Introduction to Dogmatics

OBJECTIVE

Understanding the following

Negative connotation of Dogma and modern interpretations
Biblical examples of the word dogma
Definition of Dogma/Doctrine
Three main principles for doctrine

INTRODUCTION

Understanding that the beliefs and traditions passed on through the Church are not a matter of opinions but a means for salvation. They are not dependent on times or circumstances but are truths that bring us to salvation. Dogma is not relative. What is truth...is truth and is timeless.

HOLY SCRIPTURE

And as they went through the cities, they delivered to them the decrees to keep, which were determined by the apostles and elders at Jerusalem (Acts 16:4)
The things which you learned and received and heard and saw in me, these do, and the God of peace will be with you. (Phil 4:9)
Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or our epistle. (2 Thes 2:15)
holding fast the faithful word as he has been taught, that he may be able, by sound doctrine, both to exhort and convict those who contradict. (Titus 1:9)

CONTENT (KEY POINTS)

The word Dogma has rather a negative connotation attached to it in modern times. If someone is spoken of as being dogmatic this is not usually assumed to be something good and commendable. Rather it means that someone is too sure of themselves, even full of themselves, and wants to impose his opinion on everyone else. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines dogmatic as... expressing personal opinions or beliefs as if they are certainly correct and cannot be doubted. Facebook and other forms of social media certainly encourage the sharing of personal opinions and beliefs as if they could not be challenged. Indeed, sanity and our spiritual peace, demands that in such situations we learn not to counter the unassailable personal opinions of those we meet with what are, in the short space allowed to comment on social media, essentially our own personal opinions.

Some of the modern synonyms of the word dogmatic are opinionated, arrogant, overbearing and rigid. I'm not sure that any of these are very attractive qualities. But it seems to me that this reflects a change in modern times in relation to truth and fact. It is very common in our own times to have some opinion expressed, and then criticized by another, not as being untrue, but as not being 'true for me'. At what point in modern history did truth become so relative that it depended entirely on my attitude and opinion rather than the veracity of what was said?

As we discuss the nature and content of Orthodox Dogmatic Theology, it therefore seems necessary that we also reflect on how we are to present this Theology, this teaching of the Apostolic Church, in a way which invites investigation and consideration, rather than as an imposition which should be rejected out of hand. Nor is this an issue only for our relations with those outside the Church.

Dogmatic understanding leads to knowledge of God, and faithful worship, and service.

So what do we mean by Dogma and Dogmatic, if we do not mean what modern society might choose to understand it as meaning? It is of course a Greek term, and it has the sense of a teaching and a definite precept, not just a personal opinion. In the New Testament it is especially used to speak of a decree, or political command that cannot be ignored but must be acted on. There are five uses of this word.

New Testament References of Dogma

In the New Testament, we find the Greek word dogma to mean two main things:

A decree or legal decision/regulation (Luke 2:1, Acts 16:4 and Acts 17:7)
Ordinances. This has the sense of being the detailed instructions of the Jewish Law, which are to be received as something authoritative and not merely of personal opinion. (Ephesians 2:15, Colossians 2:14)

A. What is Dogmatics?

The term dogma (Gk. δόγμα, 'opinion', from δοκεῖν) means "opinion" or "tenet;" literally "that which one thinks is true." In the New Testament the word "dogma" appears in the sense of ordinances of God through the Church which required obedience. For example, the decisions of the Apostolic Council at Jerusalem in Acts 16:4,17 and the precepts of the Mosaic Law (Eph 2:15, Col 2:14). In the writings of the Early Fathers, dogma signified the fundamental truths revealed by God, as delivered by the Apostles in their writings and oral teachings.

Doctrine means teaching, treatise, or catechism. These two terms will be used interchangeably. It is important to understand that there is a difference between dogma and theology. While theology is the study of God based on divine revelation and a way of expressing Who God is and how He works in the world, dogma is inherent truths themselves, theological teaching that is formally and authoritatively affirmed. Theology has gradual and continual development, for example, the development of terms, formulae, and creeds. Dogma on the other hand is constant with no real development, only the discovery of truths formally and authoritatively affirmed.

While there is some flexibility within theological expression, we do not accept any variation in dogmatic truths. For example, God created man in a unique way and gave him unique attributes. These are facts or dogma. Within that dogma, there are different expressions of what it means to be made in the Image and according to the Likeness of God.

These inherent truths which are divinely revealed for our salvation are a set body of teachings of the Church, not individualistic, and preserved as held everywhere from the beginning.

Main Principles

There are three main principles for doctrine:

Doctrine is revealed by God, believed in worship, taught by the Scripture and the Fathers, confessed through the Church, and lived and experienced by the saints;
We cannot separate morals from teachings; and
We cannot separate Orthodox Tradition from its history or historical context.

Theology, however, is our understanding and expression of the dogmatic truths. Theology, unlike dogma, may change and adjust over time.

Theology requires time, meditation, and study. As St. Gregory of Nazianzus states, "It is difficult to conceive God but to define Him in words is an impossibility." Our limitations in describing God, however, are distinct from our belief in His existence. We can understand the existence of God, but we don't know what that existence is. But because we cannot describe Him does not mean He is not there. The corporeal mind cannot fathom the incorporeal. As a result, we have different ways of describing God, both positive and negative. Positive descriptors or cataphatic terms include attributes of Who God is (love, omniscient, omnipotent, etc.) while negative descriptors or apophatic terms include attributes of Who God is not (unlimited, immeasurable, uncreated, etc.).

