Vatican City, May 13, 2017 / 02:32 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- The following is an unofficial transcript of the in-flight press conference on the papal plane returning from Fatima to Rome on May 13, 2017.
Greg Burke: Thank you Holiness, they were 24 very intense hours, as you said, for the Lord, 24 hours for Our Lady. It’s apparent that the Portuguese felt very touched when you said, “We have a Mother,” that they feel this in a special way. 100 years ago Our Lady didn’t appear to three important journalists, she appeared to three shepherds, but we’ve seen how they with their simplicity and sanctity were able to make this message reach the entire world. The journalists make the message arrive – it is seen from the number of nations from which they come – and they’re very curious about this trip of yours. If you’d like to say something first, great…
Pope Francis: First of all, good evening. Thanks. And, I’d like to respond to the first of the possible questions, so we can do things a bit more quickly. I’m sorry when we’re at the halfway point and they come to tell me that it’s snack time… let’s do them all together. Thanks.
Greg Burke: Good, let’s begin with the Portuguese group, with Fatima Ferreira of the Portuguese TV Radio
Anna Elza Ferreira (Redevida de Televisao): I don’t know what I think about sitting in front of the Holy Father. Well, first, many thanks for this trip. Holy Father, you came to Fatima as a pilgrim, to canonize Francisco and Jacinta in the year that the apparitions mark their 100th year. From this historical point of view, what is left now for the Church, for the entire world? Also, Fatima has a message of peace. Holy Father, you are going to receive in the Vatican in the coming days, the 24th of May, the American president Donald Trump. What can the world expect and what does the Holy Father expect from this encounter? Many thanks.
Pope Francis: Thanks. Fatima certainly has a message of peace. It’s brought to humanity by three great communicators that were less than 13 years old, which is interesting. Yes, I came as a pilgrim. The canonization was something that wasn’t planned from the beginning, because the process of the miracles was in progress but the all of a sudden the export reports were all positive, and it was done – that’s how the story was told – for me was a very great joy. What can the world expect? Peace. And what am I talking about from now on with whomever? Peace.
Ferreira: And what remains now of this historic moment for the Church?
Pope Francis: A message of peace. And I’d like to say one thing … before disembarking I received scientists from all religions who were doing studies in the Vatican Observatory at Castel Gandolfo, including agnostics and atheists. And an atheist said to me, “I’m an atheist.” I won’t tell you from what ethnicity or place of origin he was – he spoke in English. And at the end, he asked me, ‘I ask you a favor: tell the Christians that they should love their message of peace more.”
Aura Miguel (Radio Renascença): Your Holiness, in Fatima you presented yourself as the “bishop dressed in white.” Up to now, this expression applied rather to the vision of the third part of the secret, St. John Paul II, the martyrs of the twentieth century. What does it mean now, your identification with this expression?
Pope Francis: The prayer, that, I did not write it… the sanctuary wrote it… but also I have tried because they said this, and there is a connection with the white. The bishop of white, Our Lady of white, the white glow of the innocence of children after Baptism and innocence… there is a connection to the color white in that prayer. I believe – because I did not write it – but I believe that literally they have tried to express with white that desire for innocence, for peace… innocence: to not hurt the other … to not create conflict, the same.
Miguel: Is it a revision of the interpretation…
Pope Francis: No, but that vision … I believe that then Cardinal Ratzinger, at that time prefect of the Doctrine of the Faith, explained everything clearly. Thank you.
Claudio Lavanga (NBC News): Thank you. Holy Father, yesterday you asked the faithful to break down all the walls, yet on May 24 you meet a head of State who is threatening to build walls. It is a bit contradictory to your word, but he also has – it seems – opinions and decisions different from you in other topics, such as the need to act to confront global warming or the welcoming of migrants … Thus, in light of this meeting: what is your opinion of the politics that President Trump has adopted so far on these topics and what do you expect from a meeting with a Head of State who seems to think and act contrary to you?
Pope Francis: The first question … I can respond to both… I never make a judgment of a person without listening to them. I believe that I should not do this. In our talk things will come out, I will say what I think, he will say what he thinks, but I never, ever, wanted to make a judgment without hearing the person. The second…
Claudio Lavanga: What do you think about the reception of migrants?
Pope Francis: But this you all know well…
Claudio Lavanga: The second instead is what you expect from a meeting with a head of state who thinks contradictory to you?
Pope Francis: Always there are doors that are not closed. Look for the doors that are at least a little bit open, enter and talk about common things and go on. Step by step. Peace is handcrafted. It is made every day. Also friendship among people, mutual knowledge, esteem, is handcrafted. It’s made every day. Respect the other, say that which one thinks, but with respect, but walk together … someone thinks of one way or the other, but say that …. Be very sincere with what everyone thinks, no?
Claudio Lavanga: Do you hope to soften his decisions after the meeting?
Pope Francis: This is a political calculation that I do not permit myself to make.
Greg Burke: Thank you Holiness, now there is a change of places, Elisabetta Piqué is coming.
Elisabetta Piqué (La Nacion): Thanks first of all for this brief and very intense trip. We wanted to ask you, today is the centenary of the apparitions of Our Lady of Fatima, but is is also the important anniversary of a fact of your life that took place 25 years ago, when the Nuncio (Archbishop) Calabresi told you that you would become the Auxiliary Bishop of Buenos Aires, something that meant the end of your exile in Cordoba and a great change in your life. Have you every connected this fact that changed your life with Our Lady of Fatima? And in these days that you’ve prayed before her have you thought about this and what did you think about? Can you tell us about that? Thanks.
