I also posted several comments on Fr Barron's Youtube video. No responses as yet. I don't expect any. Here are my comments: "as a practical matter, we reasonably know that hell is not empty. this video gives the IMPRESSION to many that it's probably not hard to avoid hell, since, after all, it's possible that NO ONE will go there. sorry, but this is a very subtle undermining of the faith (probably not intentional)." "... in fact, this video will create doubt in the minds of Catholics about all the truths they were raised with. if hell might be empty (actually, let's be real, an absurd contention), what other basic truths should we be calling into question? Fr Barron (here) is a good example of what i like to call "educated into stupidity." Stick with Augustine and Aquinas. dark, yes, and true, yes." "... the idea that Jesus spoke about the POSSIBILITY of hell only, and not its definite reality, is laughable." "... this also disregards as of no import the writings of innumerable saints and visionaries, whom, i suspect, Fr Barron does not take seriously, or "interprets" what they have to say into meaninglessness. make no mistake, the is the sort of NEW DOCTRINE Paul warned us about."
Hell is mentioned in the Gospels much more often than heaven. Check it out with a concordance. This is no accident. But I am saddened about all this. I was very,very fond of Fr Barron. That he will be a very senior Cardinal in the US Episcopate one day I have no doubt. He has lost an avid fan but I will pray much for him, poor man.
I think the late great American theologian Cardinal Dulles provides a very even balanced and scriptural view on this topic below. It's a bit long but worth it. I am confused as to why this has come up today when we should be celebrating All Saints? I also note that the Fr. Barron YouTube Clio is a few years old so why is Voris bringing it up. http://www.firstthings.com/article/2008/08/the-population-of-hell-23
Good article! Thanks! One small passage from it: 'Pope John Paul II in his Crossing the Threshold of Hope mentions the theory of Balthasar. After putting the question whether a loving God can allow any human being to be condemned to eternal torment, he replies: “And yet the words of Christ are unequivocal. In Matthew’s Gospel he speaks clearly of those who will go to eternal punishment (cf. Matthew 25:46).'
9+ Well I can't really tell why Michael brought it up. He would have to explain that himself. I wouldn't like to second guess him. But I can say why it is important and relevant to me. Say you are being shown round a house you are thinking of buying and everything looks grand and beautiful. Suddenly someone shows you a patch of woodwork that is filled with woodworm. From that one patch you can tell that the whole house is about to fall down. I would say that Fr Barron's house is very, very big and important, his world wide influence massive. So I suppose Michael thought it important to show the patch of woodworm bring the entire structure down and I am glad he did. As to his statement being a couple of years ago or twenty years ago, well it isn't relevant if he still defends these views as apparently he does. As to mentioning this on All Saints Day...well what better day? So many of these shed their life's blood for the Dogma of the Faith.
Well one thing is for sure......... have you ever heard of a funeral where the priest or minister hasn't essentially canonized the person who died. Everyone speaks as if they are already in heaven. I recall my dad telling me a story once of his brother-in-law, Dude, who hardly ever went to Church and led a very worldly life. The priest's homily made him sound as if he was a saint. My dad's brother leaned over and whispered to my dad, 'was that the same Dude we new!'? So maybe there isn't a hell, since no one goes there
The last two funerals I was at the officiating priest referred to the dead as being' Happy now in heaven'. My first immediate thought was, How do you know this?' Knowing the deceased as I did I would have been surprised if they were in heaven, at least at once. In one case I know the priest had never even met the dead person. I can see why priest s do this. It is much , much easier to take the feel good smiley face approach that doesn't provoke dissent. But the effects are, to cut the dead person off from prayers for the dead, for if he /she is in heaven ,why pray for them? If the person who may have been behaving quite badly whilst on Earth is said to be in heaven (at once) then folks wll say, 'Well if she or he got up there (so fast) it doesn't take much of an effort. It also takes the salt out of the theological food so to speak. It makes Faith sweet but insipid, without real sustinence or meaning. It might just as well be New Age , who get up to similiar nonsense.
