Thank you.
Further your thesis that the Dogma was condemned before it was approved has been debunked by multiple poste
One "debunking" at a time, please. You said, "The cut-n-paste claimed proclamation of a Pope that was debunked." So did Pope Hormisdas reaffirm a phony decree or not? Why would Pope Nicolas authoritatively cite a phony decree and falsely attribute it to Pope Gelasius?
And "my thesis" is not that the Dogma was condemned before it was approved, but that the WRITING, IT"S AUTHORS, AND IT"S ADHERENTS, i.e., the Transitus writing of the Assumption of Mary, that theological redaction of ealier accounts, known to be the origin of this teaching into Church teaching via Gregory of Tours, was condemned before the teaching on the Assumption was eventually approved.
What denomination are you?
We' re not going to change the subject that fast. Answer my questions first; Did Pope Nicolas affirm a phony decree or not? Did Pope Nicolas authoritatively cite a phony decree and falsely attribute it to Pope Gelasius, or did he not?
Cordially,
...In all time and all countries the same doctrines...was false because:
Originated by heretics and condemned as heretical by two Popes in the fifth and sixth centuries, the dogma of the Assumption of Mary comes to mind.See? You claimed the DOGMA of the Assumption of Mary was condemned by multiple Popes. That false claim has been laid bare for all to see. You efforts to shift your claims and your cut-n-pastes of limited and unsupported research notwithstanding, your original claim fails.
What denomination are you? And if you again fail to answer, what is it you are ashamed or afraid of?