Terms, the Resources of the Church, and the Understanding of the Bible Fr. Dr. Andria Saria In the history of Christian literature, one of the main terms that we must examine in order to continue our discussion is the meaning of dogma and doxa. Earlier, we spoke about dogma and economia. The word dogma has often been misunderstood because it has received many different interpretations. This is especially true among people who think that the Orthodox Church is simply a system made up of rigid dogmas and rules.
Such a misunderstanding has also been noticed by the Fathers of the Church in their writings. The word dogma itself is not the problem. The real issue is how people use this term and what meaning they place in it. When the term is used incorrectly, it creates confusion and misunderstanding. The problem, therefore, is not the word dogma itself, but its misuse.
A clear example of this can be seen in the discussion of Saint John of Damascus. In one of his works, he uses the expression Mother of Christ. The term itself and its meaning are correct, because Mary gave birth to the incarnate God. According to the teaching of the Church, Christ is the name of God who became incarnate. The word Christ can also be used in reference to the Son of God before the incarnation, but in the strict and direct sense, He is called Christ after the incarnation.
The word Christos means the Anointed One. The Savior, our Lord Jesus Christ, is called the Anointed One after the incarnation, because His human nature was anointed by His divine nature. From this perspective, the expression Mother of Christ can be considered correct. Saint John of Damascus himself says that the term does not contain an error. However, since Nestorius used this expression incorrectly and caused division and confusion in the Church, introducing an unhealthy theological spirit, the Church preferred to use the term Theotokos—the Mother of God.
The same situation can also be seen with the term dogma. This word has often been used against the Church in a negative way, as if dogma means something rigid, outdated, or harmful. Because of this, a stereotype developed that still exists today. Many people say, “We do not accept Christian dogmas,” by which they often mean that the Church is too conservative. In reality, the term dogma is connected with a theological idea or truth.
What kind of Christian resource expresses this idea? We have said that the basic form of dogma is found in the Creed, which can fit on one page. However, the Church has also given explanations and interpretations of these dogmatic truths. In every case, a dogma is a statement or teaching that is firm, stable, and unchangeable. It is a truth that cannot be altered.
This meaning has always been part of the concept of dogma. The term dogma also existed in the ancient world. Even there, the word carried a similar meaning, which is why the Orthodox Church adopted it. In antiquity it meant a decision, a command, or an official decree—for example, the decision of a king or an assembly. In the Gospel itself, the term dogma is used to refer to the decree of Caesar.
In a general sense, this is the meaning of the term. More specifically, in the life of the Church we use the word dogma to describe the authoritative teaching of the Church. In Georgia, this term became widely established in the 12th century and was often translated with meanings such as faith or command. In addition to this term, several other related terms are also known, such as Nomocanon (where nomos means law and canon means rule), as well as epitaxis, diataxis, diatake, and others. Why is it necessary for the teaching of the Church and the literature of Christian writers to be grounded in dogma?
Where do these doctrinal statements originate? Are they the result of human reasoning, or are they given by God? The Christian faith affirms that dogmas are not the product of human intellectual effort but are truths revealed by God. Their foundation can be seen already in the Old Testament through the revelation given to the prophets. This revelation was then fully manifested in the person and teaching of Jesus Christ and was further transmitted through the apostles.
What has been revealed by the Lord does not depend on human speculation or doubt. Where divine revelation exists, human assumptions and conjectures become secondary. For this reason, the decisions of the Ecumenical Councils carry a particular authority in the life of the Church. The teachings and explanations affirmed by the Church in council receive the quality of dogmatic stability. Such teachings cannot be altered by individuals according to their personal opinions, emotions, or intellectual preferences.
If dogma represents the revealed and unchangeable dimension of the faith, then in a broader sense the entire content of Holy Scripture may be understood as containing dogmatic truth. At the same time, within the life of theology there exists another dimension, which may be called the interpretative or exploratory aspect of theological reflection. This aspect is commonly referred to as doxa. Dogma is not something that requires human discovery, because it has already been given through divine revelation. It does not belong to the realm of speculation, nor is it subject to change through human criticism or reinterpretation.
However, theological reflection and interpretation—the attempt to understand and articulate the meaning of revealed truth—belong to another sphere. This reflective dimension is important because it allows the human mind to participate actively in the process of spiritual and intellectual growth. Theological reflection develops within the boundaries established by dogma. In other words, dogma defines the framework within which theological thought may operate. Unfortunately, dogma is often misunderstood as something that suppresses human thought or restricts intellectual freedom.
