Monday, April 27, 2015

Fooled Again: Medjugorje

 I'm a hard and fast opponent of those who would place private revelations (even those approved by the Magisterium pre-Vatican II) as a "solution" to the problems we face after the near universal apostasy following the death of Pope Pius XII. "Fr." Nicholas Gruner has been rightfully derided as the "CEO of the Fatima Industry" for telling people since the mid-1980s the Apocalypse was at hand unless Russia was consecrated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary by the "pope" and "bishops."  Of course, this means Gruner will, of necessity, rule out sedevacantism. He can't ask for money for his "apostolate" if there is no pope to perform this all important consecration. Not only has doomsday not yet arrived after more than 30 years of telling us it was "immanent," but he has written his supporters to ask for a donation and "let Mary's hand guide you as you write your check for the largest donation you can afford." He now even tries to peddle the crazy "apparitions" of Bayside in Queens County, New York City.

 People have asked about Medjugorje, and the alleged appearances of the Blessed Virgin Mary there since June 24, 1981. In this post I will lay out my reasons for telling you this apparition is just as false as Bayside, Garabandal, and the spin given to genuine apparitions such as Fatima.

1. Background

 The alleged apparitions began on June 24, 1981 in the small town of Medjugorje in Bosnia-Herzegovina. The "seers" were four boys and two girls. Three were born in 1965, one in 1964, one in 1966, and one in 1971. According to the website The BVM has come there "In Her own words She tells us, 'I have come to tell the world that God exists. He is the fullness of life, and to enjoy this fullness and peace, you must return to God'.

Our Lady's mission is one of peace. She has come to earth to reeducate us and to help us convert and recenter our lives back to God. Our Lady's role has always been one of guiding people to Her Son, Jesus. What an amazing opportunity we have before us! Our Lady's call to conversion is urgent, and we should respond with all our hearts." My comment: Mary has come to tell the world "God exists"? Notice there is no mention of the Great Apostasy of Vatican II. No condemnation of the false Vatican II sect "popes" and no mention of a return to the "One True Church."

The website continues: "Our Lady continues to give messages to six people from the village of Medjugorje: Ivan, Jakov, Marija, Mirjana, Vicka, and Ivanka. These six people (referred to as "visionaries") have received apparitions of the Blessed Virgin Mary since June 24, 1981. In addition to Her public messages, Our Lady is to give each of the six visionaries a total of ten "secrets" of happenings that will occur on earth in the near future. Some of the secrets pertain to the whole world while others concern the visionaries themselves or the local village. Only one of the secrets has so far been revealed by the visionaries. In the third secret Our Lady has promised to leave a supernatural, indestructible, and visible sign on the mountain where she first appeared. Our Lady said: "This sign will be given for the atheists. You faithful already have signs and you have become the sign for the atheists. You faithful must not wait for the sign before you convert; convert soon. This time is a time of grace for you. You can never thank God enough for His grace. The time is for deepening your faith, and for your conversion. When the sign comes, it will be too late for many."

When each of the six visionaries has received all ten "secrets", Our Lady will stop appearing to them on a daily basis. Currently, Marija, Vicka, and Ivan have received nine secrets, and Our Lady still appears to them every day, wherever they are, at 6:40pm. Mirjana, Jakov, and Ivanka have received all ten secrets, and Our Lady appears to them once per year for the rest of their lives. For Ivanka who received her 10th secret on May 7, 1985 it is on the anniversary of the apparitions, June 25 each year. For Jakov who received his 10th secret on September 12, 1998, it is on Christmas day each year. And for Mirjana who received her 10th secret on Christmas 1982, it is on her birthday, March 18 each year. Our Lady has also been appearing to Mirjana on the 2nd of each month since August 2, 1987 for the purpose of praying for all unbelievers. Mirjana tells us that it is very important that all of us pray for the unbelievers in the world, who are described as those who have not yet experienced God's love. No one knows when Our Lady will give the tenth secret to Marija, Ivan, and Vicka." My comment: So until such time, please buy all you can from our online store!

Finally, "Since the apparitions began in 1981, approximately 40 million people of all faiths, from all over the world, have visited Medjugorje and have left spiritually strengthened and renewed. Many bring back stories of miracles in the form of healings (of mind, body and spirit), supernatural visual signs, and deep conversions back to God. You owe it to yourself and your loved ones, to investigate with an open mind and heart the messages which are given to us by Our Lady of Medjugorje. I invite you to read these messages and decide for yourself how they will affect your life and that of your family." My comment: Notice "people of all faiths" and "conversions back to God" NOT conversions back to the True Faith.