Pope Francis: Women know everything, eh! No, I didn’t think about the coincidence, only yesterday while I was praying before Our Lady I realized that one May 13th I received the phone call from the nuncio 25 years ago. I don’t know… I said, well look at that. I spoke with Our Lady a little about this. I asked her forgiveness for all of my mistakes, also of a bit of bad taste for choosing people… but yesterday I realized this.
Greg Burke: Nicolas Seneze of La Croix is coming.
Nicolas Seneze (La Croix): Thanks, Holy Father. We’re returning from Fatima for which the Fraternity of St. Pius X has a great devotion and much is said about an agreement that would give an official statute to the Fraternity in the Church. Some even imagined that there would be an announcement today… Holiness, do you think that this agreement is possible in a short timeframe? And, what are the obstacles still? And what is the sense of this reconciliation for you? And, will it be the triumphant return for faithful who have shown what it means to be truly Catholic or what?
Pope Francis: I would toss out any form of triumphalism. None. Some days ago, the Feria Quarta of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, their meeting – the call it the Feria Quarta, because it’s the fourth Wednesday – studied a document and the document still hasn’t reached me, the study of the document. This is the first. Secondly, the current relations are fraternal. Last year, I gave a license for confession to all of them, also a form of jurisdiction for marriages, but even before the problems, the cases they had, for example, had to be resolved by the Doctrine of the Faith. The Doctrine of the Faith carries them forward. For example, abuses. The cases of abuse, they brought them to us, also to the Penitentiary. Also the reduction to the lay state of a priest, they bring to us. The relations are fraternal. With Msgr. Fellay I have a good rapport. I’ve spoken many times… I don’t like to hurry things. Walk. Walk. Walk. And then we’ll see. For me, it’s not an issue of winners and losers, it’s an issue of brothers who must walk together, looking for a formula to make steps forward.
Tassilo Forcheimer (ARD): Holy Father, on the occasion of the anniversary of the Reformation, Evangelical Christians and Catholics are able to walk another stretch of road together. Will there be the possibility to participate in the same Eucharistic Mass? Some months ago, Cardinal Kasper said: A step forward could take place already this year.
Pope Francis: There have been great steps forward, eh … we think of the first statement on justification, from that moment the journey has not stopped… the trip to Sweden was very significant because it was just the beginning and also a commemoration with Sweden… also there is significance for the ecumenism of the journey… that is, to walk together, with prayer, with martyrdom, with works of charity, with works of mercy. And there, Lutheran Caritas and Catholic Caritas have made an agreement to work together. This is a great step. But steps are always awaited. You know that God is the God of surprises. But we must never stop. Always go on. To pray together, to give testimony together and to do works of mercy together, that announce the charity of Jesus Christ, to announce that Jesus Christ is Lord, is the only Savior, and that grace only comes from Him. And on this path the theologians they will continue to study, but the path must proceed. And (with) hearts opened to surprises.
Mimmo Muolo (Avvenire): Good evening Holiness. I’m asking you a question in the name of the Italian group. Yesterday and today at Fatima, we saw a great witness of popular faith together with you. The same that is found, for example, also in other Marian shrines like Medjugorje. What do you think of those apparitions, if they were apparition, and of the religious fervor they have aroused seeing that you have decided to appoint a bishop delegate for the pastoral aspects? And if I can permit myself a second question I know is very close to your heart besides that of us italians… I would like to know, the NGOs were accused of collusion with the boat traffickers of men. What do you think of this? Thanks.
Pope Francis: I’ll start with the first. I read in the papers that I peruse in the morning that there was this problem, but I still don’t know how the details are and because of this I can’t give an opinion. I know there is an issue and the investigations are moving ahead. I hope that they continue ahead and that the whole truth comes out. Medjugorje, all the apparitions, or the presumed apparitions, belong to the private sphere, they aren’t part of the public, ordinary magisterium of the Church. Medjugorje. Medjugorje. A commission was formed, headed by Cardinal Ruini. Benedict XVI made it. I, at the end of 2013 the beginning of 2014, I received the result from Cardinal Ruini. It was commission good theologians, bishops, cardinals, but good. Very good. And the commission. The Ruini report was very, very good. Then there were some doubts in the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and the Congregation judged it opportune to send each one of the members of this Feria quarta (Editor’s note: “Feria Quarta” is a once-a-month meeting in the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith during which current cases are examined) all the documentation, even those that seemed to be against the Ruini report. I received a notification – I remember it was a Saturday evening, late evening… and it didn’t seem right. It was like putting up for auction – excuse me the word – the Ruini report which was very well done. And Sunday morning the prefect received a letter from me that said that instead of sending them to the Feria Quarta, they they would send the opinions to me personally.
