I
- Status
F
fellowChristian
Guest
Did it say that the Lutheran church retracted the teachings the church judged to be heretical? I couldn’t find that part:shrug: And doesn’t the Lutheran church have women bishops? Wouldn’t that have to change? Just a thought.
S
Sayf_Udeen
Guest
And what would this achieve now?
Don’t Catholics believe he is at mercy with God now and humans have no say in his afterlife?
Don’t Catholics believe he is at mercy with God now and humans have no say in his afterlife?
L
LutheranDK
Guest
It would be SO cool to take this step further in healing the relations between the churches. But to revoke Luther’s excommunication would, to me, seem to be the same as saying that the basis of the excommunication (heresy) was not true, thus saying that Luther was no heretic, thereby signalling that his rediscoveries were true.
And that would leave the RC church with endless other problems…
R
ralphinal
Guest
It is a moot point. Once he died, he was no longer excommunicated.
I
itsjustdave1988
Guest
Seems like weird wishful thinking which doesn’t seem to place sufficient importance in doctrinal truth.
Moreoever, I don’t see how the anathemas of Trent are not still in effect. Observe…
“It remains difficult to see how, in the current state…given in the Joint Declaration [of the Catholic Church and the Lutheran World Federation on the Doctrine of Justification], we can say that this doctrine [of the Lutherans] on “simul iustus et peccator” is not touched by the anathemas of the Tridentine decree on original sin and justification.” Official response of the Catholic Church, prepared by common agreement between the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity]
Of course, this just describes anathemas regarding Luther’s teaching on Justification. Luther also taught many other heretical things which this joint declaration didn’t even attempt to address.
1
1ke
Guest
Basically this shows a lack of understanding on the part of the person who posted this regarding excommunication-- both what it is and what it does.
A
amontoya
Guest
What does “simul iustus et peccator” mean?
I
Irish_Polock
Guest
Wasn’t Pope Formosus excommunicated after his death? The whole Cadaver Synod story (I forget the stories details, he was put on trial at very least) IF so why does bringing a soul back into communion with the church after death sound so radical?
Just being the devils advocate here :hey_bud:
I
itsjustdave1988
Guest
“at the same time righteous and sinner”
This Lutheran formula is contrary to Catholic doctrine. According to the Official Response of the Catholic Church cited and linked to above, “This statement does not, in fact, seem compatible with the renewal and sanctification of the interior man of which the Council of Trent speaks [cf. Council of Trent, Decree on justification, cap. 8: “… iustificatio… quae non est sola peccatorum remissio, sed et sanctificatio et renovatio interioris hominis” ( DS 1528 ); cf. also can.11 ( DS 15619 )].”
I
itsjustdave1988
Guest
Teachings can be evaluted to determine if they are orthodox, even after the death of the person who promulgated such teachings. For instance, well after the early church Patriarch, Origen of Alexandria was dead, some (not all) of his teachings were condemend. He was not excommunicated, but some of his teachings (e.g. concerning “universal restoration” or apokatastasis) were condemned by lawful authority.Wasn’t Pope Formosus excommunicated after his death? The whole Cadaver Synod story (I forget the stories details, he was put on trial at very least) IF so why does bringing a soul back into communion with the church after death sound so radical?
Just being the devils advocate here :hey_bud:
Nonetheless, excommunication is a penalty for living persons, barring them from lawful access to the Holy Sacraments until such time as lawful authority deems it prudent to remit the excommunication. It has no affect upon dead people, who no longer have access to the Sacraments. The entire discussion lacks an understanding of what excommunication is.
Juridical sentences can be deemed by higher authority as either just (upheld) or unjust (overturned), but to “revoke” a dead man’s excommunication makes no sense.
I
itsjustdave1988
Guest
Consequently, since Luther is dead, the excommunication inherently no longer applies. What the poorly written article probably meant to say was they desire that the Catholic Church reevaluated the decree condemning the teachings of Martin Luther. Some seem to opine that it was all a big misunderstanding. While there might have been some misunderstandings (e.g., Luther seems to contradict Luther an many occasions), the opinion that Luther’s teachings are in fact compatible with Catholic doctrine does not seem to be supported by the corpus of Luther’s works when honestly compared to Catholic doctrine.
Luther had an opportunity when he was living to clarify how his teachings were compatible with Catholic doctrine. He failed to do so. I’m not convinced that today’s revisionist interpretations of Luther’s work can be considered compatible with Catholic doctrine.
Luther had an opportunity when he was living to clarify how his teachings were compatible with Catholic doctrine. He failed to do so. I’m not convinced that today’s revisionist interpretations of Luther’s work can be considered compatible with Catholic doctrine.
A
amontoya
Guest
Thanks! I’m a convert to Catholicism, and am not at all familiar with Latin. I would like to learn, though.
G
Gottle_of_Geer
Guest
A revocation might well send the kind of message you mention, but, it wouldd not follow that the message received, is the message intended. So while people might conclude from a revocation that a revocation “would…seem to be the same as saying that the basis of the excommunication…was not true”, such a conclusion would not need to be intended.
Hope that makes sense.
That would be great! Perhaps at the same time Lutherans would edit out all references to the “papacy as anti-Christ” from the Book of Concord. In any event, both would be meaningless (except to engender better relations) unless they lead to greater doctrinal unity. I have more faith in that eventuality than some.
Jon
R
Robert_in_SD
Guest
Perhaps the better gesture would be for the Catholic Church to offer prayers for his eternal soul. I think that excommunication by its nature (separation from the Church militant) ends with death because the individual then stands before God for individual judgment. A formal declaration of separation from the communion of the Church has what effect on that??? He’ either in (or on his way to) Heaven (in which case the revocation has no effect on him) or he’s in Hell (in which case the revocation has no effect on him).
But prayers for His soul would assist him if he remains in purgatory, right? We can pray for him whether he is formally separated from the sacraments of the Church or not, right?
Peace,
-Robert
No, of course not. Justification by Grace through faith is. I believe the charge is 1500’s polemics.
Jon
- Status