1. Welcome to Mother of God Forums - A place dedicated to the Mother of God. Please feel free to join us in prayer and sharing. Please Register to start posting.
    Dismiss Notice

Do Pope and Paglia Believe Hell Does Not Exist?

Discussion in 'Church Critique' started by BrianK, Oct 11, 2017.

  1. BrianK

    BrianK Resident Kook, Crank, Curmudgeon - & Mod Staff Member


    Do Pope Francis and Archbishop Paglia Believe Hell Does Not Exist?
    Maike Hickson October 11, 201711 Comments
    Image: Coppo di Marcovaldo, The Hell (c. 1301)
    In our 9 October report about recent comments made by papal confidant Fr. Antonio Spadaro as regards the moral law, we added a post-publication update about a new conversation between Pope Francis and Eugenio Scalfari. Scalfari, who has become a favorite interviewer of Pope Francis, is the atheist founder of the Italian newspaper La Repubblica, known for his unconventional method of reconstructing interviews from memory, rather than using direct quotations. (Although Scalfari’s recounting of the pope’s more controversial words have thus often been dismissed by members of the Catholic press as unreliable, the pope’s insistence in continuing to seek out Scalfari for candid interviews and on-the-record discussions should put to rest any claim that he has been misrepresented.)

    In the latest instance, while reviewing Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia’s new book, Scalfari quotes the pope as saying that among the bishops of the Catholic Church there is a lot of relativism. Scalfari then quotes Francis as saying*:

    We believers and of course above all we priests and we bishops believe in the Absolute, but each in their own way because each one has his own head and thought. So our absolute truth, shared by us all, is different from person to person. We do not avoid discussions in the case where our different thoughts confront each other. So there is a kind of relativism among us as well. [emphasis added]

    Scalfari then adds his own thoughts about the pope’s and Archbishop Paglia’s own distinct idea that hell is empty:

    Pope Francis, preceded in this [view] by John XXIII and Paul VI, but, with a more revolutionary force with respect to ecclesial theology, has abolished the places where, after death, souls must go: Hell, Purgatory, Paradise. Two thousand years of theology have been based on this kind of afterlife, which even the Gospels confirm. However, it is with some attention to the theme of Grace — that is in part due to the letters of Saint Paul (to the Corinthians and the Romans) and partly even more so to Augustine of Hippo. All souls are endowed with Grace, and so they are born perfectly innocent and they remain so unless they take the path of evil. If they are aware of it and do not repent even at the moment of death, they are condemned. Pope Francis, I repeat, has abolished the places of eternal dwelling in the afterlife of souls. The thesis held by him is that the souls dominated by evil and not repentant cease to exist while those who are redeemed from evil will be assumed into beatitude, contemplating God. This is the thesis of Francis and also of Paglia. [emphasis added]

    As Vatican expert Sandro Magister has reported before, Scalfari previously quoted Pope Francis as saying: “In a millennium or so our human species will be extinguished and souls will merge with God.”

    And in 2015, Pope Francis was again quoted by Scalfari: “What happens to that lost soul? Will it be punished? And how? The response of Francis is distinct and clear: there is no punishment, but the annihilation of that soul.”

    These quite heretical statements that are attributed to Pope Francis himself — and which he still has not publicly denied — are now also attributed to the new head of the Pontifical Academy for Life and Grand Chancellor of the re-organized John Paul II Institute on Marriage and Family Sciences. His new book, therefore, should be carefully studied and analyzed.

    In context — under the premise that there is no eternal punishment for sin anymore — this new Bergoglian era now makes much more sense. If Hell is not to be feared, what impediment is there to keep us from moving in the direction of moral relativism and doctrinal laxity?

    It thus becomes more urgent for faithful Catholics who are determined to remain loyal to the traditional teaching of the Catholic Church to continue, in their own organizations and publications, to resist such violations of God’s truth which are already producing grave effects on the moral behavior of Catholics with regard to contraception, abortion, and adultery. Professor Josef Seifert has laid his finger into the wound of Pope Francis’ teaching, namely: that there seems to be no intrinsically evil act any more.

    *Translation by Andrew Guernsey
    little me, gracia and AED like this.
  2. A heretic can not be a valid Pope.

    The church's teaching on the immortality of the human soul and the eternal punishment of hell is De Fide.

    Those who contradict and deny that teaching are rejecting core doctrinal beliefs that are central and essential to the essence of the Roman Catholic faith.