You know, looking back on it, I have always been afraid of going to hell even since I was a child. On of the Reasons for this was going to the Redemptorists for their Confraternity. In the old days before Vatican 2 and for a while after they used to have a vow they used to take to preach on hell (they did away with it very sadly..I hope they bring it back). Anyway their sermons would have brought you out in a cold sweat. Scarey, scarey, scarey. But looking back on it I believe this was a very ,very good thing. The fear of the Lord is the beginning of Wisdom as Scripture and as I walked through life it was often this fear of hell that kept me from doing things I would now very,very much have regretted. The poor souls who wake up and find themselves in hell for all Eternity, who will they be most angry against who will they scream and cuss about? Why the priests who never preached on hell because of fear of human respect or because like Fr Barron they did not truly believe themselves. PRAYING FOR SINNERS “I can’t stop praying for poor sinners who are on the road to hell. If they come to die in that state, they will be lost for all eternity. What a pity! We have to pray for sinners! Praying for sinners is the most beautiful and useful of prayers because the just are on the way to heaven, the souls of purgatory are sure to enter there, but the poor sinners will be lost forever. All devotions are good but there is no better one than such prayer for sinners." “What souls we can convert by our prayers. The one who saves a soul from hell saves this soul and his own as well.” “One can offer himself as a victim for 8-15 days for the conversion of sinners. One can suffer cold, heat, deprive oneself of looking at something, go visit someone who would appreciate it, make a novena, attend daily Mass for this intention in places where it is possible. Not only would one contribute to God’s glory by this holy practice of praying for sinners, but one would obtain an abundance of grace.” “I am only content when I’m praying for sinners. The good God has made me see how much he loves that I pray for poor sinners. … I don’t know if it were really a voice I heard or a dream, but, whatever it was, it woke me up and told me that to save a soul in the state of sin is more pleasing to God than all sacrifices. For that reason, I do all my resolutions for penance.” St. John Vianney
Very interesting article from Msgr. Pope on St. Bernard of Clairvaux stages of sin. Take a look at the "I am sin" video- very chilling. http://blog.adw.org/2013/10/stages-of-sin-from-st-bernard-of-clairvaux-fasten-your-seatbelt/
As bad as "instant canonizations" are for Catholics, it's so much worse among protestants. At least with us a Mass is being offered. I was at a protestant funeral of one of my patients and the minister said, "He didn't get to go to church as much as he would have wanted to, but he did go once on Mother's Day." (!!!) He went on to say how happy the man must be now in heaven. So much for the narrow way... Since so few of us pray for the dead, we must pray as if we were many.
I agree with what you and others have said. I suppose in their wanting to help the grief stricken, priests say things about the deceased to provide comfort. I'm not saying this is the right approach, but as you said the Mass itself is a prayer fir the deceased. I think this also serves to give notice to those of us who are more attuned to the consequences of sin, we need to take prayers into our own hand both before and after the death of a family member or friend. Calling for last rites and anointing, praying the Rosary, Divine Mercy, etc are things we should do. During the wake service, insist on a prayerful time- for my mom and dad, we prayed various litanies, the Chaplet of Divine Mercy. Today is All Souls Day so we all have the opportunity to help those poor souls in a Purgatory awaiting the beatific vision. Perhaps this forum should decide we will collectively offer our prayers today for the most forgotten soul in Purgatory who has no one to pray for him/her? O Lord, we beg you by your most holy and redeeming sacrifice of the Cross to let one drop of your Most Holy Blood to fall upon the most forgotten soul in Purgatory and bring him/ her to be with You this day in the full splendor of your Kingdom.