A good study of God must be deeply rooted in a good spiritual life. Struggle for purity of life is essential. Theology requires humility. A theologian knows that the study of God has limitations. In our human limitation in studying the divine mysteries, we often reach a point at which we must confess that we do not know, we cannot understand. The more one studies, the more discussions and debates may arise, but it is essential to understand that it is okay to admit that we are limited and cannot know everything about God. Therefore, we do not discuss every aspect, but only what we can grasp so as not to end in heresy. As St. Gregory says, the way of studying theology is a narrow path studied by few.

Reference for Servants: Some Guidelines

Acquiring a holistic picture. Some events cannot be understood in Scripture or in theology without taking a holistic picture of salvation, i.e., looking at the Old Testament through the New Testament and how the key to the Scriptures is our Lord Jesus Christ. Sometimes, examination of one subject of salvation and entering into extensive debates (ex. original sin) does not provide proper or complete answers without examining the large picture of salvation. That is why St. Athanasius said we cannot start speaking about the incarnation before examining the creation of the whole world. So we should not be lost in details without looking at the whole picture.

1. Having the proper reference. There are many opinions on many theological subjects, but in order to have the orthodox view we call for the living Apostolic Tradition to have the proper reference. This Apostolic Tradition has three pillars: the Holy Scripture, the patristic writings, and the Divine Liturgy. The interaction between these three pillars reveals theological truths and answers. One verse may be misleading without looking to other verses. Likewise, Holy Scripture is interpreted through the understanding of the Church as defined by the patristic witness and consensus of the Holy Fathers. One of the reasons for deviation and heresies in the history of the Church was a misguided reliance on logic without properly examining these three pillars of Apostolic Tradition. The heresiarchs, Nestorius and Arius, followed logic instead of properly examining the witness and application of the Holy Scripture. The defenders of the Faith, St. Athanasius and St. Cyril, properly examined the witness of the Holy Scripture and relied on the patristic tradition in formulating their responses.

2. We do not believe that the Fathers are infallibile. There are Fathers who are universally accepted as pillars in expounding and explaining the dogma of the Church. For example, St. Athanasius of Alexandria is considered the basis or canon of the Orthodox Faith whereas St. Cyril of Alexandria is considered the seal. In between them are St. Basil the Great, St. Gregory the Theologian and St. John Chrysostom. We see the other Fathers based on these. This is important, because in our explanations below, we will depend mainly on the teachings of our Alexandrian Fathers, St. Athanasius and St. Cyril, with some references to the great Cappadocians.

3. Understanding the Hierarchy of the Truth. There are important facts but they are not all at the same level. There are some truths that are essential and others that are less important. We should focus on the essential facts, because they are the foundation of the Orthodox Faith. This begins with the essential fact that God created the heavens and the earth. Without a Creator, the whole scheme is lost. How He created and works within creation is secondary. Questions of how He created all things and in what way are secondary questions that relate to the details of the essential truth that He created all things, visible and invisible.

4. Searching for Consensus among the Fathers. Some Fathers and Christian writers distinguish between image and likeness, focusing on our Lord Christ as the True Image and man as the reflecting image. Others envision the Image of God as a standard of perfection with man striving to grow in the likeness of this perfect Image. Some will characterize as image and likeness, some distinguish between the two, some distinguish between the very Image and us reflecting image. Some consider image to be the model, and our likeness is our struggle to reach image. Others, like St. Athanasius, understand the Image as the union with the Logos and being connected to Him through the Spirit. St. Cyril approached the Image as the grace of the Holy Spirit given to us. These are all theological expressions of the basic truth or dogma that man was created in the Image and according to the Likeness of God. Although there is variance among the Fathers regarding this distinction, we hold by the concept that we were created in the image of God.

5. Placing Concepts and Definitions Before Terminology. The meaning of a concept is more important than the terminology used to describe it. There was a flexibility of terms among the Fathers. When there were problematic differences, the Ecumenical Councils helped standardize this terminology. Before the Councils, there were varying interpretations of ousia and hypostasis, for example. Afterwards, the situation was very different. So, when we speak today about sin, ransom, debt, substitution, sanctification, etc. we must first clarify concepts and definitions of the terms we use so that we are properly examining theology. One-nature and two-nature Christologies can be presented either in a heretical or Orthodox manner depending on how one understands the meaning of the terminology.

6. Acquiring Theological Depth. Concerning theology (not dogma), one can speak about redemption in five minutes, but one can also go deeper in understanding this concept in various degrees with respect to vocabulary, Scriptural examples, patristic sayings, theological concepts, etc. This is not necessarily for everyone as St. Gregory noted above, but is appropriate especially when pastoral circumstances require it. We should not be embarrassed if we are not interested or unable to go in depth. Even if one cannot reach the depths of a theological matter, it doesn't mean he is wrong. Many great saints didn't delve into details. We have the examples of St. Antony and St. Athanasius who reached different theological depths in their lives. We should embrace the reality that we have different talents and strengths.

7. Reading the Fathers themselves, not just about them. There are many books about the Holy Fathers that offer analysis on how they dealt with a particular concept and relevant quotations, like, for example, a book on St. Cyril's understanding of the Holy Trinity. Regardless of how useful these secondary sources and quotations are, what is more helpful is reading the Holy Fathers' actual writings, which provides a more comprehensive and unique perspective than relying merely on secondary sources.

APPLICATION (Action)

If I have questions about the beliefs of the Church or I don't understand something, I can ask: Clergy, servants, parents. Look things up through Orthodox resources. Understanding the dogma helps understand God more.

SERVANT RESOURCES

St. Gregory Nazianzus, First Theological Oration (Oration 27).
St. Gregory Nazianzus, Second Theological Oration (Oration 28).