>A dogma, then, is another thing: dogma is not the real, sensible world,
>otherwise why call it dogma? It is a definition, by the Church, that says:
>if you want to believe in Christ as revelled by the Roman Catholic Church,
>you also have to believe that this thing (not evident) is true.
>e.g. St.Mary was a virgin (not demonstrable): this is a dogma; if you don't
>believe it, you don't believe in the Roman Catholic Church's Revelation; you
>can still believe in Protestant Church or in Christ all by yourself; you can
>even be saved;
Saved, but perhaps slightly charred depending on the period of history dealt with. Perhaps that could be viewed as a prototype scientific experiment, lets burn the buggers and see if they are still saved despite their heresy, we'll find out if _they_ made it into to Paradise when _we_ get there. But I doubt it.
Chris - who is neither a Protestant nor a Catholic (or as we say up here neither a Tim nor a Hun) lest that be though to motivate this observation (which would be the paranoid conclusion, up here).
Powered by hypermail