http://unamsanctamcatholicam.blogspot.com/2013/11/fr-barron-and-mark-shea-and-balthasar.html Friday, November 01, 2013 Fr. Barron and Mark Shea and Balthasar are Wrong Michael Voris recently came out with a video entitled simply "Fr. Barron is Wrong", challenging the popular priest-evangelist on his repeated statements in favor of the theory proposed by the late Hans Urs von Balthasar in Dare We Hope? that it is acceptable for Christian to have good hope that Hell may be empty. Voris rightly notes that Christ Himself says some souls will definitely go to Hell on numerous occasions, and that the Church's alleged "silence" on the definitive presence of anyone in Hell is not due to any support for the empty-hell theory, but due to the fact that the definitive presence of any one soul in Hell is not part of Divine Revelation and therefore outside the pale of the Church's competence to define. Therefore, the fact that the Church has never "proclaimed" anyone in Hell provides no rationale whatsoever for asserting that Hell is empty. At this point Mark Shea jumped in and accused Voris of smearing Fr. Barron wrongly with his "poison." It is not my intention here to comment on the antagonism between Voris and Shea; I am more interested in Shea's comments that the Fr. Barron-Balthasar "Empty Hell" theory is "perfectly within the pale of orthodox speculation" and that "at the end of the day, that’s all you have: two schools of opinion–both of which are allowed by the Church." Thus, the Balthasarian "Empty Hell" theory is granted a legitimate place on the spectrum of legitimate opinions upon which Catholics can disagree in good conscience, and the traditional opinion that people do in fact go to Hell is also placed on the spectrum as another legitimate "option." This defense of Fr. Barron and Balthasar apparently goes back to Shea's position that Tradition itself has two "irreconcilable" aspects of the question of Hell that leave the issue fraught with a certain "tension", which I contest but will leave off for the time being. I am more interested in Shea's comments about "two schools of opinion-both of which are allowed by the Church." This is what I object to. Balthasar's "Empty Hell" theory is absolutely not a legitimate position on the Catholic spectrum, nor is the belief that some people actually go to Hell just one of various "schools of opinion." According to Fr. Barron, Shea, and Balthasar, even though it is heresy to say that we know that Hell is empty, it is not heresy to suggest that we can have a good hope that Hell is empty. How Fr. Barron and others can assert this is beyond me, since even this proposition is condemned as a heresy by Bl. Pius IX. Let us recall the Syllabus of Errors, number 17, in which the following proposition is condemned: "Good hope at least is to be entertained of the eternal salvation of all those who are not at all in the true Church of Christ." -- Encyclical "Quanto conficiamur," Aug. 10, 1863, etc. This is precisely what Fr. Barron and Balthasar assert, and what Mark Shea says is "perfectly within the pale of orthodox speculation." Fr. Barron says we can at least have a good hope that everyone makes it to heaven, and yet Pius IX specifically condemns this opinion. Not only proclaiming knowledge of universal salvation, but even allowing "good hope" to so much as be "entertained" is condemned. Period. Our Lord teaches as much when He says, "Enter ye in at the narrow gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way that leadeth to destruction, and many there are who go in through it." (Matt. 7:13). He does not suggest that there are many for whom it is possible that they go to destruction but do not actually go; He says "many there are who go through it." Many means many. Many does not mean "nobody." In discussions about this topic by apologists pushing the Balthasarian opinion, I seldom see any reference to Luke 13, when Jesus is asked the question point blank, "Lord, are only few people going to be saved?" to which Christ responds, "Strive to enter by the narrow gate; for many, I say to you, shall seek to enter, and shall not be able." (v.23-24). You see that? Many shall seek to enter, and shall not be able. This is not the realm of the hypothetical. Revelation 20:15 is cited by Voris in his video, which says, "And whosoever was not found written in the book of life, was cast into the pool of fire." Again, this is not presented as a hypothetical, but as a real vision of the situation at the Last Judgment. It could be countered that it only says that people not in the book of life get cast into the pool of fire, but does not imply that anyone was actually in this unfortunate position. We do know at least, however, that two individuals will be damned: the Beast and the False Prophet: "And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever." (Rev. 20:10). Furthermore, if nobody was actually thrown into the pool of fire, how would John have this knowledge that anyone whose name was not in the book would be thrown in the pool of fire? To put it another way: Suppose I say, "I was uptown yesterday, and I saw the police were ticketing everybody who weren't wearing seat belts." Then suppose you ask, "So how many people got ticketed?" and I say, "Oh, nobody" wouldn't you be utterly confused? The basic grammar of the statement "I saw the police were ticketing everybody who weren't wearing seat belts" implies an action completed in the past, not some hypothetical. This demonstrates the kind of contortions one has to put the Scriptures through to deny the obvious fact that some people will wind up eternally damned. We could also cite Lumen Gentium 16, which says, "Some there are who, living and dying in this world without God, are exposed to final despair. Wherefore to promote the glory of God and procure