Skip to main content

Pope Francis's "could almost be a Atheistic Document" still doesn't Reaffirm Existence of Hell

Reuter and the leftist Catholic media are really excited because Pope Francis in the Apostlic Exhortation "Gaudete et Exsultate" mentions the devil "over a dozen" time.

In their minds this proves somehow that Francis is explicitly reaffirming that he believes in the existence of hell. (Reuter, "After 'no hell's report, Pope give the devil his due," April 9, 2018)

The Pope may believe that there is no hell as his atheist friend Eugenio Scalfari reported him saying, therefore the devils may be on the earth or even in heaven and not in hell which doesn't exist accordingly to the words attributed to him.

Remember that Francis thinks heaven is inviting many atheists over those rigid Catholics who believe in Jesus's words about adulterous sexual acts being intrinsically evil as Pope John Paul Il reaffirmed and taught.

Maybe Heaven is not only inviting many atheists, but many devils, too.

That the Pope may believe this is not that far-fetched. Tracy Rowland in "Catholic Theology" (page 193) says Francis in 1984 reviewed a book of Hans Urs Von Balthasar.

Fr. John Hardon refused to review a book by Balthasar for Fr. Joseph Fessio's Ignatius Press because of the author's heretical views on hell. Hardon said the book "leaves doubt if whether there's anyone yet in hell." (therealpresence.org, "Seduction of Evil Spirits," September 7, 1997)

The heart of the matter is that to this point and in this new papal document Francis has not as Cardinal Raymond Burke said "clearly reaffirmed the truth about... hell." (Breitbart, "Cardinal Burke: Pope Francis Feeds Confusion in the Church," April 5, 2018)

But, surely someone will excitedly say Reuter in the above article says one time in the document "Francis did mention hell."

If the Pope had "clearly... reaffirmed the truth of hell" then with this passage he might have condemned to hell all the rigid Catholics who believe in the Ten Commandments and the infallible teachings of the Catholic Church in the media and on blogs who point out that many of Francis's teachings contradict Revelation.

Reuter quotes the Exhortation as saying:

"Even in Catholic media... we see how the unguarded tongue, set on fire by hell, sets all things ablaze."

Nice metaphor, but hardly a clear reaffirmation of the existence of hell.

Strangely enough, as far as I saw, the Exhortation only speaks of the "mission" and "the perennial 'today'" but not of the afterlife.

It could almost be a atheistic document.

An atheistic globalist could have written this document as a call for the masses to forget about national security remembering that the only sins are not to support unlimited immigration and the Islamic take over of what is left of Christian Europe (which are as important as the holocaust of the unborn babies), if it didn't have so much flowery Catholic language and the lip service to the unborn.

This Exhortation could almost be a atheistic document.

If Francis can't apparently talk about the afterlife in this document, as least as my quick look through the Exhortation seems to show, even after he just made worldwide headlines denying hell which was attributed to him by his friend and refuses to this day to reaffirm the existence of hell and apparently in this document doesn't speak of heaven, I didn't see a reference to heaven, then he needs to read the following words of St. Paul.

Even if someone finds the word "heaven" mentioned somewhere, nowhere in the Exhortation, that I saw, is there anything remotely coming close to St. Paul's:

"If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all people to be pitied."
(1Cor. 15:19)

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church.










Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Taylor Marshall finally admitted that "Francis teaches HERESY," now, the question is will he do a Skojec & a Schneider Cop Out

    Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales totally confirmed beyond any doubt the possibility of a heretical pope and what must be done by the Church in such a situation: "[T]he Pope... WHEN he is EXPLICITLY a heretic , he falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church, and the Church MUST either deprive him , or, as some say, declare him deprived, of his Apostolic See." (The Catholic Controversy, by St. Francis de Sales, Pages 305-306) Taylor Marshall finally admitted that "Pope Francis teaches HERESY: Pope Pius XII condemned the heresy of Francis": Pope Francis on Feb 2 2022, taught, "that in Christ no one can ever truly separate us from those we love because the bond is an existential bond, a strong bond that is in our very nature...who have denied the faith, who are apostates." Pope Pius XII taught the exact opposite when he wrote of those: "who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body, or b

Wernz-Vidal: "One cannot consider as Schismatics those who Refuse to Obey the Roman Pontiff because they would hold his person Suspect or, because of Widespread Rumors, Doubtfully Elected"

    Pope Francis is tottering on the precipice of Hell. None of this means he isn't the pope, and such talk among the laity is scandalous in its own right. Not a single cardinal in that 2013 conclave has come out and said the election was rigged and Bergoglio isn't the pope, that he is in fact an anti-pope . If he is, a future pope can declare that, when Jorge Bergoglio will no longer be a pope. But if the very men gathered in conclave haven't made that public accusation,  anyone who is suggesting that better take into account that they too will have to give an account of themselves to Almighty God when they die . Such talk adds to the scandal of the "little ones," the simple, even potential converts, who, when they hear big-mouth Catholics on social media saying he's not really the pope, draw back from approaching the Church. Do any of us desire to stand in front Our Blessed Lord as the Supreme Judge and explain why, in our desire for more c

The Nuremberg Trial-like Excuse which Cardinal Burke has so Staggeringly, so Stereotypically Proffered on the Promised “Formal Correction”

Does Cardinal Burke think Francis is an antipope? On at least five occasions, Cardinal Burke has rejected the magisterial nature of official papal teaching (in one case, pre-emptively dismissing a hypothetical official teaching of the Magisterium): Cardinal Burke has rejected the official teaching of Pope Francis in the new Apostolic Constitution Episcopalis Communio concerning the possibility that a pope can raise the final synodal document to the level of ordinary magisterium, if the pope chooses. (We covered the Episcopalis Communio here .) The whole apostolic constitution on the Synod is problematic. … This idea that either the Pope on his own or the Synod together with the Pope can create some new Magisterium [i.e. a new teaching of the ordinary Magisterium], is simply false. The Synod is a consultative body, to help the Pope to see how best to present the Church’s teaching in time. It’s not able to create ordinary Magisterium. As a canon lawyer, Cardinal Burk