--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Dave Land <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm curious about this wink. Are you not fully on-board with the
> doctrine of the assumption? It's not terribly important to me either
> way, though I am inclined to think that it is a Churchly creation
> intended to exalt Mary, rather than a historical fact.

Not at all.   The Assumption is interesting because it is a "two-fer."
If you disagree with this dogma, then by definition, you also have to
disagree with the dogma of papal infallability.

In this case though, I fully believe the teaching.

JDG





_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to