A Short Guide to Encyclicals, the Catechism, and How to Parse Dogma from Opinion
Many Catholics are told that “the Church teaches” a particular principle or set of beliefs. Sometimes this claim is accurate; in other cases, questions arise about the nature of the teaching, the degree of authority it carries, or whether it admits debate and discussion among the faithful. This is because not all Church teachings, though all worthy of consideration, reflection, and good-faith understanding, carry the same weight. The distinction between them is especially important for lay Catholics who may find themselves questioning a particular teaching, and wondering not only whether it is true, but whether they may, while remaining loyal to the Church, question it at all. In this essay, we aim to help readers understand the different forms of Church teaching and provide a simple framework for testing the claim that “the Church teaches” a particular thing.
Catholic theologians typically distinguish between four kinds of teaching within the Church: (1) those taken to be divinely revealed, (2) doctrines definitively taught, (3) authentic ordinary teachings, and (4) prudential or pastoral judgments. The former two categories, as we will parse further later, engage with the infallible magisterium, whereas the latter two do not.
Divinely Revealed Teachings (Dogma)
The first kind of teaching, teachings which are taken to be divinely revealed, are also referred to as dogma. These dogmatic teachings are to be assented to and believed by all faithful and loyal members of the Church. The Second Vatican Council states that “when either the Roman Pontiff or the Body of Bishops together with him defines a judgment, they pronounce it in accordance with Revelation itself, which all are obliged to abide by and be in conformity with…” (Lumen Gentium §25). Complete and obstinate denial of these teachings is considered heretical (Code of Canon Law, can. 751). One such example of this is the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, pronounced by Pope Pius IX in 1854, which held that Mary was conceived without original sin. These kinds of teachings are typically pronounced either by the Pope or Ecumenical Councils, but they can also be taught by the ordinary and universal magisterium when the bishops of the Church, in communion with the Pope, consistently teach a doctrine as divinely revealed to be held by members of the Church (Code of Canon Law, can. 749, §§1-2). It is important to note that not all teachings or pronouncements of the Pope are dogma, and in fact most are not. In rare cases, the Pope may speak “from the chair” or, in the latin, Ex Cathedra (the last such statement was made by Pope Pius XII in 1950). These are the papal pronouncements by which dogma is formally defined. These pronouncements, as stated above, are not the only dogmatic truths within the Church. Both ordinary and universal teachings of a truth as divinely revealed are infallible. For example, articles of the Nicene Creed such as the Trinity or the divinity of Christ are taught by and transmitted through the ordinary and universal magisterium, and enjoy the same infallible and dogmatic status as Ex Cathedra papal pronouncements.
Doctrines Definitively Taught
The second kind of teaching, doctrines which are definitively taught, are similar to divinely revealed teachings in that they must be accepted and held by faithful Catholics. The difference between the dogmatic teachings of the church, as described above, and doctrinal teachings is that the former are to be understood as divinely revealed, while the latter are considered to be inseparably connected with Divine Revelation, but not divinely revealed themselves. The teaching remains infallible, but the nature of the teaching is different. This is described in Canon Law, which separates divinely revealed teachings from definitive doctrinal teachings, but nonetheless asserts that the former ought to be “believed in divine and Catholic faith,” while the latter requires the faithful to “accept and hold each and every teaching” (Code of Canon Law, can. 750). The technical distinction between believing, accepting, and holding is an interesting theological question, but does not impact the fact that both categories require the assent of the faithful. An oft-cited example of such a teaching is the doctrine of the reservation of the priesthood to men, which, while enjoying a lengthy history, teaching, and tradition, was reaffirmed by Pope John Paul II in his 1994 apostolic letter entitled Ordinatio Sacerdotalis. It was later clarified by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, led by then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, that this doctrine belonged to the “deposit of faith” and required the definitive assent of the faithful, though the clarification did not explicitly present the doctrine as divinely revealed. This teaching, like all teachings within this category, is proposed infallibly, but is not proposed as divinely revealed.
Authentic Ordinary Teachings
The third kind of teaching, authentic ordinary teachings, are not quite as definitive, yet remain both important and binding for faithful Catholics. Unlike the prior two categories, these teachings do not require definitive assent, but they do require “a religious submission of the intellect and the will” (Code of Canon Law, can. 752). It is expected of faithful Catholics that, in both the mind and the actions of the body, they will “avoid whatever does not accord with that doctrine,” even if the authority pronouncing that doctrine–whether it is the Pope, the College of Bishops, or individual Bishops–does not “intend to proclaim that doctrine by definitive act” (Code of Canon Law, can. 752). Papal encyclicals (which we will discuss in greater detail later) on faith and morals often fall under this category, and it is therefore incumbent upon believing Catholics to understand the nature of the teaching they are reading, even if the announcements are being made by high-ranking clergymen up to and including the Pope. To clarify, religious submission to these teachings is not absolute. Where the teaching presented is not proposed as definitive, the faithful may suspend internal assent, so long as this suspension is done for sound reasons, is held and expressed in a respectful manner, and avoids public contradiction (Donum Veritatis, §§28-31) .
