who live the faith at a level of perfection and holiness that’s just short of heaven. They are the ones to look to, not the ones parading around in power, seeking an appreciative audience, and sounding more like lawyers in boardrooms or politicians seeking personal gain than shepherds who actually love the sheep they are charged with guiding. If a Catholic leader spends more time promoting or justifying himself than proclaiming Christ crucified and risen, then leave that wolf and find a true shepherd.
To understand the value and truth of Catholic doctrine, look in the places where the Gospel is truly lived and see the Church in her beauty, truth and goodness. Then the hypocrisies and divisions and outright egregious sins of the powerful or popular will be seen for what they are: ephemeral smoke, soon to be cleared by the healing wind of the Holy Spirit, soon to trouble and grieve us no more. Please God, may your Kingdom come, on earth as it is in heaven.
Flourish Catholic 