Define "Core belief", please. It sure sounds to me from what Kolokotronis says that it's pretty close to quod semper, quod ubique, quod ab omnibus.
Further your contemptuous disagreement with me was with my assertion that it was a doctrine held by many for some 1500 years before it was made de fide. In fact, your first statement was that it was the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception which was made de fide in the 1950's.
If I failed to show that you were mistaken on that I'd like to know how I failed.
Now you claim to have done a great deal of research into how doctrinal statements arise.
So we're looking at the wrong doctrine and a substantial disagreement over how long the doctrine has been held by many on the Church before it was made de fide. Okay, I'm right about the doctrine in question and right about how long it was held by many, but the group of which I am a part is misinformed.
Nice tap dance.
As you suggest, lots of us are misinformed. One of the things I'm misinformed about is whether or how the orthodox make something de fide.
Nice tap dance. I find the Orthodox to be very consistent in their views while the Catholics have slowly migrated to their view.
I think I've met my dance master. This started because you implied that you knew that we were about to make the title co-redemptrix a matter of dogma. I said it took about a millenium and half to get to the Assumption, and you told me to get real. Now you are saying we move slowly, and tell me that I tap dance.
Harley crabby?
Nawwwwwwww. It's against his religion.
Or was that a doctrine of his faith.
I forget.