Posted on 05/30/2019 3:23:33 PM PDT by ebb tide
May 30, 2019 (LifeSiteNews) – To suggest that hell is empty amounts to calling Jesus a liar, LifeSiteNews co-founder and editor-in-chief John-Henry Westen told a recent gathering of Catholic pro-life and family advocates in Rome. That hell contains human souls who have rejected God is established by the Lord in scripture and held by the Catholic faith since its beginning.
“Jesus himself says to us, “Broad is the road that leads to destruction and many there are that go there,” said Westen. “And he said, “Narrow is the road that leads to life and few there are that find it.” (Matthew 7:13-14)
Westen was answering a question at the Rome Life Forum — held earlier this month — about the Superior General of the Jesuit order having said the devil does not exist as well as reports of Pope Francis denying the existence of hell in favor of the annihilation of “lost souls.”
“In order to suggest that hell is empty you need to suggest that Jesus is a liar,” Westen stated.
The annual Rome Life Forum took place May 16-17 at the Pontifical University of St Thomas Aquinas (the Angelicum). Pro-life and family advocates and Catholics from across the world attended the event hosted by Voice of the Family and co-sponsored by LifeSiteNews, Associazione Famiglia Domani (Italy), Family Life International New Zealand, and the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (UK).
Westen first clarified in the Q&A session on the subject of hell that Cardinal Raymond Burke, other bishops and priests had publicly corrected Jesuit Superior General Fr. Arturo Sosa Abascal’s 2017 comments saying the devil is a “symbolic figure” who doesn’t really exist.
Regarding the pope’s statement about the existence of hell, the comments referenced were reportedly made in conversations with famous atheist author Eugenio Scalfari in the left-wing newspaper Scalfari founded La Repubblica.
Francis has done a series of interviews with Scalfari, each resulting in controversy for what Scalfari reports the pope said, with the no hell narrative forming a pattern with Scalfari. The atheist author has reported in September 2014, March 2015, October 2017 and March 2018 that Francis had told him that there is no hell and unrepentant souls are not punished and instead annihilated. After Scalfari’s reports, the Vatican has typically had to issue some sort of clarification emphasizing that the quotes are not accurate. Scalfari admits the interviews are “reconstructions” from memory, that he takes no notes and does not use a recorder.
In the March 2015 interview with Scalfari where he says the pope denied hell for lost souls, his article says:
“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. All the others will participate in the beatitude of living in the presence of the Father. The souls that are annihilated will not take part in that banquet; with the death of the body their journey is finished.”
Another Scalfari interview with Francis from March 2018 that has the pope denying the existence of hell was followed by the Vatican releasing a statement saying the text “should be considered as a faithful transcription of the words of the Holy Father” but never addressed the question of hell or the annihilation of souls. Nonetheless the media by-and-large stayed with the original narrative – leaving people to believe Scalfari’s report of what was said.
An October 2013 interview between Francis and Scalfari that had Francis saying that the “most serious” evils are “youth unemployment and the loneliness of the old” was pulled from the Vatican website due to Scalfari admitting his writings are reconstructed from memory.
Additionally from that interview, Francis was reported to have said that “proselytism is solemn nonsense,” and that “there is no Catholic God.”
One of the difficulties with those interviews, Westen explained to the Rome Life Forum, is that Scalfari doesn’t take notes, goes home, and then writes up what’s there.
Complaints were lodged with the Vatican about them, he said, since the Vatican puts the Scalfari interviews on its website. The 2013 story came down for a period but was put back up, he said, there was no official correction from either the pope or the Holy See Press Office.
The other difficulty with the statement denying hell, continued Westen, is that in Francis’ exhortation Amoris Laetitia, there is a line in there that says, “no one is condemned forever, that’s not the logic of the Gospel.”
“That seems to corroborate what was said in the Scalfari interview,” Westen said. “And has anyone corrected that? Well, not specifically.”
He said it’s very difficult for cardinals and bishops to correct the pope.
