From the beginning of the first chapter: WHAT IS A DOGMA? THIS title, -What is a Dogma?- is only a simple question and by no means does it promise an answer. It is a question from the philosopher to the theologian calling for an answer from the theologian to the philosopher. It would indeed be vain to pretend to give here a complete and definite answer to this complex question. Such problems cannot be solved in a few pages. Therefore the reader must not look for a settled doctrine in the short article which is to follow ...
Read More
From the beginning of the first chapter: WHAT IS A DOGMA? THIS title, -What is a Dogma?- is only a simple question and by no means does it promise an answer. It is a question from the philosopher to the theologian calling for an answer from the theologian to the philosopher. It would indeed be vain to pretend to give here a complete and definite answer to this complex question. Such problems cannot be solved in a few pages. Therefore the reader must not look for a settled doctrine in the short article which is to follow, nor even for categorical theses on any point. If he sometimes finds that I speak in too affirmative a tone let him be kind enough to admit that I do so only for the sake of greater clearness in my questions. In fact I wish to confine myself to simple suggestions which I present merely as rough drafts of solutions offered for the criticism of those who have authority to judge of the subject. And moreover I can justify this attitude of mine by an imperative reason, namely that I am not a theologian and do not like to decide matters in which I am not proficient. Perhaps someone will ask, why then do I take the trouble to treat a subject of which I admit I have no particular knowledge? Here is my reason. In our day every layman is called upon to fulfill the duty of apostleship in the incredulous world in which he lives. He alone can serve efficiently as the vehicle and intermediary of the Christian message to those who would not trust the priests. Therefore it is inevitable that some problems of apologetics should be laid before him, problems whose solution is an absolute necessity for him if he does not wish to fail in the task which the force of circumstances has laid upon him without possibility of escape, if he wishes to be always ready, following the counsel of the Apostle, to satisfy those who ask him the reason for his faith. It is only natural therefore that I desire to be informed; and if I formulate my question publicly it is because I am not the only one in this situation, and because there is a general interest that the answer shall also be a public one. Besides I have another motive for acting as I am. If I freely acknowledge my incompetence in a matter which is properly theological, yet on the other hand I consider that I am well situated to appreciate correctly the state of mind in contemporary philosophers that is opposed to the understanding of Christian truth. And it is to this that I bear witness in saying frankly, even brutally (if I must in order to be fully understood), what I know, what I have observed, what perhaps are not always sufficiently comprehended, namely the exact reasons why unbelieving philosophers of to-day repulse the truth that is brought to them and the legitimate causes (agreeing in this with the Christian philosophers themselves) why they are not satisfied with the explanations that are furnished them.
Read Less