the salvation of all of these, and mindful of the command of the Lord, "Preach the Gospel to every creature", the Church fosters the missions with care and attention." Note that LG 16 says that "there are" some who wind up dying in final despair without God, and then goes on to cite this as one of the reasons for the urgency of the Great Commission, which is in accord with Tradition: the Gospel must be preached in order to save souls from Hell. Fr. Barron and Shea both assert that the Empty Hell theory of Balthasar seems to be taught by Pope Benedict XVI in Spe Salvi. Having just completed a very thorough study of the late pontiff's encyclical, I dispute this fact, but that is for another post. But it is sufficient to say that, if we are reading the Magisterium in continuity with itself, Spe Salvi can simply not mean what Fr. Barron and Shea suggest, otherwise Benedict XVI contradicts Pius IX. The "Empty Hell" theory is not one of many legitimate "schools of thought." It is a novelty, toyed with early on by Origen and then virtually abandoned until the modern era. The amount of legerdemain and re interpretive manipulation one has to do to Scripture, Magisterial teaching, history and tradition in order to breathe life into the theories of Fr. Barron and Balthasar on this question is appalling. The evidence in favor of the traditional teaching that there are people in Hell outweighs Balthasar and Fr. Barron's positions as a tidal wave overwhelms a sand castle. That this novelty is being defended by some as a legitimate position within the pale of orthodoxy is sad, especially in light of Syllabus of Errors number 17 which explicitly condemns it. It should also be noted, in case one wants to write off Voris, that very respected mainstream priests and theologians also consider Fr. Barron's opinions very troubling, such as Msgr. Charles Pope of the Archdiocese of Washington (see here) as well as Dr. Scott Hahn, who once stated that Balthasar's theory was absolutely without merit. I'm not anti-Mark Shea. His book, By What Authority? helped bring me to the Church. But, as Voris said of Fr. Barron, Mark Shea is simply wrong here. I'm not "attacking" him, not "smearing" him, not calling him a heretic. I am just saying he is simply wrong. Being that we are entering that period of the liturgical year when the readings direct our minds towards the Last Things, for the remainder of November all my posts will relate to this question of Hell, its reality, eternal duration, and the Church's Tradition on this important subject. Next time, I will examine the definitive presence of damned souls in Hell throughout Christian Tradition as established by the Christian sensus fidelium.
I think Mr. Shea must be holding steadfastly to the "more flies with honey" school of thought; frankly, I find Mr. Voris and his call-a-spade-a-spade method closer to my own opinion. See (hear, actually) also Fulton Sheen's 1960's era program The Hell There Is on http://gloria.tv/?media=512573
Excellent! It's indeed "appalling" that his whole dispute has to take place at all. The teachings of the church are being attacked or eroded from within and without.
And why would anyone who loves the Church, especially someone in a position of authority, risk leading even one astray???
Relevant here is the change in the wording of the Mass. For 19 and a half centuries the words used in the Mass was that Christ died 'for many' ('pro multos' in Latin). This was changed in English (not sure about other languages) after the introduction of the Novus Ordo in the 60's to 'for all' which was a novelty. The original translation was intended to be temporary, pending a final and official translation but persisted for several decades. Finally, Pope Benedict ordered a final and definitive translation be introduced and this returned to the accurate translation (Thank God) and to the original of 'for many'. This correction has infuriated many 'modernist' Catholics and demonstrates how some abuses 'crept in' following Vatican II. It also demonstrates that modernists (and some others in the Church) have adopted a 'universalist' view of salvation (unknown to earlier generations) which is about the most spiritually dangerous concept that can be imagined. If we are all going to heaven, why bother doing any service to others or avoiding any sin no matter how foul it might be. We have the Herods, one of whom murdered the innocents in an attempt to murder the Lord and another who accepted adoration as is he were a god and was smitten and eaten by worms for his trouble, did they make it into heaven? http://www.churchmilitant.tv/platform/index.php?vidID=vort-2013-11-01
This is why we need to pray for God's sheperds. Some may be lost but hopefully through our prayers and sacrifices and sufferings offered to God they will be saved. Or hopefully once everything begins they will be enlightened. The burdens for all of our sheperds are tremendous and I know it's so easy to choose the easy route and go with the flow rather than buck the system currenty accepted. Please pray for them! God Bless!
Wise, kind words Bernadette. I will remember that ; to pray for priests. I think some people are specially chosen by God to pray for priests, that is all they pray for. A great calling. I notice now I bring my trusty Kindle to mass and can follow the exact wording of the mass how often the Celebrant changes the laid down words of the mass and of scripture as he thinks best. This makes me uneasy.
Our Holy Father's intentions for November. Suffering Priests. That priests who experience difficulties may find comfort in their suffering, support in their doubts, and confirmation in their fidelity. Latin American Churches. That as fruit of the continental mission, Latin American Churches may send missionaries to other Churches