These opinions were studied and all of them underscore the density of the Ruini report. Principally, three things must be distinguished: the first apparitions, that they were kids. The report more or less says that it must continue being studied. The apparitions, the presumed current apparitions: the report has its doubts. I personally am more nasty, I prefer the Madonna as Mother, our Mother, and not a woman who’s the head of a telegraphic office, who everyday sends a message at such hour. This is not the Mother of Jesus. And these presumed apparitions don’t have a lot of value. This I say as a personal opinion. But, it’s clear. Who thinks that the Madonna says, ‘come tomorrow at this time, and at such time I will say a message to that seer?’ No. The two apparitions are distinguished. The third, the core of the Ruini report, the spiritual fact, the pastoral fact. People go there and convert. People who encounter God, change their lives…but this…there is no magic wand there. And this spiritual and pastoral fact can’t be ignored. Now, to see things with all this information, with the answers that the theologians sent me, this good, good bishop was appointed because he has experience, to see the pastoral part, how it’s going. And at the end he’ll say some words.
Muolo: Holiness, thank you, also for the blessing of my fellow citizens who thank you, they saw it and are very happy…
Greg Burke: Holiness, now if I can be the nasty one, we have done all of the language groups and…
Pope Francis: Time is up already?
Greg Burke: There’s a question, they tell me.
Pope Francis: One or two more.
Joshua McElwee (National Catholic Reporter): Thank you, Holy Father. The last member of the Commission for the Protection of Minors, who was abused by a priest, resigned in March. She, Ms. Marie Collins, said that she had to resign because the officials in the Vatican did not implement the recommendations of the commission that you, the Holy Father, approved. I have two questions: who is responsible, and what are you doing, Holy Father, to ensure that the priests and bishops in the Vatican implement the recommendations suggested by your commission?
Pope Francis: Marie Collins explained the matter to me well, I spoke with her, she is a good woman, but she continues to work in the formation of priests on this point… she is a good woman who wants to work … but she made this accusation, and she has a bit of reason… why? Because there are so many late cases, then in this period of lateness, because they accumulate there, you have to make legislation for this… what should the diocesan bishops do? Today in almost all the dioceses there is the protocol to follow in these cases: it is a great improvement. This way the dossiers are done well. Then there are the accusations…this is a step. Another step: there are few people, there needs to be more people capable in this area, and the Secretary of State is looking for, even Monsignor Mueller (Editor’s Note: Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Mueller, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith), to present new people. The other day two or three more were approved… the director of the disciplinary office changed, who was good, eh, he was very good but he was a bit tired… he returned to his home country to do the same with his episcopate. And the new one is an Irishman, Msgr. (John) Kennedy, he is a very good person, very efficient, prompt, and this helps a lot.
Then there is another thing: Sometimes the bishops send – if the protocol is okay, it goes right away to the Feria Quarta and the Feria Quarta studies and decides. If the protocol is not okay, it must go back to be redone. That’s why you think of continental help or in a continent or two … in Latin America, one in Colombia, another in Brazil, as pre-tribunals or continental tribunals… this is in the planning… but then it’s fine, they study it at feria quarta and they take away his clerical status. This goes back to the diocese, and the priest makes recourse. First, the application was studied by the same Feria Quarta that had given the sentence, and this is unfair. I created another tribunal and I put an indisputable person as the head, the Archbishop of Malta, Msgr. (Charles Jude) Scicluna, who is one of the strongest against abuses, and this second – because we must be just – the one who makes recourse is entitled to have a defender. If he (the defender) approves the first sentence, the case is over.His only option is a letter asking the Pope for pardon. I have never signed a pardon. I believe, I do not know, another question. This is how things are. We’re going forward. If Marie Collins was right on that point, we were also on the way. But there are 2000 cases piled up.
Portuguese journalist: I’m going to ask a question about the case Portugal, but I think that it can be applied to many of the Western societies. In Portugal, almost all of the Portuguese say they identify themselves as Catholics. But the way the society is organized, the decisions that we make, often are contrary to the indications of the Church. I refer to marriage between homosexuals, the legalization of abortion, now we’re going to begin discussing euthanasia. How do you see this?
Pope Francis: I think it’s a political problem. And that also the Catholic conscience isn’t a catholic one of total belonging to the Church and that behind that there isn’t a nuanced catechesis, a human catechesis. That is, the Catechism of the Catholic Church is an example of what is a serious and nuanced thing. I think that there is a lack of formation and also of culture. Because it’s curious, in some other regions, I think of the south of Italy, some in Latin America, they are very Catholic but they are anti-clerical and ‘priest-eaters’, that … there is a phenomenon that exists. It concerns me. That’s why I tell priests, you will have read it, to flee from clericalism because clericalism distances people. May they flee from clericalism and I add: it’s a plague in the Church. But here there is a work also of catechesis, of raising awareness, of dialogue, also of human values.
[…]
“His willingness to go off script or speak without one has been challenging and often refreshing:”
I’ve yet to see an instance in which it was refreshing.
That is understandble. It’s hard to find the putrid refreshing.
My first thought as well. I would add that Francis needs to take a lesson from Shakespeare’s Henry V. Have a good time while a prince (bishop of Argentina?), but once Pope chose who you associate with FOR THE SAKE OF THE KINGDOM. You are not free anymore to hobnob with “flakes” and give them access to what is sacred for their own use or misuse.