This perception is incorrect. Dogma should not be understood as a limitation but rather as a guide that directs human thought toward the truth. True intellectual freedom is not opposed to dogma but is revealed through it. If God is understood as the ultimate truth, and if this truth is known through revelation—which we call dogma—then the knowledge of God cannot be a source of limitation. On the contrary, it becomes the path that leads the human person toward communion with God.
Therefore, dogma does not hinder thinking; instead, it restrains false thinking and protects the truth from distortion. Throughout history, the emergence of truth has often been accompanied by the appearance of false interpretations. As the second century Christian philosopher Athenagoras observed, whenever truth arises, false versions of truth appear alongside it, making discernment difficult. In this sense, the function of dogma is protective. It safeguards the authentic content of revelation and preserves it from false additions or distortions.
Dogma, therefore, should not be seen as a restriction of thought but as a divine guide that directs human beings toward salvation. From this perspective, dogmatic theology relies heavily on the literary and theological sources of the Church while also engaging with the dimension of doxa, which represents the sphere of theological reflection. At the same time, the Church carefully guards the apostolic tradition and seeks to prevent the spread of teachings that do not arise from the apostolic source. Earlier we discussed the first dimension of ecclesiastical literature, which is expressed through the concept of dogma. We now turn to the second dimension, which may be described as the interpretative or exploratory aspect of theology— doxa.
Although the terms dogma and doxa originate from related conceptual roots, they developed distinct meanings. Dogma came to signify what is stable, authoritative, and unchangeable, while doxa refers to interpretation, opinion, and theological reflection. The Greek verb dokeō carries the meaning of “to think,” “to suppose,” or “to form an opinion. ” For this reason, doxa contains a personal dimension. As a theological opinion (theologoumenon), doxa inevitably includes elements of subjectivity and personal interpretation.
Furthermore, doxa often involves a degree of preference. A theologian may find one interpretation more convincing or more meaningful than another. Thus, doxa expresses not only an intellectual position but also a certain evaluative judgment within theological discourse. For Orthodox Christians, another important term is Orthodoxy. The Greek word orthos means “straight,” “correct,” or “true.
” In its original sense, the term referred to “right opinion” in the ancient world. However, within the life of the Church this meaning developed into the idea of right worship and right faith. Thus, the word did not simply describe correct belief. It gradually came to signify the true glorification of God—the proper and authentic expression of faith. In the history of Christian literature, the term Orthodoxy began to be used precisely in this sense.
In the Georgian tradition, this term appears from the sixth century, where it is associated with the meaning of glory—that is, doxa, meaning glory. Therefore, Orthodoxy can also be understood as “right glory” or “true glorification of God. ” The term Orthodoxy entered Georgian literary usage from Greek and became established in the literature of the sixth and seventh centuries. Later, in the eleventh century, Saint Arsen of Ikalto and Ephrem the Small translated the term doxa as “will” or as “a viewpoint expressed by me,” indicating a more interpretative understanding of the term. To understand the nature of Christian literature more deeply, we must turn especially to the Bible.
It may sound surprising, but we can state as a principle that church literature does not possess an independent value or purpose by itself. Before explaining this statement, we must remember that the teaching of the Church as divine truth has been revealed in written form in the book known as the Bible. The Bible contains the written revelation that communicates what is necessary for human life and salvation. The Bible has a unique and intrinsic value. It is often called “the Book of Books.
” Church literature receives its highest authority and significance only in relation to the Bible as Holy Scripture. In other words, church literature does not stand independently; it exists only in inseparable connection with the divine Scriptures. For this reason, we do not find teachings in church literature that contradict the Bible or fail to interpret it. Naturally, this raises an important question. If the Bible —both the Old and the New Testaments in their inseparable unity—already contains everything necessary for human salvation, and if all believers and church leaders accept that all essential teaching is already present in Scripture, then why was such an extensive body of church literature created?
The Church has always believed that nothing necessary for salvation exists outside the Bible. Every good and essential teaching is contained within it. Everything that needed to be revealed to humanity through words has already been revealed in Scripture. Therefore, the question arises: if everything is already written in the Bible, why was it necessary to create such a vast and extensive body of church literature? Church literature, even from a quantitative perspective, is extremely rich and abundant.