Prudential or Pastoral Judgments
The fourth and final kind of teaching, prudential or pastoral judgments, are similarly not considered to be definitive doctrine. The major distinction between authentic ordinary teachings and these kinds of teachings is that the former have to do with general or universal faith or moral principles, whereas the latter tend to involve the application of these principles to contingent cultural and historical circumstances. For example, the above-mentioned Rerum Novarum is in part an authentic ordinary teaching in its discussion of the moral principles underlying labor relations, but also a prudential or pastoral judgment in its application of these principles to the particular historical circumstances of the employers and laborers at the end of the 19th century. Catholics are called to submit their intellect and their will to the moral principles laid out in these authoritative documents and declarations, but they are not necessarily required to submit to particular applications of these principles (Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith, 2002). One contemporary example of this is the Church’s teaching on immigration. Pope Leo XIV has, in the last couple of years, made several statements addressing the issue of immigration across the world, and particularly in the United States. When reading or hearing these statements, one should separate Pope Leo XIV’s appeal to universal human dignity (definitive doctrine) from his calling for the end to specific United States immigration policies such as family separation (prudential judgment). Catholics are called to accept and hold the former, but may dissent from the latter so long as it is done with right reason, in the proper spirit, and in a non-public manner (Donum Veritatis, §§28-31).
Papal Encyclicals and the Catechism
Now that we understand the nature of different teachings within the Church, let’s discuss two forms of messaging within the Church that occasionally stir confusion among the laity: (1) papal encyclicals and (2) The Catechism of the Catholic Church.
A papal encyclical is a letter from the Pope to an audience of Bishops with the intention of guiding their ministries. These encyclicals are released to the public for the spiritual benefit of both Catholics and non-Catholics alike. Many Catholics and non-Catholics believe that encyclicals, as a result of papal authorship, enjoy an inherent infallibility. This is not true. To be sure, papal encyclicals should always be treated by faithful Catholics as solemn and important documents. Arguments made within them should not be easily dismissed, regardless of their status as definitive doctrine or mere practical application or prudential judgment. After all, the Pope is the leader of the Church, and our earthly spiritual father, and is therefore due an effort among his flock to interpret his words with sincerity and seriousness. That said, the mere fact of an encyclical being authored and signed by the seat of St. Peter does not necessarily grant it an infallible status. According to the Second Vatican Council, the nature of the teaching being presented within a given papal encyclical should be read according to the Pope’s “manifest mind and will” (Lumen Gentium §25). His mind and will can be known “from the character of the documents, from his frequent repetition of the same doctrine, or from his manner of speaking” (Lumen Gentium §25). In other words, the authority of a teaching is determined not merely by the fact that it bears a papal signature, but by how the teaching is presented, how consistently it has been taught, and whether the Pope intends to propose it definitively.
Another document that can cause confusion is the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Like papal encyclicals, it contains teachings of varying levels of authority, ranging from dogmas and definitive doctrines to ordinary magisterial teachings and prudential judgments. Many Catholics assume that every statement in the Catechism carries the same weight or that anything printed there is automatically dogma. In reality, the Catechism is a compendium: a systematic summary and synthesis of Catholic teaching drawn from Scripture, Tradition, councils, papal teaching, and other authoritative sources. Because it presents many different kinds of teaching in one volume, it must be read carefully. As Pope St. John Paul II described the Catechism, it is “a sure norm for teaching the faith” (Fidei Depositum, sec. IV), but this does not mean that every statement within it is equally definitive, infallible, or binding. The authority of a particular passage depends upon the kind of teaching being presented and the sources on which it rests.
A Practical Method for Reading
So how should we read these documents then? How does a lay Catholic properly interpret and submit to these documents in accordance with Church teaching? While we cannot hope to be entirely definitive on these questions, we feel that there are several important steps to follow which will help a lay Catholic properly interpret these, and other, Church documents.
The steps we recommend are the following: (1) identify the kind of document, (2) identify what it actually asserts, (3) distinguish the principle to its application of contingent circumstances, and (4) separate pastoral or prudential judgements from authentic ordinary or definitive doctrinal/dogmatic teachings.
