In the West, it seems...

...it all gets down to one individual over against many.

It was Augustine who changed the Church's formerly-held understanding of the Fall; Augustine who ignored the essence/energy distinction already taught by, for example, the Cappadocians; Augustine who explicated the "filioque."

Augustine can be forgiven, because he himself in his writings constantly begs to be corrected.

It was Aquinas who superimposed the teachings of Aristotle onto the doctrine of the Church, in a systematic and doctrine-distorting way. See how he argues that grace is created:

"...no accident is called being as if it had being, but because by it something is; hence it is said to belong to a being rather than to be a being (Metaph. vii, text. 2). And because to become and to be corrupted belong to what is, properly speaking no accident comes into being or is corrupted, but is said to come into being and to be corrupted inasmuch as its subject begins or ceases to be in act with this accident. And thus grace is also said to be created inasmuch as men are created with reference to it, i.e. are given a new being out of nothing, i.e. not from merits, according to Eph. ii.10, created in Jesus Christ in good works."

Aquinas, too, can be forgiven, because before his end he had a vision in which he testifies that all he had formerly written was straw.

It is harder to understand those who seek to build houses out of that straw--who take neither Augustine nor Aquinas at their own words about their writings.

In any case, in the west it boils down to one over against the many. For the west, in the end, Augustine is the Father; Aquinas is the doctor . . . just as the Bishop of Rome is the bishop.

The Protestants are faithful to their papal patrimony, then, when they plug in Luther, or Wesley, or Calvin as the one, over against which the many must be measured.