Terms, the Resources of the Church, and the Understanding of the Bible

photo by Valentin Balan

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something rigid, outdated, or harmful.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.