IV. Hell
1033 We cannot be united with God unless we freely choose to love him. But we cannot love God if we sin gravely against him, against our neighbor or against ourselves: “He who does not love remains in death. Anyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him.”610 Our Lord warns us that we shall be separated from him if we fail to meet the serious needs of the poor and the little ones who are his brethren.611 To die in mortal sin without repenting and accepting God’s merciful love means remaining separated from him for ever by our own free choice. This state of definitive self-exclusion from communion with God and the blessed is called “hell.”
1034 Jesus often speaks of “Gehenna” of “the unquenchable fire” reserved for those who to the end of their lives refuse to believe and be converted, where both soul and body can be lost.612 Jesus solemnly proclaims that he “will send his angels, and they will gather . . . all evil doers, and throw them into the furnace of fire,”613 and that he will pronounce the condemnation: “Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire!”614
1035 The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, “eternal fire.”615 The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs.
1036 The affirmations of Sacred Scripture and the teachings of the Church on the subject of hell are a call to the responsibility incumbent upon man to make use of his freedom in view of his eternal destiny. They are at the same time an urgent call to conversion: “Enter by the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is easy, that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard, that leads to life, and those who find it are few.”616
Since we know neither the day nor the hour, we should follow the advice of the Lord and watch constantly so that, when the single course of our earthly life is completed, we may merit to enter with him into the marriage feast and be numbered among the blessed, and not, like the wicked and slothful servants, be ordered to depart into the eternal fire, into the outer darkness where “men will weep and gnash their teeth.”617
1037 God predestines no one to go to hell;618 for this, a willful turning away from God (a mortal sin) is necessary, and persistence in it until the end. In the Eucharistic liturgy and in the daily prayers of her faithful, the Church implores the mercy of God, who does not want “any to perish, but all to come to repentance”:619
There is the teaching of Our Holy Father Pope Francis.
Why are we letting ourselves be blown here and there?. When the Holy Father seems to contradict Tradition, Just take no notice, and let the collage of cardinals deal with the problem.
We already know the Great Slander Mechanism’s tactics.
What’s perennially, and disappointingly eye-opening, is how many “catholics” react to its lies and innuendoes, and how readily and lustily they do so.
“Hosanna! Crucify Him!”
The Pontiff should give serious consideration to entering into a life of contemplative prayer and reparation.
Let’s be perfectly honest here, Pope Francis has a communication problem and this is not the first. One of the more glaring gaffs he has made is stating in the recent past that the crucifixion was a failure. Now we can all dance around that statement and inject our own “this is not what he meant”, but he does not follow up such statements to put his comment into context and then we have to deal with the fall out. Perhaps he needs to not do interviews or answer direct questions and just release statements through the Vatican.
A communication problem or a spiritual one?
I can’t believe people have not caught on yet. It is likely that Pope Francis told Scalfari that there was no hell. The fact that he said at other places and times that their IS a hell does not matter. What the Pope says changes from time to time. If Scalfari found it a stumbling block to believe in hell, then the Pope would have no trouble telling him there is no hell. The Pope was “accompanying” Scalfari, trying to move him closer to the church. If this involved the POPE denying or altering doctrine, then so be it. When Scalfari is ready to accept the idea of hell, the Pope will re-introduce it. It will appear again. What we just saw was the Pope’s idea of how to lead someone into the church. You deny or alter doctrine, if necessary. Then, when the person has accepted the fundamentals, you move the goalposts again, hell re-appears, and Voila! Now, the critical thing is that the POPE is endorsing this approach. Truth is situationally relative for the Pope, and he will say whatever he needs to say to get to his goal. He is flexible. Doctrine does not matter. So Germans want to give communion to divorced and remarried and bless gay marriage. Who cares? Not the Pope. So maybe Jesus did not rise from the dead. Who cares? Not the Pope.
Except for the last three sentences, I would have framed this post of yours and triple matted it in navaho white. We agreed on good Friday about something.
“You deny or alter doctrine, if necessary.”
You do realize you’re saying that one should lie–give false advertisement–in order to win people to the Truth. Sorry. That is not Catholic.
We are called to preach the truth in season and out.
Lying at the outset establishes one as an untrustworthy source who will be castigated later for their double tongue.
What he was saying is that is what is happening, not that he advocates doing it. It seems that he disapproves of it as strongly as you do, if not more so.
This a very perceptive and profound reflection,samton909. It rings most true. As Pope Pius XII said in his last words on his deathbed: “Pray, pray, pray for the Church in this most terrible time”.
All that matters is that you try to reduce your use of the electric fan.
The flaw in your logic samton909 (and it shows everyone here you likely NEVER ever debated a Unitarian Universalist or a Jehovah’s Witness in your life. I have BTW) is people who deny Hell do so because they erroneously believe it makes God look less merciful so they substitute “merciless eternal Hell” with “God saves everyone” and or “God painlessly blots bad people out of existence” heresies (thought 7th day Adventists believe mortal sinners will suffer actual pain in a temporary Hell for a time before annihilation).
Pope Francis is all about “mercy” so why would he deny this doctrine and continue to mercilessly teach it? If he never taught the existence of Hell in public or mentioned the Devil that would make this story seem credible. But the evidence says otherwise.
This is not a new claim by Scalfari. He made it about Pope Francis before and between that time and now the Pope has openly taught about Hell. This gives him more then enough plausible deniability and it is an offense against charity to speculate on what you think are the Pope’s motives. It also detracts from valid criticism that Pope Francis should do more to correct confusion and not cause confusion.