2. The "Five Stones"

 The message of "Our Lady" is to use "five stones" to overcome Satan. They are fasting, prayer (using the Masonic "luminous mysteries" of Wotyla), reading the Bible (no version is specified), confession (almost non-existent in the Vatican II sect), and the Eucharist (which the Novus Bogus does not produce).

  This is enough for any Traditionalist to see that this can't be coming from the Blessed Mother. If your friends still caught in the Vatican II sect need further proof, read on.

3. Problems with The Seers ("Visionaries")

 According to the Medjugorje website as to why none of the seers chose the priesthood or religious life:

  "Our Lady told the visionaries in the early days that she would like them to become priests and nuns but told them that they must pray and descern (sic) for themselves what vocation they felt called to. Our Lady asked that they be the best example they could be in whatever vocation they chose. Ivanka was the first to decide that her calling was married life, and asked for Our Lady's blessing. Our Lady joyfully gave Ivanka her blessing, and added that she had chosen the harder path for her life. I know Marija, Vicka, and Ivan all seriously considered a religious vocation, but after much prayer, they discerned that their vocation was married life. We should not consider the decision to be parents and to bring life into the world a less important or holy vocation than a religious vocation."  (Emphasis mine)

Reality Check: The Council of Trent: On Matrimony: CANON X.-If any one saith, that the marriage state is to be placed above the state of virginity, or of celibacy, and that it is not better and more blessed to remain in virginity, or in celibacy, than to be united in matrimony; let him be anathema.

In addition, it is reported by E. Michael Jones (a "conservative" member of the Vatican II sect) that as of the late 1990s one so-called seer, Ivan Dragicevic, was driving a BMW, and living in a large mansion with his wife, Loreen Murphy, a former "Miss Massachusetts" beauty queen. He is also obese, so I guess he threw away the "stone" of fasting. Three others also live in such opulence; even having a private tennis court on the grounds of her mansion. How does all this compare with the lifestyles of the seers at Fatima or Lourdes? Does it seem like these people are "choosing the harder path" ?

4. The Biggest Problem: The Heresy Of Ecumenism

From the FAQ section on the Medjugorge website asking whether the apparitions are just for Catholics: "Absolutely Not! Medjugorje is not just for Catholics. God loves all His people. Many people who come on our trips are not Catholic and come from different faiths and religions throughout the world. What is most important is that we change our lives to put God in the first place. Although a good percentage of those of other faiths that visit Medjugorje do convert to Catholicism, it is only because of what they see in the Catholic faith. The Catholic Church is the original Church founded by Jesus. Through the Eucharist, and the rest of the Sacraments of the Church, the most is given to Catholics and the most is also required. If you have questions about the Catholic faith please do some research. There are many good books which will help you understand the incredible richness of the Catholic faith. We offer many of these books on our web site at:" (Emphasis mine)

Notice they don't convert because the RCC is the One True Church and only means of salvation, She is the original Church (implying there are others that came afterwards). The MOST is given to Catholics? No, the ONLY means of salvation is through the True Church. This passage expresses the "Frankenchurch" heresy that there exists a "Church of Christ" that is more or less present in all sects according to how many "elements" they possess. To have all "elements" is best (the Vatican II sect), but to have just some is good and also leads to salvation. The answer ends with a pitch to buy their books.

Please read what the approved pre-Vatican II theologians had to say about the Church, evil, and good works. learn from the lives of real saints how to proceed in holiness. Forget private revelations. We are not bound to believe in them, and even the real ones like Fatima are subjected to endless controversy as to the "true meaning" and "authentic messages." Put your Faith in the Church and not alleged "Heavenly Visions", which all too often turn out to be religious illusions perpetrated by unscrupulous frauds. 

Monday, April 20, 2015

Denying The Holocaust

 Everyone who reads my blog knows that I'm no fan of Bishop Richard Williamson. Williamson got himself into hot water with Ratzinger (when he still went by the false title "Pope" Benedict XVI), back in January 2009, shortly after the "excommunications" of the four Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) bishops were remitted. It seems that Williamson denied that the figure of six million Jews being killed in Nazi Germany was accurate and also called into question the existence of the gas chambers as the means of execution. Ratzinger, a former member of Hitler's Youth, went ballistic and condemned Williamson's comments calling on him to retract them and effectively derailed the "negotiations" between the SSPX and the Modernist Vatican.

