www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology What EWTN really thinks of us

Dear Friends,

Here is an interesting exchange between Dr. Gregson and a questioner:

http://www.ewtn.com/vexperts/showmessage.asp?Pgnu=1&Pg=Forum12&recnu=1&number=381053

I'm sure Dr. Gregson is an "expert" but surely not on Eastern theology.

Apart from the errors of the questioner, which we can overlook since he is seeking information to begin with, Dr. Gregson makes a number of erroneous and contradictory statements:

1) "The whole Church is Roman" but I didn't know one lost one's Ritual/Ecclesial identity when one came into communion with Rome.

2) " . . .differences between eastern and western Catholics . . .might be lessened if eastern Catholics didn't rely so heavily on Eastern Orthodox theologians."

3) "The Orthodox tend to misrepresent Catholic teachings."

4)"The Catholic Church is always accused by the Orthodox of teaching that original sin includes inherited guilt. While St Augustine did teach that, St Thomas . . .greatly modified that teaching. . ." (So the Catholic Church does teach a form of Original Sin as inherited guilt?)

5) ". . .the primary aspect of original sin is the lack of original justice (sanctifying grace) . . . Eastern theologians . . .largely agree with this . . ." (So we're at fault for reading Eastern theologians?)

6) "The notion that original sin is an external contagion, rather than an inherited disorder" (which Eastern theologian ever taught that?)

7) "The Council of Trent was an Ecumenical Council, not recognized by the Orthodox, but certainly binding as to doctrine on all Catholics, east and west . . . it was called to address a western crisis, the Reformation" (So what does it have to do with Eastern Catholics?)

Anyway, one would think that EWTN would refer all such questions to a real expert in the person of Anthony Dragani rather than allow someone with a half-baked Eastern grounding to tackle these matters.

This individual has NO respect for the notion of Particular Ecclesiology in the East nor for the Particular theological and other traditions of the East.

He should apologise and rethink his position, if not simply allow Dragani to respond on his behalf.

Alex

I agree, alex, i learn about eastern catholicism through EWTN but through the expert Anthony Dragani who was a great influence and help during the process that lead up to my chrismation.

Daniel

While "Roman Catholic" is sometimes substituted for "Latin-rite Catholic," and thereby limited in its extension, (the fact is that the whole Church is Roman), in the sense that its center of unity is Rome, the See of Peter, whose successor is the Vicar of Christ.

Some one needs to seriously correct this guy (Anthony D)

Daniel

God that makes me angry he must be a Roman.

Daniel

Let's just be clear on what you mean by Roman--Melkites in the Middle East are referred to as Roman in reference to New Rome, whereas the "Roman" Catholics are called Latin. :p

Three cheers to Anthony for all the work he does over at EWTN to speak up for us in the Latin media juggernaut. While EWTN is very good, we get ignored. Anthony does a great job, as do Frs. Sopoliga and Bertha.

Justin

Alex, thanks for the link. The impression is very different in the original than in your snippets.

The questioner raises this point, which is erroneously ascribed by him as an Eastern teaching. The respondent places it in the West, and deescribes it as a heresy that was anathematized in both the East and West.

His comments are correct, IMO. And we've been through this several times. Orthodox apologetics consistently claim a Catholic doctrine of inherited guilt - a quick check of the CCC would dispel this idea in favor of the one advanced in the reply.

His definition is very specific here about the universality. Not language that I favor, as it is easily misconstrewn. But there was nothing triumphalist in it.


Can't argue with the logic. But would just say in response, vive le difference!

Dear djs,

I think you've misrepresented Dr. Gregson's misrepresentations.

If you are going to stand by the CCC alone, then Dr Gregson doesn't do that - but then again, he does . . .

St Augustine taught inherited guilt, but then Aquinas "lessened it" and then there is the Council of Trent and now the CCC.

What is the consistent doctrine of the Roman Church on Original Sin?