Two wrongs don’t make a right & you cannot do good by doing evil. You are better then this..
Stick with criticizing the Pope’s actions (or lack there of) and don’t cause scandal with your unsubstanciated conspiracy theories. Again you are better then that.
Jean Paul Sartre said I think in “Being and Nothingness” or in the biography of Jean Genet that a man in bad faith believes what he does not believe and does not believe in what he believes.
In the severity of God area, Pope Francis has that problem. He is mercurial on hell so it is Catholic mascara application ( rampant on the net) to only cite his moments of affirming hell without quoting him on Judas and within AL….
Paragraph 297, AL: “No one is condemned forever, because that is not the logic of the Gospel!”
Aboard the papal plane, Oct 2, 2016 / 06:08 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- During his flight from Baku, Azerbaijan to Rome on Sunday, Pope Francis:
“Mercy has the last word. I like to tell, I do not know if I told you, because I repeat it so much … in the Church of Santa Maria Maddalena – I told you or no? – There is a beautiful capital, but it is more or less from the thirteenth century. Medieval cathedrals were catechesis with sculptures. And in a part of the capital there is Judas hanged with his tongue out and eyes (bulging) out, and on the other side of the capital there is Jesus the Good Shepherd who takes (Judas) and carries him with him. And if you look closely, the face of Jesus, the lips of Jesus are sad on the one hand, but with a small smile of understanding in the other. They understood what mercy is … with Judas, huh! “
This is Balthasarian theology. It has been embraced informally for a while now. I love and respect IP, but it has been part of this whole strange discussion. Consistently. We can hope no one is damned. IOW, we can hope Hell is an empty threat. Which could also be explained as “There is no Hell.” As an aside, otherwise very orthodox Protestants have said the same thing, the evangelical John Stott for instance. I am not sure what is more disturbing: the Pope’s reticence to teach clearly, or all the people scampering to insist Francis is Very Orthodox. This column insists the Pope believes in Hell. Come on. Who is very confident they know what Francis really believes about anything unless it title liberal? Not me.
Joe M Christians hope for the salvation of all, which is not of itself audacity and similarly accept by faith what scripture already confirms that not all will be saved. If von Balthazar had hope of salvation of all yet claimed belief in scriptural pronouncements on condemnation why does he justify his query in his book Dare We Hope that All Men Be Saved on the premise “We’re all under judgment” if not understood as possible salvation for all and to establish a possibility based not on hope but on scripture. Von Balthazar provided the premise not based on faith and scripture but presumption followed by many today that there is no eternal Hell.
Amen…see Christ below in Luke….Amen and thank you.
While I am on a roll. Fr. Morello if you will indulge me.
>Christians hope for the salvation of all, which is not of itself audacity and similarly accept by faith what scripture already confirms that not all will be saved.
Whose interpretation of Scripture? We don’t confess Luther’s perspecuity errors regarding Holy Writ?
As far as I know the Church has never said anyone is in Hell but the Devil and the fallen angels via the extra -ordinary magestarium.
>If von Balthazar had hope of salvation of all yet claimed belief in scriptural pronouncements on condemnation why does he justify his query in his book Dare We Hope that All Men Be Saved on the premise “We’re all under judgment” if not understood as possible salvation for all and to establish a possibility based not on hope but on scripture.
Father if Protestantism has taught us anything it is you can justify anything from scripture. Which is why we need the Church to rule on matters of doctrine. Cardinal Dulles said he didn’t find Balthazar’s views contrary to the faith since unlike true universalism which denies hell altogether Balthazar allows for the real potential for souls to go to Hell.
>Von Balthazar provided the premise not based on faith and scripture but presumption followed by many today that there is no eternal Hell.
No, an honest reading of his theology shows he does teach being damned is a real possibility for everyone even if in the end everyone is somehow saved. Or should we deny the Catholic doctrine of sufficient grace being truly sufficient in favor of Calvinism?
Like I said elsewhere the heresy of universalism teaches damnation is absolutely impossible. Balthazar teaches damnation is truly possible for individuals. Thus one should hope for the salvation of all and still fear the damnation of themselves and other individuals.
PS. I personally don’t think everyone is going to be saved FYI. But it could happen. OTOH maybe everyone will be saved but me so I should listen to the wife and say more Rosaries.
Cheers.
That whole movement contradicts Christ:
Luke 13:24 Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition (DRA)
24 “Strive to enter by the narrow gate; for many, I say to you, shall seek to enter, and shall not be able.”
It’s based on the epistle saying of God…” who desires all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth”. Aquinas in the Summa T. noted that this refers to the antecedent willing of God ( before we act) not His consequent willing ( after we act ) and of that former willing Aquinas noted…” but the antecedent will of God does not always take place”…..” but the will of God simply always does take place” ( the final over arching willing ).
Read Aquinas on the will of God but have a Bacardi Black with pineapple juice not far away…not very far away at all….word.
Bannon you deserve an A+ rating for your comment on antecedent and consequent will in God. Have one of those suggested concoctions on me.
I already had two Jack Daniel’s double mellowed Tennessee whisky’s today….you have to buy it Father…whiskey without the brutality and a finish so long that it’s like me talking about the death penalty…that’s how long it lingers. Ask for Gentleman Jack….small if you’re on budget…750ml is $29-$36….depending on where but it comes smaller.
