Pope Francis’ alleged remarks about Hell. Fr. Z says, “Let not your heart be troubled.”

[steve-b]

And, those “valid sources” are only “valid” based, for much of their history, on oral tradition, correct?

All I am saying is that information has been passed on without notes for a long, long time. Even if this guy had taken “notes,” it may or may not have mattered because of interest/bias?

Or, what if they really did elect an idiot who doesn’t recognize the company he is in, and how they might manipulate his statements? You have to pick your words carefully depending on the audience that is around you.

If we are REALLY talking about what pope Francis is reported to have said, then I provided a link in a previous post , as an answer.

 

[Thom18]

this “story” is gaining traction in the atheistic secular media

i wish Pope Francis would stay away from sclafari…

At this point, I wish he’d stay away from all journalists. It’s really distressing that this kind of stuff keeps happening.

 

[OsculeturMeOsculo]

Isn’t that irrelvant?

 

[Spyridon]

@goout.

How dare you accuse a good and holy priest of perpetuating confusion among the people of God.

He did no such thing as you slanderously, falsely, and calumniously imply. He’s trying to assuage the widespread confusion caused by the media reporting on fake news.

 

[Spyridon]

Well at least Pope Francis hasn’t said anything which ended up getting Catholics killed, as Pope Benedict XVI inflammatory words did.

What a shameful thing to say.

Implying our Emeritus Holy Father is indirectly responsible for death because he preached the truth? Sick.

The devil is responsible for any death which occured, not Papa Benedict.

 

[goout]

@goout.

How dare you accuse a good and holy priest of perpetuating confusion among the people of God.

Umm, that’s exactly what he is accusing the Pope/Vatican of doing.
And I’m not criticising a priest’s holiness.

He did no such thing as you slanderously, falsely, and calumniously imply. He’s trying to assuage the widespread confusion caused by the media reporting on fake news.

[/quote]

I stand by what I said.
I believe he (Fr Z) just adds to the confusion, to what benefit I have no idea. No one I know or read is having fits about what the Pope said to the Italian journalist. (I didn’t know about it until reading this thread). It’s only in the electronic ether that folks are riled up.
His blog post does nothing to clear anything up in regards to the Pope. Fr Z posts catechetical material, none of which is in doubt anyway.
Nowhere is the Pope quoted directly. Nowhere is the Pope given good faith benefit of the doubt.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

I’m not implying anything.

Fact is, his words were inflammatory and caused riots and the murder of four nuns.

Pope Benedict XVI is a theological genius, but he was totally incompetent in public affairs and his first few months as Pope, didn’t have his speeches reviewed before making them.

Previous Pope’s had their speeches reviewed and edited before they made them, to be sure the world wouldn’t over-react.

Jim

 

[JimR-OCDS]

In the context of this thread, no it’s not irrelevant. It’s what Jesus would do.

Jim

 

[brian_custer]

for whatever reason’ pope st francis chooses not to speak english

 

[OsculeturMeOsculo]

Not really since most of the thread is about the validity of something Pope Francis said.

 

[Fauken]

The Pope is not a saint. He is simply Pope Francis.

 

[goout]

for whatever reason’ pope st francis chooses not to speak english

English is not the Pope’s native or even second language.
Should we demand that he conform his speech and personality to our liking?
Or should we first

1. give him the benefit of the doubt
2. seek to understand what he actually says (this requires some time, patience, and humility…we give more good faith to chemistry textbooks than we do to the Pope. That is sad. When we find ourselves at odds with textbooks, we usually assume we need to look further and change our way of thinking (aka “repent”). Apparently the Pope is beneath the integrity of a textbook?).

Or should we

1. reflexively take every third hand news story (that’s honestly what this is…third hand), and use it to cast doubt on the integrity of the Vatican and the Pope.

 

[Agathon]

Nowhere is the Pope quoted directly. Nowhere is the Pope given good faith benefit of the doubt.

So what did he actually say?

 

[goout]

I dunno???

 

[pnewton]

@goout.

How dare you accuse a good and holy priest of perpetuating confusion among the people of God.

He did no such thing as you slanderously, falsely, and calumniously imply. …

What a shameful thing to say… Sick.

Methinks the pot is calling the kettle black here.

There is some truth to the adage that there is no such thing as bad press. Repeating something that was false, even to say it was false, may well serve to perpetuate the myth among those disinterested. That does not mean that some blogger like this priest should stay silent. He obviously saw the need to address the issue.

 

[HarryStotle]

A link to the original article is here: Il Papa: “È un onore essere chiamato rivoluzionario” - la Repubblica
A subscription to the newspaper is required to read the article.

The closest reported statement I have come across would be the following quote from the article translated into English. I can’t confirm this is what the article originally said, though.

"They are not punished, those who repent obtain the forgiveness of God and enter the rank of souls who contemplate him, but those who do not repent and cannot therefore be forgiven disappear," Francis is quoted as saying. "There is no hell, there is the disappearance of sinful souls."
Source: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2018/0...-that-pope-francis-denies-existence-hell.html

This is the response to Scalfari’s original article by the Vatican’s press office.

The Holy Father Francis recently received the founder of the newspaper La Repubblica in a private meeting on the occasion of Easter, without however giving him any interviews. What is reported by the author in today’s article is the result of his reconstruction, in which the textual words pronounced by the Pope are not quoted. No quotation of the aforementioned article must therefore be considered as a faithful transcription of the words of the Holy Father.
Source: http://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/it/bollettino/pubblico/2018/03/29/0236/00512.html

Clearly, Scalfari has a habit of reworking the Pope’s words since he acknowledges that he does not record interviews nor makes any attempt to be accurate about was actually said.

So the question of why Pope Francis would grant this man interviews knowing the likelihood that his words will be misrepresented by Scalfari is not exactly an outrageous one since the same kind of “massaging” of the Pope’s words by Scalfari has occurred a number of times in the past five years.