Doctrinal hierarchies are conventionally understood across the diversity of theological disciplines. Multiple types of hierarchy within the confounds of Christian theology will be mentioned here. Systematicians have a general organizational structure to their systematic theologies, beginning with Revelation, Scripture, and Creation, then moving into to Theology Proper, Humanity, Sin, Salvation, and Eschatology (and of course many doctrines in between). Although it is also common to find Theology Proper (Doctrine of God) as the opening dialogue in systematic theologies, especially from those authors who are inclined to take a more philosophical approach to theology. Specific ordering is constructed according to the systematician’s preference, including the right to omit undesired doctrines; however, for the most part any systematic theology will follow a similar path.
The reason for this organizational structure is neither because they desire to open up their discussion with the most important doctrines followed by those lesser ones, leaving least for last, nor because they desire to build up the anticipation of the reader toward the most important doctrine, saving the best for last. Rather, the reason systematicians generally follow a similar structure is because of the contextual presuppositions of each given doctrine. What I mean is logical priority: there is a kind of logical ordering necessary for greater comprehension. It would be odd to discuss the doctrine of Scripture prior to the doctrine of Revelation, for instance, since Scripture is a form of divine revelation. Discussing salvation before the implications of a sinful humanity wouldn’t make much sense either. The reader benefits from the intentional doctrinal arrangement within systematic theologies. This arrangement of doctrine in a systematic setting is one sense in which we can speak of a hierarchy of Christian doctrine: not dealing with centrality or importance but with the content of one doctrine being logically more foundational to the contents of another.[1]
Theologians recognize other forms of hierarchies concerning Christian doctrine. The second hierarchical form correlates to the importance of some doctrines over others. Importance is of course a relative term: to whom or for what purpose? Intuitively Christians hold some doctrines near and dear to their hearts and others only superficially. For a biblically faithful Christian, the doctrine of inerrancy is paramount, not so for an atheist who is considering a change of heart. A deviating atheist should prioritize his gaze upon, say, the doctrine of Christ, avoiding unnecessary quibbles over the initial appearance of minor errors in the biblical text. Some Christians might find the doctrine of angels to be crucial in living out their Christian life and the doctrine of the Trinity to be frivolous due to its inherent complexity. Christian philosophical scholars would find the opposite to be true. Determining the hierarchical status of Christian doctrines based on their level of importance is highly subjective and ambiguous. Therefore, it is uncommon to find theologians speaking of doctrinal hierarchy with respect to importance.
In most cases, the centrality of Christian doctrine within Christianity as a coherent system of faith is the proper reference for hierarchy. When I speak of hierarchy in terms of centrality, rather than thinking of a strict list of one doctrine proceeded by another until the full list of all doctrines has been constructed, think of a hierarchy as three encompassing categories. Imagine a small circle, and outside of that circle is a bigger circle, and another circle outside of that one.
The most outer layer represents a level 1 doctrine, which designate the most peripheral doctrines. Those doctrines that Christians of a single local community can simply disagree on are deemed the most peripheral. All of the differences one has with their local churchmate would be counted in the first layer, including those differences that are unknown. For example, if you believe the earth is billions of years old, come to find out that your local pastor believes the earth is only a few thousand years old, would that compel you to leave your church? For the vast majority of Christians the response would be no. Keep in mind, again, there will always be some subjectivity in deciding where on the hierarchy any particular doctrine falls.
Moving to the next layer of the second circle is a level 2 doctrine, according to which Christians in a local church cannot simply ‘agree to disagree’. Level 2 doctrines tend to be those that divide denominations from other denominations and even cause splits within a particular denomination itself. For example, let’s say you believe the sinfulness of homosexuality is taught in the Bible, but the pastor of your church openly teaches a pro-homosexuality stance, would that dissuade you from attending that church? If so, then this belief would be placed in the second level of the hierarchy. Also consider the variation of perspectives on the Eucharist. Many Catholics would not be comfortable participating in communion at a protestant church, in which case their doctrine of transubstantiation would be placed in this middle layer. On an encouraging note, it is to be expected that Christians who seek the truth of level 2 doctrines with the utmost piety, biblical integrity, and well-informed study may reach opposing conclusions.
Level 3 doctrines, representing the most inner layer, are defined as those that are nonnegotiable and most central to the Christian faith. To illustrate, imagine you were on the Titanic as it was sinking and you only had minutes to articulate and persuade those around you to accept Christ, what would you say to them? Most likely whatever answer you give will represent a level 3 doctrine. Would you spend time discussing the literary genre of Genesis or the doctrine of Satan? I think not. Instead, you would convey the truth of Christ—His life, death, resurrection, and teachings, especially concerning sin and salvation—and the triunity of God. When the hierarchy reaches the center, we should observe the most doctrinal unity among Christians.
To summarize the kind of hierarchy most commonly encountered, Christian theology—speaking both propositionally and pragmatically as one lives out their faith—necessarily includes some teachings that are more central to Christianity than others. Found in level 1 doctrines are relatively insignificant beliefs that are open to disagreements among brethren in local fellowship with one another. Level 2 doctrines are more serious, they represent stark differences that impede unity in worship and they entail denominational distinctness. Level 3 doctrines are acknowledged as the core of Christianity and as basic requirements for orthodoxy.
[1] That is not to say this logical hierarchy has a clear-cut ordering, for there will be overlap.
Comments