    As such they are heretics.

    It's now fairly clear what has happened in the Catholic Church since 2013 and the only solution is to call a general council to depose those persons at the apex of the Catholic Church hierarchy who are working to destroy both the church itself and the faith of millions of ordinary Catholics.
    little me likes this.
  3. BrianK

    BrianK Resident Kook, Crank, Curmudgeon - & Mod Staff Member

    A FORMAL heretic cannot be a valid pope, but it’s up to the CHURCH to decide if a pope has committed formal and obstinate heresy, not us individually (even if we’re certain he is and has been committing material heresy.)

    Even then, we DO NOT know if he immediately ceases to be an acting pope because of formal heresy or whether his formal heresy must be acknowledged by the Church and he be formally declared a formal heretic by the Church.

    Regardless, an interview with an aged atheist journalist does NOT constitute formal heresy but (IF the journalist even reported his words accurately) simply more material heresy, for which a pope CANNOT be declared a formal heretic.

    You may have grave personal reservations over this pope, and you may communicate such, and even explain how the Church may find her way out of this seeming impossible situation so as to build up the faith of others whose anxiety over his words and actions is causing severe crisis - but you may not, on your own authority as a lay person, declare this papacy null and void and declare another to be acting pope.

    Such is not going to be tolerated here.

    And if you do not grasp the very important distinction between material and formal heresy and why it is so vitally important in this current discussion it has been addressed here on the forum ad nauseum.

    You can start here:
  4. Praetorian

    Praetorian Powers

    Thank you Brian,
    It is important that we all stay in the Barque. Rejecting a sitting Pope is a quick way off of it. The laity have no authority to do such a thing. Accepting Pope Francis as the Pope does not mean accepting error. If we think that a Pope can say nothing wrong, and if he does therefore he cannot be Pope, ascribes far too much perfection to the office of the Pope. Almost trying to make him some form of deity himself. That would be a form of papalotry.
    Shae, AED, HeavenlyHosts and 3 others like this.
  5. Praetorian

    Praetorian Powers

    I do not have a "moderator" on my side. I have Catholic teaching on my side. It just so happens the moderator is a Catholic and as such follows Church teaching. That teaching says that no individual Catholic has a right to refuse the authority of a Pope. That is schism as I have stated ad nauseam.

    Also just to be clear I have never judged you personally. I would not do that. I have judged the position you have taken and made abundantly clear as erroneous.

    I hope for the good of your soul you come to see the truth Anthony.
    Shae, Dean, Carol55 and 2 others like this.
  6. BrianK

    BrianK Resident Kook, Crank, Curmudgeon - & Mod Staff Member

    As well catechized lay Catholics we can judge material heresy.

    We cannot individually judge whether heresy meets the criteria for formal heresy. Only the Church can do that. Individual judgments of formal heresy will not be permitted to stand here.

    The highest churchmen in the world are still debating whether AL represents magisterial teaching or personal opinion, as AL itself asserts. We’re not going to be able, as laity, to make that determination.
    Shae, AED and gracia like this.
  7. BrianK

    BrianK Resident Kook, Crank, Curmudgeon - & Mod Staff Member

    Thank you, Praetorian. Your concern has helped me be much more prudent in the way I express my own grave concerns about this papacy.
    sunburst, Shae and Praetorian like this.
  8. Praetorian

    Praetorian Powers

    Thank you for saying that Brian. It really means a lot. Truly. I am as concerned about all of this as you are (and most of us here), but at this time we need to be very careful where we tread and where we lead others to tread as well.

    There was a period of emotional upheaval during and after the synods as we all figured out what was happening and everything became crystallized. I think that many here also had to become accustomed to what we all thought was impossible. We were kind of dumbfounded. I think right now the forum is hitting a "sweet spot" where we recognize the errors being sown in the Church, but we are not overstepping our authority as laity and we are also being much more charitable and thoughtful in the way we put forth our arguments.

    Thank you (and Mac) as well for being one of the first to sound the alarm bells here a few years ago. (y)
    DivineMercy, Mac, Shae and 3 others like this.
  9. BrianK

    BrianK Resident Kook, Crank, Curmudgeon - & Mod Staff Member

    This was my sincere hope for MOG all along and it’s the one thing that brings me joy to see in the midst of our trials.
    DivineMercy, Mac, Shae and 4 others like this.
  10. Praetorian

    Praetorian Powers

    Now we just need to make sure no one is pulled overboard by the storm!
    There seem to be no railings on the Barque anymore!
    Mac, Shae, BrianK and 1 other person like this.
  11. I regard my self as a learned Catholic.
    You have made much on the distinction between formal and material heresy.
    I believe you are not correct in claiming that a judgement of formal heresy is something only an ecclesiastical court can arrive at.
    When something self evidently constitutes the matter of formal heresy then it is indeed within the competence of any catholic to arrive at a conclusion.
    I have done so myself in order to protect myself.

