So, on the topic of the Universal Church - In the second episode on St. Gregory of Narek, I originally wrote this:

In any case, in the aftermath of the Council of Chalcedon, after 451, we have the first permanent split of the Church that, on the one hand, still exists today, but on the other hand, is recognized as legitimately Christian. What this means is that there would, after this, always be so-called separated brethren - Christians who are in the universal Church, but not in the Catholic Church. Now you may be used to the idea that the Catholic Church IS the universal Church - that in fact the very word Catholic means universal, or the whole Church. And that was true in the beginning - for Ignatius of Antioch - The Catholic Church is the mainstream Christian Church, led by the bishops in succession from the apostles, and he says, you docetics who are having your own separate meetings without the Eucharist because you don’t believe in the real presence - you are not Catholic - you’re not catholic because you’re not Christian - so Christian = Catholic, and Catholic = Christian. But eventually something changes - temporarily with Novatian, and permanently with the non-chalcedonian churches. Now it’s possible to be Christian but not Catholic. There are Christians,who are not Catholic, and we know this, if nothing else, from the second Vatican council. And eventually, in the 20th century the Catholic Church and the non-chalcedonian churches recognized each other as Christian and dropped the mutual accusations of apostasy. To be clear, we Catholics will still say that the Catholic Church is the TRUE Church. But that’s not exactly the same thing as the universal Church. Because there are Christians within the universal Church who are not Catholic. Again, to be clear, those churches or ecclesial communities that are outside the Catholic Church -
can only be within the universal Church - that is, they can only hope for salvation - because they subsist under the umbrella, if you will, of the True Church, the Catholic Church. But the point is, to be called a Doctor of the Church is to be affirmed as a doctor of the universal Church, not just the Catholic Church.Keep in mind that St. Gregory himself lived well after the schism, so at the very least he’s not held responsible for his status outside the Catholic Church...

OK, that's what I had - and after consultation with my producer, this is the final version of the script in that section:

In any case, in the aftermath of the Council of Chalcedon, after 451, we have the first long-term split from the Church in which, on the one hand, the separated body still exists today, but on the other hand, it is recognized as legitimately Christian. Many of the controversies over various heresies in the early Church involved issues that, if you got wrong, you would not even be a Christian anymore, like denying the divinity of Christ for example. But over time, there would also be groups that either rejected some less fundamental doctrine of the Church, or just rejected the authority of the Church by going into schism. The Church in time recognized that these groups, although not Catholic, were still Christian. And with regard to the Armenian Apostolic Church in particular, in the 20th century the Catholic Church and these non-chalcedonian churches recognized each other as Christian and dropped the mutual accusations of apostasy. In addition, it is important to note that the Armenian Apostolic Church, though not in communion with the Catholic Church, had and has Apostolic succession - validly ordained priests and bishops - and thus has all seven sacraments,
giving someone like St. Gregory a spiritual life much closer to that of Catholics than, say, a Protestant might have. And keep in mind that St. Gregory himself lived well after the schism. So at the very least he’s not held responsible for his status outside the Catholic Church.

So you can see we cut it down, and removed some of the stuff on the distinction between Catholic Church and Universal Church. And my producer also made an important point: Benect XVI had clarified that the affirmation that a person might find salvation in a non-Catholic espression of the faith does not necessarily legitimize the ecclesial body in question (for example a Protestant denomination) but rather it's about the people in that tradition or communion - in other words the Catholic Church affirms that individuals in other communions may find salvation, but this does not necessarily affirm the validity of that other communion.

So there you have it - I thought you might find this behind-the-scenes conversation interesting.

JP