“Their call is to ask for clarity,” Westen explained. “And that’s an act of love and charity, because the cardinals as collaborators of the Holy Father for the good of the Church have that responsibility from Christ to bring clarity. And the role of the pope is to bring unity to the Church.”
The cardinals have asked in love for clarity from the pope, he said, not in any way out of any kind of jealousy or hatred for the pope.
Westen said there are other reliable sources beyond Scripture that confirm lost souls do go to hell.
“It was confirmed by Our Lady at Fatima when she showed the three children the vision of hell,” said Westen. “They saw people in hell!”
Descriptions from the Fatima apparitions even distinguished who the demons in hell were, he continued.
And Sister Lucia, in an interview from the 1950’s with Father Riccardo Lombardi, and author who’d written a book questioning the existence of hell, and in the interview when he asked her about the possibility of an empty hell, Sister Lucia told him, “No Father, many are in hell.”
Sister Lucia had affirmed three times for the priest, Westen said, using the same term as Jesus to quantify the souls in hell, “many.”
Jesus said something else on the question, Westen pointed out, when speaking to his apostles about Judas, saying, “Better were it for him had he not been born.”
“If anyone commits a mortal sin – they’re hell-bound,” stated Westen. “If they repent, they’re heaven-bound.”
“If you’re heaven-bound, it can’t be better for you had you not been born,” he said. “So again, you (would) make Jesus a liar.”
“So the answer to, has it been corrected is - It’s been corrected since the beginning,” Westen said.
No effort is “valiant” unless it at least contains Catholic teaching, and I see no references to pre-Vatican II Catholic teaching in that blog piece. Not to mention this blog is 2 years old, and the same man believed the Dubia Cardinals’ “formal correction” was “imminent” at the time.
I think you are confusing “valiant” with “effective,” “omniscient” and “presently convincing,” none of which I am claiming. The person made a far better effort and case than I am motivated to.
If you think you can do better, go ahead.
I'm surprised you're giving this any credence at all. Is a random blogger's opinions with no reference to Catholic teaching your idea of a "real reference"? Or is it noteworthy because you tend to agree with it?
This isn't about whether *I* can do better. It's about seeking out explanations anchored in the teaching of the Catholic Church.
I seek explanations for all sorts of things that are anchored in the teaching of the Catholic Church. That’s a big part of why I ended up a theologian.
Precisely because of this, I avoid Francis like the plague. As my mother said, usually it isn’t worth your time digging through a dumpster in hopes of finding a baloney sandwich.
If you want to, go ahead. On the whole, I’d rather read de Chardin, watch soccer, or have a hernia.
How ironic then. It appears that you were the one hoping to find a baloney sandwich in the dumpster only to find....garbage.
If you're going to try to refute a post of mine, you probably should try to find a "real reference" (aka one supported by Catholic teaching).
If you want to use a real reference, try Ludwig Ott’s Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma table of Theological Censures. (p. 10 in my copy from TAN)
Using the word heresy as synonymous with theological error ends up causing some confusion. There are plenty of ways to mess up that aren’t heresy, just as there are plenty of ways for people to end up dead that aren’t first degree murder.
Please share what Ludwig Ott says specifically regarding members of the Catholic hierarchy who teach public heresy.
I think there’s a point where those of any theological perspective are pushed past their patience, and it looks like it happened here.
Try to put support of the body of Christ first in your agenda. Then we don’t get big, heated discussions of who is right in their attempt to fit angels onto pin heads.
“...in your agenda. “
What agenda?
I have no idea how angels and pin heads relate to my being needlessly censored.
Also, the answer is 37.
Everybody has one. There are good ones and bad ones.
But anyhow, if it makes you feel any better, I got the “wah, you ain’t Catholic” treatment too.
Now what God the Father thinks about this may be a completely different matter.
Anyhow yes... there is a divine agenda.
I’d think it very possible that Jesus, were it somehow possible for Him to sign up for FR (The_Carpenter?) — and He began to speak on the Catholic caucus (or a Protestant caucus for that matter) for Him to get bounced off of the caucus.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.