Although everything necessary is indeed revealed in the Bible, it is expressed in the language of the Bible itself. The task of church literature is therefore to interpret, explain, and illuminate this biblical language so that the meaning of the divine revelation may be more clearly understood. From ancient times, the Fathers of the Church have taught that the same doctrine can be expressed in different forms of language. One form is the biblical language, which includes the prophetic language of the Old Testament and the evangelical and apostolic language of the New Testament. This unity may be described as the spiritual continuity of the prophetic–apostolic tradition.
The language of the Bible often contains symbols, images, and allegories. At the same time, the same teachings can also be expressed not in the language of Scripture itself, but in the language of interpretation and explanation. The Bible rarely uses a systematic or analytical style of argumentation. Instead, it speaks in the language of direct revelation. Because of this, both the prophetic and the apostolic word require interpretation.
The believers who first encountered these texts were not always able to understand their full depth. Of course, not every member of the faithful could immediately grasp the profound meaning contained in the prophetic and apostolic message. Here we encounter an important principle concerning the reading of the Bible. As many readers as there are, there may also be many interpretations of the biblical narrative. Each reader may explain the text in his or her own way, often believing that meaningful and deep parallels exist between personal life and the message of Scripture.
Even when these parallels contain valuable insights, they remain the result of the reader’s own reasoning, experience, and perspective. In other words, they represent a personal interpretation of the Bible. However, we must also remember that the Bible is not merely a text for intellectual reflection. It is the word of salvation, given so that humanity may be redeemed and saved. Therefore, an important question arises: among the many interpretations that exist, are all of them correct?
Are all of them salvific and true? It is obvious that this cannot be the case. If this is true, another question naturally follows: which interpretation of the Bible is the correct one? How can we protect ourselves from false or pseudo-truths? To answer this question, we must pay attention to an essential theological point.
We speak of the Bible as the written testimony of truth. It is well known that the Bible is often called the Word of God, even the living Word. At the same time, in Christian theology the title Word of God has a deeper and more personal meaning. It refers to the second Person of the Holy Trinity—the Son of God. The Son of God is the eternal, hypostatic Word.
In this sense, the Bible may be understood as the material garment in which this divine Word is expressed. When the truth was to be revealed to humanity, the Truth itself became incarnate. Human beings could not approach truth in its pure and immaterial form. Since humanity exists within the material world, divine truth had to be communicated in a way that people could understand and receive. Nevertheless, the material can never fully contain the immaterial.
For this reason, divine truth is often expressed through symbols, images, and allegories, through indirect and symbolic language. A person who perceives reality through material senses cannot receive the immaterial in a purely immaterial form. Therefore, divine truth is communicated according to the capacity of human understanding. The divine message becomes clothed in material words, in written and spoken language. The Fathers of the Church often call this the “spoken word.
” In Greek theology, the term Logos prophorikos refers to the expressed or spoken word. The second part of the word, -phorikos, comes from a term that can be translated as “bearing” or “clothed with. ” Similar expressions appear in theological language: Theophoros (“God-bearing”), Christophoros (“Christ-bearing”), and Pneumatophoros (“Spiritbearing”). Another Greek term is Logos endiathetos, which refers to the inner or indwelling word, the word that exists beyond material expression. The inner word becomes the spoken word (prophorikos), and this transformation is what makes the revelation of truth accessible to us.
In this sense, the Bible is the spoken word that contains within it the deeper meaning of the inner word mentioned above. This leads us to an important conclusion: the Bible, as a written and material expression, can be understood as the spiritual garment of the Word of God, the second hypostasis of the Holy Trinity, revealed through the cooperative action of God the Father and the Holy Spirit. For this reason, we may symbolically describe Holy Scripture as the garment of the Word of God. In patristic thought, however, the idea of a “garment” is often closely related to the idea of the body—or even, in a more concrete sense, the flesh. Yet body and flesh are not identical concepts.
Saint Ignatius of Antioch, a great Father of the Church who lived at the turn of the first and second centuries, once wrote in reference to the Gospel: “I hasten to the Gospel as to the flesh of Jesus. ” By this statement he symbolically presents the Gospel as the visible and written manifestation of Christ’s body. This expression is not literal but symbolic, emphasizing the deep connection between the written Word and the incarnate Word. The Bible may be called the true and unique garment of the Word, because Christ Himself fully embodied these words and fulfilled them in His life. In Him the truth of Scripture was completely revealed and realized.