Not me, either, Joe M
Balthasarian pseudo-Universalism is different from heterodox Universalism in that it affirms people have the real potential to go too Hell. True heterodox Universalism takes away any fear of Hell under this pseudo version of it the fear remains. Indeed given the premises of Balthasarian theology I seen no reason why it is not possible for everyone to be saved BUT ME if I persist in sin? So I can hope for everyone else & have a healthy fear for myself…
Pope Francis’ obsession with mercy and forgiveness, his “devil” talk and simultaneous denial of Hell is itself symptomatic of cognitive dissonance and an emotional imbalance, as is his compulsion to do repeat performances with Scalfari which always end up the same way. Jorge Mario Bergoglio is terrified of Hell and Satan and he should be. We all should have a healthy fear of that reality. But I sense in him an unhealthy fear – so what better course than to deny it.
Born in the thirties he is likely afflicted by unresolved scrupulousness – a spiritual malady not so familiar to those born after the Council. It is a painful obsessive-compulsive preoccupation with personal sin and many found relief from it in the absurdities of the “spirit” of Vatican II. That same “spirit” has become their new obsession because it represents their “release” from the neurotic cycle which subsumed their emotional and spiritual lives. A concurrent reaction against what is perceived as “rigidity” would seem to be reasonable in such a personality.
But unless you deal with the root problem within yourself and in the light of Grace the neurotic cycle just morphs into another neurotic cycle. Unfortunately all of us, and indeed history, are witness to it playing out in him and the overcompensation of the multiple cases in his cabal.
Apparently his antiquity and the trappings of the office have ignited within him the idea that he is a genuine wisdom figure.
He is rather more frequently appearing a basket case.
His need to speak with this bizarre atheist Scalfari is absurd.
He is a dangerous obstacle to his own salvation and that of others.
“The Holy Spirit was not given to the Roman Pontiffs so that they might disclose new doctrine, but so that they might guard and set forth the Deposit of Faith handed down from the Apostles.”
– Pastor Aeternus, July 18, 1870.
He needs to absent himself.
Very interesting analysis James. It could also be applied to Luther (with little modification). It is no surprise that Pope Francis echoes Luther’s teachings.
The Vatican did not say that Francis did not say this, only that the quote is not fully correct… they did not say Francis affirms hell, but a hell where souls go until the Parousia and then both he’ll and the souls, damned spirits, all disappear….
BINGO! Anyone still insisting this Pope remotely believes in Catholicism is either a liar or an idiot.
Option 2?
You mean Pope Francis does not believe in the immortality of the human soul?
BTW, Pope John XXII in the 14th century also believed that Heaven (Beatific Vision) can only be attained by good souls at the end of the world, i.e., after the Last Judgement. John XXII was condemned for this heresy, which (come to think of it) is just the other side of Pope Francis’ coin of hell by annihilation.
Marietta: You mean Pope Francis does not believe in the immortality of the human soul?
Well it seems not quite. It goes like this: some souls are immortal others are not. It’s anyone guess which souls are one or the other.
Or more correctly: hell for those who he dislikes and heaven for his cohorts.
People who have known Bergoglio for several decades describe him as a “Peronist,” in the sense that he tells individuals and whole crowds what they want to hear. He seems incapable of controlling himself when there is applause to be had. He would, as Archbishop, give a rip-roaring pro-life speech in the morning, and a rip-roaring radical feminist speech in the afternoon.
There are several quite profound, high-quality comments already on this thread–the exceptions being the same-old same-old “victim of bad communication” excuses. The truth–the real truth–is to be seen in the fact that being a Catholic is the kiss of death in Bergoglio’s Vatican, while being a boodler and/or a notorious homosexual seems to be the ticket to high office and power.
It does seem, though, that this is the pontificate of mixed and sometimes contradictory messages. Isn’t this what we see in his great concern for the poor while at the same time he criticizes all but the most statist and oppressive of economic systems? And there is the insistance of his team that Amoris Laetitia is in perfect harmony with the teaching of previous popes while interpretations of AL irreconcilably opposed to the teaching of St. John Paul II and Benedict XVI are tolerated or receive encouragement from Rome. So I would not be surprised in the least if Pope Francis says one thing about Hell on Tuesday and something entirely different on Wednesday.
In all honesty, I wouldn’t be surprised at this point if he proclaimed himself to be Emperor of Japan.
As a methodology-for it is not, itself, doctrine – *Doctrinal Development” needs to be put out to pasture for a serious rethink. Catholic dissidents (whom Francis encourages, and nurtures within himself) have mangled the concept into uselessness.
I am sorry, but I have to react viscerally here. Pope Francis believes in Hell? How so? You don’t get that impression form his overall agenda. And we all know that in the postconciliar Church, theological terms ,mean little if anything. “Inerrancy”… huh, what? “No salvation outside the Church”… duck, or the explain-away will hit you in the as-. The bottom line is the ambiguity and the desire to accommodate is coming home to roost. We wither know what we believe, or we are Unitarians with a Jesus- and a liturgy-fixation. You can’t be Catholic like that identity has been understood for years on these shores and also embrace the sucker punches of this elderly Argentine’s shock papacy. At some point someone has to pull the curtain on the wizard. YEs, he’s pope. And yes, he also seems heterodox. Unless the definition of orthodoxy is up for grabs. Which it IS, of James Martin and Michael Sean Winters would have received a smack down. They have not.