Let us walk through the steps with papal encyclicals. First, in reading a papal encyclical, a Catholic must realize that the identification of this document as such should put the reader in a receptive frame of mind, because, as we have stated, even non-definitive teachings given by the papacy ought to be treated solemnly. The reader should also remember, as we stated before, that not everything he will read in this document is dogmatic or definitive, and that he ought to pay attention to the Pope’s “manifest mind and will” (Lumen Gentium §25). Once the reader has identified the document as a work of the papacy and framed his mind to receive it properly, he should identify what it actually asserts. For example, while Rerum Novarum touches extensively upon economic and political questions, it should not primarily be read as an economic treatise, a political manifesto, or a defense of either capitalism or socialism. At its core, the encyclical teaches moral principles concerning the dignity of work, the rights and duties of employers and employees, and the obligations of justice within economic life.
Once the reader identifies these core themes, one should move to separate the moral principles the document asserts from how it claims they should be implemented. Returning to Rerum Novarum, one must separate the principles of universal human dignity, laborers deserving just treatment, and the government’s duty to protect the common good enumerated in the document, from Pope Leo XIII’s arguments in favor of particular rules surrounding the requirements of employers and what constitutes dignified working conditions. For a specific example, one must separate the idea that, “the following duties bind the wealthy owner and the employer: not to look upon their work people as their bondsmen, but to respect in every man his dignity as a person ennobled by Christian character” (Rerum Novarum §20) from the argument that “those who work in mines and quarries, and extract coal, stone and metals from the bowels of the earth, should have shorter hours in proportion as their labor is more severe and trying to health” (Rerum Novarum §42).
We then move to the following step and begin to separate which principles asserted constitute definitive doctrine, which constitute authentic ordinary teaching, and which are only prudential or pastoral judgments. In the above quotes, the former would be considered an ordinary authentic teaching, while the latter would be considered a prudential judgment. In other parts of the text, Pope Leo XIII makes statements which reference settled Church doctrine; his statement that “no man can hope for eternal reward unless he follow in the blood-stained footprints of his Saviour,” (Rerum Novarum §21) rests upon the Church’s dogmatic teaching that salvation comes through Jesus Christ. But it is important to remember that dogmatic teachings are identified not merely by their subject matter, but by the manner in which they are proposed. In this passage, Pope Leo XIII does not appear to intend to define a dogma or doctrine himself, but rather wants to invoke an already established doctrinal truth in a rhetorical and pastoral manner. This is better understood when one contrasts this with an example from Pope St. John Paul II’s Evangelium Vitae, which makes a definitive declaration against abortion when he says, “therefore, by the authority which Christ conferred upon Peter and his Successors, in communion with the Bishops—who on various occasions have condemned abortion… I declare that direct abortion, that is, abortion willed as an end or as a means, always constitutes a grave moral disorder” (Evangelium Vitae §62). His manner of speaking here (“by the authority…I declare”) suggests an intent to declare doctrine, whereas no similar intent appears in the previous quote from Rerum Novarum.
Moving into the Catechism, the first step becomes key. The Catechism itself is, as we have said, a compendium, and so it is not a source of definitive doctrine or dogma on its own. It cites different documents with varying natures, and so the nature of the teaching hinges upon the source and the nature of the documents which it cites. When reading any paragraph in the Catechism, then, the reader should look at what a given statement is citing as its source. For example, paragraph 254 of the Catechism which asserts “The dogma of the Holy Trinity” cites Fides Damasi, the Council of Toledo XI, and the Lateran Council IV. All of these sources explicitly affirm the doctrine of Trinity as a dogmatic teaching. These sources themselves are, according to Canon Law, capable of declaring dogmatic truths and do just that as indicated by their intention within the documents (Code of Canon Law, can. 749, §§1-2). Therefore, the reader would be justified and accurate in taking this teaching within the Catechism as dogmatic. Essentially, when working with the Catechism, one should look first for the sources of a given paragraph or statement, and then follow the steps laid out in the previous paragraph to identify the nature of the teaching contained within it.
Conclusion
So how does one know whether “the Church teaches” something? The answer begins by identifying the source. Is the statement found in a council, an encyclical, the Catechism, a papal definition, or some other document? The reader should then ask: What exactly is being asserted? Is the statement proposing a doctrine, explaining a doctrine, or applying a doctrine? And at what level is it being taught? Catholics need not become theologians to answer these questions. As Catholic laity, we “hold the right–and at times the duty–to share [our] views on the good of the Church and the wider community” (Code of Canon Law, can. 212, §3). It is our hope that in learning these methods, our fellow Catholics can learn to fulfill this right and duty responsibly by becoming more educated members of the Church community and more formidable defenders of the faith.