Therefore, this truth does not need to be sought elsewhere. The Church is often called the “mystical body” (to soma mystikon), the mysterious and spiritual body of Christ. When we approach the question of biblical interpretation, we face an important and serious task: which tradition and which body of church literature truly understands and correctly interprets Holy Scripture? The only authentic and salvific path is the ecclesial path, the continuous tradition of the Holy Fathers. This conviction is grounded in the central dogma that the Church is the spiritual body of Christ.
Christ Himself is the Truth, and He is the One revealed in Holy Scripture. In fact, the entire content of Scripture ultimately speaks about Him. If the Bible is the written revelation of the Word of God, then it is natural that the correct understanding of this revelation was entrusted by Christ to the Church. When the Truth was revealed to humanity, it was also preserved within the life of the Church. It would be impossible for the true interpretation of Scripture to exist outside the Church, in an alien environment, while the Church itself remained deprived of it.
If that were the case, the Church could no longer be considered the spiritual body of Christ. Instead, some other community would have to be recognized as that body. But the Church has always preserved the authentic understanding of Scripture through its living tradition. Nevertheless, we must also approach the nature of Christian literature in a practical way. Where can we find the true path of interpretation?
This path is found only where Christ Himself established it—the Church, which leads believers toward the gate of salvation. Therefore, the interpretation of the Church represents the only fully correct and salvific interpretation of the Bible. Other interpretations may have their own value, but they do not possess salvific authority. Value itself may exist in different forms and degrees. Some interpretations may be intellectually rich, philosophically deep, or artistically meaningful.
They may reveal the poetic beauty or literary character of the biblical text. However, such interpretations do not necessarily possess soteriological value, that is, the power to lead a person toward salvation. The Bible must be understood as a whole, and its message must be grasped within its full spiritual context. The Church guides believers toward this comprehensive understanding. From this perspective, we may conclude that church teaching is essentially the salvific interpretation of the Bible.
In other words, it is the correct interpretation of Scripture. The Bible itself contains the teaching of salvation, and the purpose of church literature is to clarify and explain this teaching to the faithful. Church literature, therefore, can be understood as an extended interpretation of Holy Scripture—a vast body of commentary on the Bible written with the single purpose of revealing the path to salvation. Its goal is to make the meaning of salvation accessible to believers. Church literature has meaning only in connection with the material it interprets, namely the Bible.
The Bible itself is the primary source of all truth, and commentary has value only in relation to that source. The tradition of the Church and the works of the Holy Fathers stand between us and Christ in a guiding sense. They function as guides, signposts, and lamps that illuminate the path leading to Christ. What, then, is the relationship between the Bible and church literature? The Bible expresses the truth in biblical language, while church literature expresses the same truth in the language of interpretation, the theological language of the Church.
One could even say that church literature is, in a sense, the Bible expressed in interpretative language. This statement should not be misunderstood. It simply emphasizes the deep and inseparable connection between the Bible as a written monument of revelation and church literature as a vast body of theological writings. Together they form a unified and inseparable whole. This naturally leads us to another important question: what forms of transmission of teaching exist within the tradition of the Church?
The Church tradition received the Bible as a collection of sacred books, and at the same time it interprets the Bible and explains its authority and dignity. Church teaching is founded upon the Bible and exists in constant relationship with it. Not all people immediately reach the same level of spiritual understanding. Those who are new to the Church often need guidance and support. Those who are more spiritually advanced also have their own teachers and spiritual guides, and these guides themselves have teachers who stand even higher in spiritual wisdom.
This hierarchical structure is clearly visible in the life of the Church. This hierarchy does not exist for the sake of power or privilege, but for a single purpose: to ensure that the path leading to salvation remains accessible to everyone who desires it. For this reason, the teaching of the Church is universal. It bears the mark of universality because it does not exclude any human person from the possibility of salvation. Salvation is not reserved for a select group of individuals.
It is offered to all who sincerely desire to be saved. A person who grows spiritually and advances in the knowledge of God naturally helps others along the same path. Such a person explains to others what he has learned and shares the interpretation that he himself has received. Just as he grows spiritually, he also helps others grow on the same path. In Greek, the interpretation of Scripture is called exegesis (exēgēsis), and the discipline that studies interpretation is called exegetics.
