Theological triage: DRAFT plan

Status: APPROVED 2026-10-10 (with one change: F9 became “Christ’s saving death”, and the substitutionary framing moved to S20; weights stay 3/2/1). Site structure: structure.md.

Original status: DRAFT for review (historical). Research under this plan is underway. Tier placements were proposals at drafting; actionable to verify markers in the triage tables and high-value shared/source notes have largely been cleared in later commits—see current notes/ and the verification checklist below.

Purpose

Sort Christian doctrines into three tiers so the site can answer three different questions:

1. Most correct: which tradition stands closest to Scripture, with more weight on the doctrines that matter most.
2. In the faith: how fully each tradition holds the doctrines essential to the gospel.
3. Shaped by: how much of each tradition’s identity rests on its second- and third-order distinctives.

1. Criteria

Definitions (after Mohler, “A Call for Theological Triage and Christian Maturity”, 2005)

Supporting tests

• Scripture first. A doctrine is first-order only if Scripture ties it to salvation or to the identity of God and Christ (for example 1 Cor 15:1–4, Gal 1:6–9, 1 John 4:2–3, 2 John 7–9, Rom 10:9).
• Creedal confession. The ecumenical creeds record what the early church confessed as the shared faith:
  • Apostles’ Creed (Roman baptismal creed; final form about 8th century)
  • Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed (381)
  • Chalcedonian Definition (451). Not received by the Oriental Orthodox, so it is treated as a special case (see section 3).
  • Athanasian Creed (Quicunque vult, about 5th–6th century). It explicitly calls its Trinitarian and Christological content necessary for salvation.
• Vincentian canon (Vincent of Lérins, Commonitorium 2.6, 434): “what has been believed everywhere, always, and by all” (quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus). This counts as evidence of universality, not as a ruling. A doctrine that passes it and is tied to salvation in Scripture is a strong first-order candidate.
• Traditions’ own lines. Each tradition’s own statement of what is essential is recorded, as shown in the next table. Where it disagrees with the default tier, the method shows that disagreement (see section 3).

How each tradition names its essentials

2. Doctrine list

Mapping key: existing categories are justification, baptism, salvation, eucharist, atonement, original-sin, relics, icons, afterlife, and trinity (in progress: Trinity/filioque). NEW marks a topic that would need a new study.

First-order (16)

Second-order (23)

Third-order (24)

Audit of missing debated topics (2026-10-10)

Topics checked against the list above, with the tier proposed and the reason. All are now researched (S21–S23 and T19–T24, each with at least two questions).

Second audit (October 2026). Checked again for notable debated topics with no home: merit and the necessity of works (now S24, second order, because Trent VI canon 32 and the Protestant confessions divide on it as part of justification); communion in both kinds and reservation (T25); church discipline and shunning (T26, a defining Anabaptist issue); and the law in the Christian life (T27). Also considered and not added: leavened or unleavened bread (no pre-750 or confessional basis for scoring most traditions; Nerses Shnorhali defends the Armenian practice), footwashing as an ordinance (Dordrecht XI only), indulgences (covered by S17 purgatory) and Christian perfection in the Wesleyan sense (outside the nine traditions; the related question is T27.2).

3. The traditions disagree on what counts as first-order

The tiers above are a default based on Mohler, the creeds and the Vincentian canon. They are not neutral, and several traditions would draw the lines differently:

• Catholic: visible communion with the bishop of Rome, the Eucharist as “source and summit” (LG 11), and knowingly rejecting defined dogma count as far more central than “second-order” suggests. Marian dogmas are defined dogma.
• Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox: the Church, its sacraments and the councils it receives are not easily separated from “the faith”. Each also considers the other’s Christology (S16) more serious than third-order, though modern joint statements call it largely verbal.
• Lutheran: justification is the “chief article” (Smalcald II.1), so on its own terms S1 is first-order. The real presence (S4) is also treated as a matter of confession, not opinion.
• Reformed and Presbyterian: many classic Reformed writers treat sola fide (S1) as first-order (as do some evangelicals following Galatians 1).
• Baptists: believer’s baptism (S2, T4) is close to constitutive of the church, so it is at least strongly second-order.
• Anabaptist: separation, nonresistance and the ban (Schleitheim) are central to identity, which a doctrine-only list tends to underrate.