    However in deference to your requests I will keep my opinions to myself for the time being.
  12. If a catholic sincerely believes with good reason that his parish priest has fallen into formal heresy he is dispensed
    from the normal rules of obedience a parishioner would give to his PP.
    He can't wait around for years while some church tribunal didders and dodders.
    A catholic must protect himself/herself from spiritual harm caused by heretical opinions statements uttered by anybody and especially uttered by ordained clergy irrespective of their position in the church hierarchy.

    Your rigid view exposes Catholics to potential harm from heresy and impairs their right to reject false teaching and those who propose it.
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 12, 2017
  13. Praetorian

    Praetorian Powers

    I have never said or even hinted that anyone must "go along" with anyone who spouts error whether they be clergy or laity. It is our duty not only to avoid error, but to fight it.

    That being said if you fear a parish priest has fallen into heresy you are free to go elsewhere for Mass. It is not your place to judge him a formal heretic. Just because you are impatient with the rate of speed at which the Church acts doesn't give you any right to go ahead and make a declaration of formal heresy on anyone. Sorry.
    HeavenlyHosts likes this.
  14. This is wishful thinking.
    Any catholic has a right to protect himself /herself from spiritual harm.
    Heresy causes grave spiritual harm especially when emanating from ordained clergy.

    It is not possible for a sincere catholic to accept the authority of any clergyman whom he/she genuinely thinks and believes is a heretic.
    The distinction between material and formal heresy is redundant when it comes to saving your soul.

    Therefore it is not a responsible act to give obedience to any heretic be they material or formal .
  15. Your view is that only ordained clergy and or some court can adjudicate on formal heresy.
    That is an elitist view that ignores the sensus
    Fidelium of ordinary Catholics who are perfectly capable of judging when something or somebody is formally heretical .
    It does not always require a court of church law to do that.

    And certainly in situations of emergency where the errors are so egregious ans so publicly manifest then people will make up their own minds.
  16. Praetorian

    Praetorian Powers

    29 minutes ago in post #11 on this same thread you said you were going to keep your opinions on this matter to yourself in deference to the moderators requests, and yet you have posted three more times in that small space of time on the same issue. Why don't you start your own thread about this if you want to talk about it instead of papering every thread with the same discussion?
    HeavenlyHosts, BrianK and Dean like this.
  17. The thread title is Do the Pope and Paglia believe that Hell does not exist.
    That issue was raised about two years ago.
    Credible evidence was presented that the Pope Francis believed in soul annihilation and therefore not in Hell.
    This is clearly heretical.

    The Bishop Paglia permits homerotic murals of himself to be painted in his diocesan church so the less said about him the better

    How is any catholic to,protect himself/herself from this conduct?

    How can any catholic give any loyalty or obedience to these types of individuals?
    That is what you ask .

    Do you really think when Christ founded the papacy that He expected blind mindless obedience?

    I don't.

    What I told Brian K is that I will keep my opinions on the validity of the papacy to myself for the time being.

    You can not then try use that to stifle discussion on other papal related issues and controversies.
  18. Dean

    Dean Archangels

    Threat of Hell is real. there you go.. next subject

  19. Pope Francis denies the existence of Gods infinite justice.
    Infinite justice demands that souls who do not want Gods friendship must have somewhere to go.
    That place /state is Hell.
    Infinite justice demands the immortality of the soul .
    Those who deny that immortality damage the Catholic faith.
    Pope Francis is damaging the catholic faith.
  20. Dean

    Dean Archangels

    well when he says in a sermon the threat of hell is real, im not sure how you get your statement, but you probably found that in some out of context interview
    sterph likes this.
  21. Look, there have been several reports whereby Pope Francis in an interview claimed that evil souls would be annihilated.
    The original report came if I'm not mistaken from an interview with E Scalfari.
    You can check this out yourself.
    The problem remains that papal interviews containing alleged heresies are never corrected.

    Clearly nobody cares so the papal heresies remain completely believable and credible.

Share This Page