Even if I am typo-afflicted!
When you can’t look to the Pope for guidance on Hell, Heaven, or Sex and Marriage, it’s time to tune out the Pope. Not Catholicism, but its political head. And thank God that He will not let him formally declare falsehoods, even if the man stuffs his homilies with ambiguities. As for giving allegiance to the everyday Magisterium, well, I think that may be as fuzzy an obligation as the one involved in this whole communion for the divorced thing! I assume that’s OK. Further muddying the waters, I am now praying that this Pope resigns. And thus feeling very in communion with both this Pope and the last!!
I believe in hell – that’s where your immortal soul goes if you die in a state of mortal sin. For my sake – that’s really all that matters.
If you need some prep work you go to purgatory, if you’re ready you go to Paradise.
Forever
Forever
Forever
Scalfari looks an awful like the late George C. Scott.
Serving humanity and the Planet in all humility – could be one of the many ways to heaven.
Serving “The Planet” is serving a false god.
“And the Planet” with a capital P.
What religion might this be?
Strange, I thought thatservice first and foremost is to God. But then maybe the planet is god for some.
If i am correct, the Vatican did NOT deny that the pope said what he was reported to have said, they simply advised that it may not be what he said… what they used to call a non denial denial. And of course the pope refuses to ‘correct’ the record because he is so far above that sort of thing and we’re all just pharisees or rigorists or neo-palegians or whatever for wondering anyway. What does the pope believe? Who knows? We do know that he is either the most careless man to hold the office, or the most cunning.
Please, dear author, open your eyes.
The pope has no sense of responsibility deliver clarity to his flock. Francis knows what Scalfari does with his words. That he should grant this man yet another interview is nauseating. Francis has not and will not make a clear rebuttal to Scalfari’s words. This is not rocket science. It is only common sense to see what is happening here.
I do not trust Francis. It grieves me to say this about any pope.
Does his denial of hell make him a material heretic?
Pope John XXII denied the Beatific Vision to a good person newly dead. He claimed Heaven is attained only at the end of history, i.e., after the Last Judgement. John XXII was condemned as a heretic.
To Chris Altieri’s point Pope Francis has affirmed the existence of Hell. Neither can we confirm what atheist journalist Scalfari says regarding Pope Francis’ remarks. Reputable journalists note however the faith damaging issue of ambiguity. For example Greg Burke his spokesman simply says Scalfari misquoted his exact words, which is itself ambiguous. Also true to his ambiguous modus operandi it was reported by Edward Pentin Nat Catholic Reg 3.29.18 that regarding Scalfari “The Pope’s comments on this occasion are questionable as they are at odds with previous statements in which he has spoken of Hell’s existence, most recently last week when he appealed to the mafia to ‘give up their lives of crime and avoid eternal damnation.’” But Pentin added “Francis has also given signals to the contrary, preaching last year that ‘everything will be saved — everything’ and that at the end of history there will be an ‘immense tent, where God will welcome all mankind so as to dwell with them definitively’”. As a matter of justice to the Church the Roman Pontiff is obliged to repudiate heresy and clarify truth. At best he is misquoted and careless. At worst he seems to purposely couch what he really believes ambiguously so as to promote heresy obliquely.
Try raising teenage children in the Faith under these conditions. This is appalling and deliberate and it’s time the hierarchy put a stop to it by removing him from office.
Fr. Morello,
Here are the Pope’s actual words.
“If we remain united to Jesus, the cold of difficult moments does not paralyse us; and if even the whole world were to preach against hope, if it said that the future will bring only dark clouds, the Christian knows that in that same future there is the return of Christ. When this will happen, no-one knows, but the thought that at the end of our history there is the merciful Jesus is enough to have confidence and not to curse life. Everything will be saved. Everything. We will suffer, there will be moments that cause anger and indignation, but the gentle and potent memory of Christ will eliminate the temptation to think that this life is a mistake.”END QUOTE
He is not talking about the salvation of everyone(since when are people things?)
he is talking about people who “remain united to Jesus”.
It is also obvious he is making a reference to Romans 8:19-25 & 1 Corinthians 15:26-28 the later I will quote.
1 Corinthians 15:26-28 The last enemy to be destroyed is death. [27] “For God has put all things in subjection under his feet.” But when it says, “All things are put in subjection under him,” it is plain that he is excepted who put all things under him. [28] When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to him who put all things under him, that God may be everything to every one.
[Pope Francis cited part of 15:28 in the General Audience address from which the quote is taken, and also the “return of Christ”: when these wonderful things regarding all of creation will occur]
To get the idea out of this he hold to heterodox universalism views is dishonest.
The Pope may deserve just criticism but that never authorizes his would be critics to themselve criticize unjustly.
“simple as doves” or “gentle as doves”?
It has been translated both ways. Mr. Altieri is using the RSV translation.
The Vatican clarification doesn’t really say what Francis believes, it only says that Scalfari’s recollection doesn’t contain Francis’ precise words. This hardly seems to be a denial of the substance of what may have been said. At any rate, this is all very confusing.
