Acatholic dogmas?

Dear Sir: Many non-catholic dogmas do criticize our Faith, what is your overall parish position on such appearances of the concept?

This is a question to be answered that came in from a chappie from England in the UK called LJ and it is quite a difficult one to tease out in terms of the language and technical terms deployed, if one is doing conventional olde worlde catholic victorian theology, for which there is only one Church that produces dogma and that is the one, holy, and apostolic, catholic Church as then constituted in the Victorian era. But it seems the questioner intends by this question the presence of other dogmas among other religions, and di per se, the questioner is to be lauded on observing this reality, since yes, dogmas of the faith do occur outside the visible and official confines of Catholicism, take the dogmas of Judaism that are also absorbed and believed by catholics the world over, dogmas such as the moral ones of the Ten Commandments, the liturgical ones such as temple sacrifice, the generalised "Nigel Lawson" ones such as Original Sin, and so on, and so on. A good question indeed. And one which we shall seek to answer within the short time and space herewith allowed by the length of a simple parish blog. So yes, bravo to the questioner on spotting that dogmas do occur outside the visible confines of Catholicism, those dogmas are not just the preserve of the Catholic Church even if she boasts theosophical mechanisms which regularise and coordinate the reception and absorption of those extra-catholic dogmas as truths to be believed and assented to within Catholicism, one of the big ones being the notion of "sacrifice" in the Jewish world and the Jewish dogmas surrounding the Passover berakah, something denied and doubted for many years in the 1970s and 1980s and 1990s among well-meaning catholics and anglicans after the new missal of 1969 came out, whatever the CDW in Traditionis Custodes says about a missal emerging in 1970, the deniers spurred on by the simplicity and basicness of the Americanesque almost NASA style ICEL translations into the English Missal for Anglophone believers in that time-frame of 1970-2013. English Missal. Only in modern times did this whole roadshow receive a shock to the system when the learned doctus and genius turn over his pages of his altar missal in the dark and gloomy chapel there at Oscott College in Birmingham, and thus Fr Bruce at the London newspapers entered the stage of history, covering his seminary college with glory, and finally it was he who called a halt to such basic and misleading translations, including Trinitarian heresy in the 3rd Eucharistic prayer, tamperings with the Words of Consecration in all of the Eucharistic Prayers through the pro-omnibus clause, and then Kyrie formulas after the Consecration that thingified the Lord in a third person format, reducing the good Lord's sacred presence to a matter of objects and subjects that even the very liberal Tad Guzie calls "reification as object" in his Book of Sacramental Basics, and so on and so on, the list goes on and on, about those olde worlde inaccurate ICEL translations.

So yes, non-catholic dogmas do exist, but it is not often that they explicitly and obviously intend to criticize the home-spun dogmas of Traditional centuries olde Catholicism, these are usually though not always and everywhere misapplications of the term "dogma" to truths of the old shared world before reformation and often this is done by evangelicals who are not so conscious of the history of christological dogmata arising from the first 7 centuries of christian theology. But yes, just to avoid such ecumenical misunderstandings and disappointments like this, it might well be time for student chaplaincy parishes at cities like MKU and Oxon to consider producing little booklets as Guides to the older kind of christological dogmas arising from those early centuries, so that young fresh minds do not fall into the obvious pitfalls of those early centuries all over again - after all the Church is meant to progress in its evolution and development throughout history. Such little Kleiner Erklarungen guides to popular christological dogmas might well be helpful to the young fresh minds that are keen to try to find out who Jesus was by finding out first and foremost who Jesus wasn't, following the lead and example of the early synods of council in Acts 6 and Acts 5, and this open up for the early synodal way of the early synodal bishops gathered in councils, a scientific way of doing truths to be believed with divine and catholic faith inter alia. Only the other day our parishes in this deanery celebrated the Memoria of St Leo the Great who first fashioned the formula, one Person two Natures, in order to respond to the great christological crises of his time at the various councils of that era in his response to the Eutychians and Monophysites of that timeframe, and thus he forced some progress in christological dogmas. Generally then, we might excuse those christians that deploy dogma beyond its original Tradition and beyond its original controversies, as more misunderstanding than logical critique of the one true, holy, and catholic Faith, as the questioner so wisely puts it. Well done, a good and perceptive question.