Was Martin Luther unjustly excommunicated

[ralphinal]

On Reformation Day (October 31) 1999, The Roman Catholic and Lutheran World Federation signed a Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification. Contained in that document there was the lifting of condemnations of both Church bodies against each other.

In a wonderful article in the National Catholic Reporter dated Jan 25, 2002. Gregory Baum writes about Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (Benedict XVI) reflections on the Joint Declaration explains how the condemnation were right then and wrong now

Pronouncements of the magisterium are not static. How does one interpret apparent contradictions in the magisterium?

I have my own opinion about the Church of the 16th Century. In the light of the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification at the end of the 20th Century, Martin Luther’s views are now orthodox.

The two things are not contradictory at all. What has changed is the non-doctrine of who is guilty of heresy and schism. The Church understands that the first batch of Reformers were at least one of those two. Since then, people born into Protestant denominations cannot be held guilty of the sin of heresy. THat is what the difference is.

 

[Shlomey]

In the bull Unam Sanctam of 1302, Pope Boniface VIII wrote: “We declare, we set forth,** we define that submission to the Roman pontiff is necessary for the salvation of any human creature**.”

Council of Florence solemnly declared in 1442 that outside the Catholic church there is no salvation, neither for heretics nor schismatics, even if they should live holy lives or shed their blood in the name of Christ.

Vatican Council II appeared to proclaim an entirely different doctrine. We read in Gaudium et Spes that since Christ has died for all humans and since the destiny of humanity is one, we are to hold that, in a manner known to God, participation in the mystery of redemption is offered to every human being.

Is that document infallible? If so, would we not be bound to believing that all non-Catholics are therevy damned per default?

Vatican II changed the interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus from outside the Church, there is no salvation to wherever there is salvation, the Church is (even if it is found in a non-Catholic).

problematic…

 

[ralphinal]

Is that document infallible? If so, would we not be bound to believing that all non-Catholics are therevy damned per default?

Vatican II changed the interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus from outside the Church, there is no salvation to wherever there is salvation, the Church is (even if it is found in a non-Catholic).

problematic…

No, it is not. When extra ecclesiam nulla salus was first proclaimed, it was assumed that everyone on earth had been taught the Truth of the faith and those that rejected it made a decision to go against Christ. This is not even close to true.

We understand that yes, everyone must be Catholic if they can. Those who, through no fault of their own cannot do so, still may be saved through the Mercy of God.