Just saying, on Holy Saturday:
https://mobile.twitter.com/EOrthodoxy/status/980163117433982977
I’ve attended very good churches in the Roman Catholic Church that recognize the Pope and I’ve done so for almost three decades. My own father is a sedevacantist. When we discuss things and are in agreement or I affirm something he’s saying, it’s an affirmation of his faith which is predicated on the denial my faith. Never mind that the former Mass was unable to fend off the Reformation, the French Revolution, American Revolution, the Rights of Man, Communism and multiple coups against Catholic governments in the 19th and 20th centuries, nor the sexual revolution, somehow, through an ahistorical fantasy, all this would be fixed if everyone went back the same mass that was overwhelmed by the same revolutions of selfism. Though my father is elderly, the impossibility of the relationship has undermined all filial and familial values. It’s been a long painful and ruinous relationship.
Our current Pope is indulging in something similar, where even though he is’t speaking consistently, he’s always right and everyone else is always wrong. It’s reached a point where one really has to ask oneself, who needs persecution, chaos and subversion when it’s coming from the Church itself? Again, we await clarity. Why are we awaiting clarity if we are only going to be told it’s our fault for not being generous and merciful enough. Because one is willing to be humble, it doesn’t mean they’re going to buy into things that don’t add up, especially when such follows a pattern of you lose, I win.
I pay him little mind. I see Pope Francis as the result of the permissive willing of God…punishment for a church that over praised his predecessors. A real great Pope would have sent our sex criminals to the police and jail pronto …in 1986 tops…the way Christ took two minutes cleaning the temple. Instead…it was the slow, wise movements….of the wise Church….yeah..right. It was conspiracy theories in his head that 26 countries had false accusers. So God gave us a Pope…Francis…who is impossible to call great…even by his admirers. He grates on nerves. God is punning us as punishment.
Your dad probably agrees with you alot when you leave. There was a book out of Harvard…” Getting to Yes”….which said once a person makes a definite assertion in a public forum, they won’t retract it in public….their ego is at stake. After you drive off, your dad may in his head agree with you. Go on strike as to discussing religion. He might fear its the only reason he is interesting to you. Show him there are other things in which he is interesting. Don’t react at all to bait he gives you on the Church topic.
Thank you Bill Bannon. Your advise makes sense and I appreciate it. I will give it a go.
He is punishment alright, for our sins.
It doesn’t seem Francis believed Our Lord’s words about adultery and remarriage and therefore, it’s not far fetched to think he may not believe Our Lord’s words about Hell.
Remember he wrote magisterially, “no one is condemn (to Hell) forever, it is contrary to the Logic of God,” ‘they simply disappear’…” see AL
We get what we want and deserve: when Antichrist appears he will be an outstanding hit.
When he is in effect teaching (whether deliberately or through lack of caution and good sense) billions through his journalist friend that Hell does not exist, it is immaterial what he personally believes, or what his evangelical strategy might be in making such comments. It is false and heretical teaching. It immediately paves the way for the world, the flesh and the devil to work their will.
There is little doubt that people inspired by this teaching already have gone to their eternal doom on the wings of this teaching. For example, the suicide who had his courage buoyed and his mind relieved of apprehension. What a relief for a potential suicide in the face of his suffering and lack of hope just to disappear,a choice pursued with papal reassurance. This pope has to go, and it seems perfectly legitimate to pray that the Lord will take him out of the way one way or another.
Who am I to judge?
Some, here, may not care for Antonio Socci (and Google Translate does a miserable job with his Facebook post), but he does have a point or two.
There was one phrase which caught my attention. It nicely sums up the cultural/political (maybe doctrinal) working out of Francis’ papacy – “double magisterial track” . As they say, much within to unpack.
A turn of phrase which even Google Translator couldn’t mangle.
https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.antoniosocci.com%2Funa-sollevazione-di-cardinali-ha-fermato-per-ora-leresia-bergogliana-sullinferno-la-smentita-farlocca-e-il-rischio-impeachment%2F&edit-text=
IMHO It was the wording of the clarification that was most distressing to me, the only thing it said was that the pope’s exact words were not used. Besides, given whatever the pope has said, who can really say what he believes? I know I am less certain every day as to his Catholic Faith because he has been and continues to be deliberately vague to the point that even Cardinals are not sure, let alone literate, rational, members of the laity. Besides this, it is widely reported that the head of the Jesuits does not believe there is a devil, Satan. Now if such a dolt can remain in office under a Jesuit brother, what does that say? Francis is not truthful and forthright in my estimation and he wilds power like a mobster. These are onky my opinions, I could be all wrong, I hope I am.
When somebody appears ambivalent, with rare exceptions they seem to truly hold the more contradicty view, otherwise why not strongly affirm the orthodox position?
And why can the pope not answer the questions of his own ”Easter visit” with an enemy of Christ?
I liked the article, but the last few lines irked me. Generally speaking, why is the papacy incompatible with following the example of the Good Shepherd in going out in search of the lost sheep? I think the author is guilty of rhetorical excess here.
It seems like a lot of people are mad at the idea that most of the rest of the world won’t be suffering in extreme torture whilst you and your cohort are highly privileged.
Seems like this issue is a litmus test of Jesus to separate the people who really care about others from the rest.
Conditionalists also believe in hell. But they believe in the biblical view of hell: It is a second death.