JDG wrote: > > 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. > Would you claim that any person that believes in some dogmas of the Roman Catholic Church but disbelieves in other dogmas [say, a person that claims to be a good catholic but regularly gets impregnated by different men and goes to an abortion clinic to get rid of the tumor that starts to grow in the belly] is, in reality, not a catholic?
I find it amusing that many brazilians claim to be catholic but limit their catholicism to not eating meat on Holy Fridays and baptizing the kids. Alberto Monteiro _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