This is one of the major directions within church literature. In a broad sense, much of church literature can be understood as exegetical, since it interprets and explains the Bible. Even the Bible itself may be understood as a form of interpretation, because through it the supreme divine truth is revealed to humanity. Through the Bible, the Word of God speaks to us. Within the history of revelation, even angels were sometimes messengers and interpreters of divine truth.
This idea is discussed by Dionysius the Areopagite, who teaches that angels serve as teachers of humanity, helping people ascend toward a higher understanding of divine truth. The transmission of church teaching occurs in several forms. The first important form is written transmission. The primary example of this is Holy Scripture itself. Church writings imitate this biblical model by preserving and transmitting teaching in written form.
The second form is oral transmission. This form also originates from God. We see it already in the life of Christ Himself. Christ did not write any texts; instead, He taught His disciples orally. The apostles also preached both in writing and orally.
Not all of their teachings were recorded in written form. Similarly, many of the Fathers of the Church did not personally write down their sermons. Often their listeners wrote them down, and in this way those teachings entered the written tradition of the Church. Sometimes the opposite process occurred: a written source was studied, and later a priest or teacher would preach its content orally. Such practices were common in the life of the Church, especially because not every teacher possessed the same depth of theological understanding.
The third form is the mystical or sacramental transmission of teaching. Here the word “mystery” does not mean something secret in the sense of hidden knowledge. Rather, it refers to the seven sacraments of the Church, through which divine teaching is communicated within the life of the Church. For example, when a person receives Baptism, the highest teaching of the Church is already communicated through the sacrament itself. The person is purified, enlightened, and spiritually reborn.
The sacrament itself becomes a form of divine teaching. The Eucharist, however, represents the highest and most perfect fulfillment of this mystery. It is the greatest gift given to humanity, yet at the same time it remains beyond the full comprehension of any creature. No written text and no oral teaching can fully express its spiritual depth. In the Eucharist, God Himself is given to the believer in a real and direct way.
This is not merely symbolic; it is the true reception of divine reality. Therefore, this sacrament represents the highest form of the transmission of divine truth. In fact, it is more than the transmission of teaching—it is the direct participation in truth itself. No one can perform this mystery independently. The sacrament is celebrated through the ministry of the priest, who is entrusted with this sacred responsibility within the life of the Church.
The sacrament of marriage is also a way of transmitting Church teaching. In marriage, guidance is given, and catechesis is provided by the priest to the newlyweds. The blessing of oil, like confession, is a way of passing on the highest spiritual teaching. When the truth is explained to a person, it heals both the body and the soul. Another way of transmitting teaching is through personal example.
A person who lives a holy and virtuous life becomes a model for others. Future generations observe such a life and strive to follow it. This includes holy fathers, ascetics, and martyrs who, through their own lives, demonstrated and overcame the temptations of the world. Teaching cannot exist without explanation or understanding. The Church excludes magic, esotericism, or elitism in accessing the truth.
The truth is meant for everyone. The production of literature is also a kind of sacrifice: it transmits knowledge and teaching to future generations. A person can serve as a model through written teaching, oral teaching, preaching, and apostolic instruction. In this way, he becomes a living embodiment of the teaching and the sacraments. No one can perform Church sacraments without a priest; the priest carries them out with the bishop’s blessing.
For example, Cyril of Alexandria wrote a famous commentary on the Gospel of John. At first, he hesitated to undertake this work, but eventually, he agreed. He stated that he would offer this work as a gift and a spiritual sacrifice. He understood that explaining and writing the Gospel was a true act of devotion and spiritual labor. An early Christian writer said that he initially did not understand much of Christian teaching.
But when he witnessed Christians bravely facing trials and even death, he was convinced of their sincerity. Their example inspired him to become a Christian. Becoming a Christian means accepting the teaching, following it, and entering the path of salvation. Church teaching can be expressed in various literary forms: epistolary, exegetical, dogmatic, polemical, ascetic, liturgical, and hagiographical. While the forms differ, the essence of the teaching remains the same.
Some mistakenly think that Church literature is uniform and offers nothing new; this is incorrect. There is significant diversity. Dogma is the revelation of God’s wisdom. A person cannot alter Holy Scripture with his own understanding. Faith means accepting this truth and following God without deviation.