PS: Allow me to amend this enough to say that I am aware that their are academic positions on the doctrine, many of them in fact, but they are not what dictate the formal teaching of the Catholic Church, Fiorenza or any other schoolman notwithstanding. Besides when I told Father Hal and Stan that you were shoving Fiorenza under my nose they said "Shake the dust."
I see that Fiorenza distresses you, but are you not aware of other big-name Catholic theologians who agree with Fiorenza
"Current Roman Catholic theology of original sin is undergoing a radical transition and is marked by considerable pluralism..."
It's very simple Father. Professional theologians have never dictated the language or meaning of doctrinal teaching by virtue of their secular credentials.
So unless we can work with that as a very basic premise, then there's really no point in continuing.
If you are unable to see that the contemporary teaching on original sin is in a state of flux, then there is indeed no point in continuing.
Perhaps Fr Kimel can recommend Catholic theologians who are aware of this transitioning...?
Is it not said that the contemporary teaching is drawing the Church of Rome a little closer to Orthodox understandings and that this is music in the ears of those praying for unity?
There has been no change in the teaching, Father. No change in the core teachings of original sin. I am sitting here with three systematic theology books spanning the 20th century and two doctrinal histories...and there's been no change.
So when you begin the discussion by pointing out that theologians are discussing the fine points of the core truths of the teaching on original sin, as a catechist, I get to say "That's nice." and keep on teaching.
I have, believe it or not, an active intellectual curiosity so I may read some of that discussion, but that does not change what I teach or what I would have taught 500 years ago or a 1000 years ago or 1500 years ago. The papal Church has NEVER taught personal guilt in original sin. That is the primary concern and it is no concern at all. The papal Church has NEVER taught that concupiscence is sin itself. So that is not of concern to me either.
Do you remember when Cardinal Ratzinger had to give up his wonderful world of speculative theology when he took the job as chief cook and bottle washer for the CDF? He did that because formal Church teaching is NOT dependent on the discussions of professional theologians, and he could no longer engage the luxury of what-iffin'