How the method shows it:

1. Default tiers plus each tradition’s own tiers. Every doctrine records its default tier and the tier each of the nine traditions assigns it, with citations. Disagreements are shown with a marker on the doctrine page.
2. Sensitivity view. Every score is computed twice: under the default tiers and under each tradition’s self-assigned tiers. If a ranking flips, the site says so in plain language.
3. Contested-first-order list. Doctrines that at least one tradition calls essential but the default calls second-order (S1, S4, S8, S16, S2) get their own section, with a short neutral case for each side.
4. No silent choices. Tier changes go into docs/proximity-changes.md-style change logs (docs/triage-changes.md).

4. Proposed scoring method

All scores are percentages measured against Scripture, using the existing 0–4 verdict scale (docs/scoring.md). The fathers remain a separate, contextual panel with the same tier weighting, as now.

4a. Most correct

Scripture closeness, weighted by tier:

most_correct(t) = Σ w(tier_q) · score(t, q) / Σ w(tier_q) · 4      over scored questions q
default weights: first = 3, second = 2, third = 1

• The weights were a proposal to be set at review. The site will show them openly and may let readers adjust them (like the existing slider).
• Unscored questions are left out, never guessed. The site shows how many questions each score rests on.

4b. In the faith

Adherence to first-order doctrines only:

in_the_faith(t) = Σ score(t, q) / (4 · n)     over first-order questions q

• Shown as a threshold-style band: “holds all first-order doctrines”, “holds with qualifications”, or “denies one or more”. It is not a precise percentage, because the point is recognition, not rank.
• Expected result: all nine score at or near full. That is itself a finding worth stating plainly (“these traditions share the gospel core”).
• A sensitivity note shows the result under each tradition’s own first-order list, for example how Catholicism scores Protestant traditions if papal communion counts.

4c. Shaped by

How much a tradition’s identity rests on its distinctives. This describes the tradition and does not grade it:

distinctiveness(t, q) = 1 if t's position on q differs from the majority of the nine (or is confessionally emphasised), else 0
emphasis(t, q)        = 0–2 from the tradition's own confessions (how much space and stress the doctrine gets)
shaped_by(t, tier)    = Σ emphasis · distinctiveness over that tier / total emphasis

• Shown as a stacked bar per tradition (first / second / third-order share of its confessional identity), plus its top three distinctives.
• Example of what this would show: Baptists shaped heavily by S2; Catholics by S8 and S18; Anabaptists by ethics and separation; Lutherans by S1 and S4.
• The emphasis scores are judgement calls, so each one cites the confession article it rests on.

5. Research order

1. Tier sign-off: The project owner reviews this draft (tiers, weights, contested list).
2. Verify citations marked to verify (triage-table markers largely cleared; remaining actionable markers are tracked in shared/source notes—clear only against real sources), and record each tradition’s self-assigned tier for all doctrines.
3. Re-tag existing questions: assign a tier to each of the existing 37+ questions (and the Trinity study). No new research is needed, and early weighted scores are possible.
4. Fill first-order gaps: Christology (F2–F5, F11, plus S16), then Scripture and authority (F15, S7), Creation (F7), Resurrection (F10), Church (F16). This makes “in the faith” complete.
5. Second-order new topics: Church authority (S8, S9), Sacraments (S6), Mary and saints (S18), then Ministry (S10).
6. Third-order new topics: Eschatology (T1, T2), Worship (T13–T15, T17), Spirit and gifts (T12), the rest.
7. Publish scores: most-correct, in-the-faith and shaped-by views, plus the sensitivity view, on the home page.

This order replaces the earlier topic queue only after approval. Until then, the queued topics (Trinity, Christ, Mary, saints, church authority) continue as planned, and they line up with steps 4–5 anyway.