The author did not use the word useless. So if it's your own view that is the case, you'll have to expound more on this, help me out.
Mind you, you still have not made convincing argument that a critical and honest analysis of the Pope's speech in this case in light of constant teachings on Hell or other prudential judgement does not equate to "heresies". If the
Pope had indeed suffered "a slip of the tongue", he certainly had ample opportunity to make correction. In this case, it appears the editor did it for him, just as well.
Personally, I feel this article is fair.
You will have to be very specific in making your case, carefully distinguishing WHY being disrespectful (only your opinion) amounts to spewing of Heresies (from the authors).
There is nothing "fair" about a heresy.
This dude says first, Catholic Confusion at the Very Top, the "top" meaning the Holy Father. He put himself above the Pope in defining the doctrine of faith, that's outright heresy.
Then this dude wrote, I have encountered ... apologists who argue ... that we cannot know for certain, based on Scripture and Tradition, that there are any human souls in Hell. How is he certain there are, or are not, any human souls in hell? His certainty in this matter is another heresy.
The bottom line is, the Church has never sent any people to hell, and has believed in the reality of hell as well as the reality of God's mercy, unlike our hellish dude.
Read my post #17.