There are those who disagree that the CCC cans the whole idea of "inherited guilt."

Gregson agrees that Augustine affirmed such guilt - and Rome has agreed and preached Augustinianism for centuries, even with Aquinas' contributions.

What I'm calling attention to are contradictions in Gregson's thought with respect to the East.

The questioner affirms Original Sin as inherited guilt and says that the East denies that.

Gregson replies by belittling Eastern Catholics and Eastern Orthodox - but he then goes on to show how the West has moved away from Augustine's notion of inherited guilt.

And this after affirming that Augustine did teach it. So why the invective against the East?

Gregson, in short, espouses views that are very close to those of Eastern theology.

So why his critique of the East? And why the chiding and scolding to Eastern Christians re: obedience to Rome as the central authority? How have we denied that or Catholic doctrine in any way?

We do deny what the questioner affirms. And so does, apparently, Dr Gregson.

He doesn't make sense in his reply.

I just asked questions about what he said, while quoting him directly.

Alex

The questioner does not say "guilt". Stain is not guilt; as amply detailed in the C Encyclopedia. He does erroneously ascribe a Pelagian-type heresy to us and calls, stridently, for orthodoxy. The only problem, however, is his own error.

The response places this error in the West and points out that it is a type of error also rejected in the East.

You are right, however, that the he implicitly assumes that the question accurately protrays EC thinking, then gratuitously associates it with errors in Orthodox apologetics. Because of the fact that I cringe every time that I read about "guilt" of Original Sin in such writings, I was busy concurring and didn't, upon first reading. pick up on the gratuitousness of the criticism.

AS to the time-line: it's curious that during the time when Augustine's idea held wway, we were in communion; now that they have less influence, we are not - with exception being taken to his ideas. Go figure.

Slava Isusu Kristu,

Don't get me wrong, I like EWTN. But, often , I get this very anti-anything-but-Latin (teaching and language) feeling.

I know that their ministry is needed for the Church, but I wonder sometimes why we and the other churches aren't better represented.

Maybe I am just too sensitive.

What about a theological series on the different ideas about the Filique or Purgatory? Or a monthly Ukrainian Liturgy or something?

Would that upset too many of their viewers? Obviously there is some confusion.
We wouldn't have to use Orthodox theologians if the Catholic ones spoke more to our praxis.

Just my thoughts.

Dmitri

Dear djs,

You are right in your representation of my representation of Gregson's misrepresentation . . .

"Guilt" and "stain" are often used interchangeably to refer to the same thing. One cannot have guilt without the stain and without the stain there would be no guilt.

If you believe I have stained the conversation here in that manner, then I'm guilty.

It all refers to whether we actually participate in the actual personal sin of Adam - or inherit his human nature that we share with our Forefather that he damaged for us by his sin.

The East, and to a large part the CCC, says the latter.

Dr. Gregson should really apologise publicly for a lousy, and inflammatory, response involving the Eastern Churches - and ask Anthony Dragani to properly respond.

I would write to Gregson myself and tell him off, but his mail-box is full.

How convenient . . .

Are you a former seminarian or someone who is studying theology now?

Alex

Any chance we could avoid taking the Lord's name in vain while discussing this topic? Thank you.

Well I'll have to go back and search our old discussion on OS and IC to find the relvant passages that differentiate stain and guilt.

I am curious in all of this: where on earth did the questioner get his misimpression. We shouldn't let him "get away with this".

PS
Never a seminarian, and not very interested in the study of theology. My education, beyond orandi, is from here. Yes, I've had good teachers.

As to what EWTN and a number of others think of us, it probably goes something like this, in two points:
1. The West is by definition always right, and the East is by definition always wrong; and
2. O venerable Eastern Rites, we love you - now please get back in your pickle jars so that we can pour in the formaldehyde and screw the lids on nice and tight.

Incognitus

That's what that smell was...I knew it couldn't be incense!

Slava Isusu Christu!
Glenn