Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Evangelical
About “Dogmas” And Closed-Mindedness

About “Dogmas” And Closed-Mindedness

Last updated on: February 14, 2023 at 8:58 am by Roger E. Olson

0 Comments

About “Dogmas” And Closed-Mindedness 2023-02-14T08:58:48-05:00 Roger E. Olson

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

About “Dogmas” and Closed-Mindedness

What is a “dogma?” Dictionary definitions don’t always help. Words mean how people, especially scholars and experts, use them. A “dogma” is any idea or belief that is considered basic and is somehow required within a community. (Remember, these days “community” is a pretty broad concept.) If anyone within a community faces sanctions, formal or informal, for denying a widely held belief of the community, that makes it a dogma of that community.

In the above I am speaking as a religion scholar and someone who has studied the phenomena of dogmas and heresies much. As a religion scholar I know, for example, that not all dogmas are written down or enforced by a specific authority (person or group of leaders). Many religious communities have dogmas that are simply taken for granted such that anyone who denies one of them is ostracized.

I am not talking about THEOLOGICAL dogmas in the traditional sense of the ancient creeds (Apostles, Nicene, Athanasian)—yet.

Regardless of how a dictionary may define “dogma,” the reality is that everyone knows that a dogma is a belief not to be questioned, especially within some community. Now, grounding of dogmas differs a great deal. Some are just traditional beliefs so generally assumed that anyone within the community who dares to question it will automatically be treated as a heretic and ostracized in some way. Some dogmas in some communities are established by some human authority (e.g., the magisterium in the Catholic Church) and everyone knows that seriously questioning them will probably lead to sanctions such as “silencing” (if you’re a Catholic theologian, for example).

My point is simply that a “dogma” is any belief considered formally (in writing) or informally (as a matter of informal consensus) to be beyond debate within that community. “Community” is another difficult word to define. At least these days, in the last few decades, we hear it used of almost any group of people who share some affinity.

Now I want to move on to a serious suggestion. IF we are interested in truth, as I believe we should be (and here, in this blog “community” that is a dogma :), then we, in any community, should have structures in place for challenging dogmas with impunity, without fear of sanctions. However, such challenging should normally be with intersubjective reasons that are based on the community’s shared sources and norms. The community should listen to and consider the challenge insofar as it is made by a credentialed member of the community. (A community may but is not required to consider challenges by non-members.)

Let me give an example. The “right to privacy” has become a dogma within American social life. It is, of course, not a totally settled dogma which is also normal. Most dogmas have some “loose ends around the edges.” Nevertheless, the “right to privacy” is pretty much a settled American dogma. It is not so in many societies. However, there are Americans who believe the “right to privacy” should not be a dogma BECAUSE, according to them, it is nowhere explicitly stated in the US Constitution. Legal scholars who defend the dogma appeal to a “penumbra” around the constitution, what it implies even if it does not state it explicitly. Occasionally some credentialed legal scholars (and others) challenge the right to privacy, right to its core. They should be heard and their challenges considered insofar as they appeal to the Constitution itself. The US Constitution is America’s “super-dogma.” It is our basic law; it can be amended but only with tremendous effort and much controversy. But any American who dares to say it should be discarded is considered a heretic by most Americans.

So what about in Christian communities? What are our basic sources and norms? Well, traditionally, scripture and tradition. But both are open to differing interpretations. And most Christian communities have dogmas whether they admit it or not. Ask a Unitarian if their church would admit to full membership and even leadership a white supremacist. No matter what he or she may say, I don’t believe they would.

However, because truth matters more than anything, a reasonable challenge to a dogma ought to be given some serious consideration by some one or group in leadership and possibly by the community as a whole. Otherwise, truth takes a backseat to dogma.

Now to science. The American scientific community generally speaking treats naturalism as a dogma. I believe this is a mistake unless the community has some way of seriously considering challenges to that dogma by its credentialed members (e.g., scientists with earned doctoral degrees who have conducted serious research). But here I speak of methodological naturalism. It does seem to me that methodological naturalism is essential to modern science.

My concern, however, is that many outspoken scientists (think Carl Sagan) have publicly treated methodological naturalism as requiring metaphysical naturalism as its dogmatic foundation. I see absolutely no good reason for that. The leap from methodological naturalism to metaphysical naturalism is simply a leap without good reason. I do not object if a scientist ADMITS that his or her belief in metaphysical naturalism and/or materialism is his or her philosophy not required by his or her science. However, anyone who has functioned within a major research university knows that in a general way, metaphysical naturalism is smuggled into methodological naturalism in the ways in which science is taught.

Back to religion. Contrary to much modern science (not including its founders!), most, if not all, religion is fundamentally non-naturalistic in terms of metaphysical dogmas. Of course, there are exceptions. Some liberal theologians talk of “naturalistic theism.” I’m not sure, however, that their particular naturalism would be accepted as naturalism by many scientists. (Naturalistic theism has flourished at places like the University of Chicago School of Divinity.)

It seems to me that metaphysical non-naturalism (I am trying to avoid the term “supernaturalist” with all of its baggage) is essential to religion in a way metaphysical naturalism is NOT essential to science. Methodological naturalism is necessary to modern science, but metaphysical naturalism is not.

I could go on and on and on. I know I have left many questions open and unanswered, especially procedural ones. Those may have to wait for later musings.

*Note: If you choose to comment, please keep your comment relatively brief (no more than 100 words), on topic, addressed to me, civil and respectful (not hostile or argumentative), and devoid of pictures and links.*

Uncategorized

Previous Post

February 10, 2023

Are UFOs Real? Back to the Claim of “Scientific Dogmas”

Next Post

February 16, 2023 Truth and Trump

Recent Comments

0 | Leave a Comment

"“Secular” means non-religious. No religion is embraced by American society anymore. Christianity remains the leading ..."

Roger Olson

Billy Graham’s Successor?

"I will look him up. Never heard of him."

Roger Olson

Billy Graham’s Successor?

"Where and when and how did I “support” a leader or church…? I said I ..."

Roger Olson

I’m Proud of Adam Hamilton (and ..."

"4-5% of the population is atheist or literally 'secular' not the entire country.Thats a really ..."

davidt

Billy Graham’s Successor?

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Against Liberal Theology Uncategorized

Select a Month November 2026 October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What does Paul tell Titus that the grace of God teaches us to do?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Say no to ungodliness and live self-controlled, upright and godly lives Spread the gospel Love one another Obey the authorities