 You might call Williamson's remarks culpably ignorant, offensive, or just plain stupid. In any case they were not heretical. The English-born bishop did not condone murder, or make any claim that runs contrary to the True Catholic Faith and/or Morals. "Holocaust denial" is a crime in Germany, and Bp. Williamson had to stand trial. He ultimately was given a slap on the wrist. Had he molested children and denied the Divinity of Christ, Ratzinger would have hidden him from the authorities and ignored his remarks. Ironically, this man is "recognized" by Williamson as having been a true "pope."

 I bring this up because of the political feud that began about ten days ago between presidential candidate Senator Rand Paul, and Democratic National Committee (DNC) Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz.  Paul refused to tell The Associated Press whether he would support exceptions for abortions in instances of rape or incest or if the birth of a child would risk the mother’s life.

“The thing is about abortion — and about a lot of things — is that I think people get tied up in all these details of, sort of, you’re this or this or that, or you’re hard and fast [on] one thing or the other,” Paul told the AP.

Later in the day, when pressed on the question by a New Hampshire journalist, Paul responded, “Why don’t we ask the DNC: Is it OK to kill a 7-pound baby in the uterus?” “You go back and go ask Debbie Wasserman Schultz if she’s OK with killing a 7-pound baby that’s just not born yet,” Paul told reporters. “Ask her when life begins, and ask Debbie when she’s willing to protect life. When you get an answer from Debbie, come back to me.”

“Here’s an answer,” said Schultz, a congresswoman from Florida. “I support letting women and their doctors make this decision without government getting involved. Period. End of story. Now your turn, Senator Paul. We know you want to allow government officials like yourself to make this decision for women — but do you stand by your opposition to any exceptions, even when it comes to rape, incest, or life of the mother? Or do we just have different definitions of ‘personal liberty’?

 Pro-lifers complained that Paul should have simply stated that life begins at fertilization and may never be directly killed. Pro-abortionists complained Wasserman-Schultz shouldn't have admitted what Americans already know---the Democratic Party stands for murdering children in the womb at any time and for any reason as long as the professional killer ("doctor") and the mother agree to it.

As a life-long pro-lifer myself, I think Rand Paul should have done what the media did to Bp. Williamson: accuse Wasserman-Schultz of denying the Holocaust. Since the infamous Supreme Court decision of Roe v. Wade on January 22, 1973, 57.7 million innocent unborn babies have been legally executed. If Wasserman-Schultz, a Jewish woman, predictably screams anti-Semitism, Paul should have the courage to show how we have an abortion Holocaust, and it mirrors the sentiments in Nazi Germany over abortion. There are also striking parallels between the killing of the Jews and the killing of the unborn. I have the comparisons below.

 1. Abortion in Pre-Nazi Germany

Legal Status
"A pregnant woman who shall purposely cause herself to abort" or "any person" who "shall kill her child in utero shall be subject to a penitentiary sentence." (See Section 218, German Penal Code, 1871)

Mass Demonstrations 
In the late 1920s doctors helped stage demonstrations resembling "theatrical performances" in order to create public sentiment against Germany's abortion law. (American Medical Association Journal, July 19, 1930)

Perpetration of Illegal Abortions
Blamed on "underhanded quacks" (Assessment of medical publication Deutsches Aerzeblatt)

Maternal Deaths
16,000 women die each year. (Greatly inflated figure manufactured by pro-abortion doctors)

In 1933, the Nazi government legalized abortion for virtually any reason and at any stage of development. It was encouraged for eugenics.

2. Abortion in Pre-1973 America

Legal Status
"If any person administer to, or cause to be taken by a woman, or any drug, or any other thing" with the "intent to destroy her unborn child....he shall be confined to the penitentiary." (See Virginia Abortion Statute, 1873)

Mass Demonstrations
In the late 1960s doctors helped stage demonstrations with "theatrical flair" in order to galvanize public opinion against state abortion laws. (Former abortionist Dr. Bernard Nathanson, 1979)

Perpetration of Illegal Abortions
Blamed on "butchering quacks"(Assessment of medical journal Southern Medicine and Surgery)

Maternal Deaths Attributed To Illegal Abortion 
Up to 10,000 women die each year. ("I confess that I knew the figures were totally false. But, in the 'morality' of our revolution, it was a useful figure." Dr. Bernard Nathanson)

In 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court legalized abortion on demand, a position in line with resolutions enacted by pro-abortion medical associations. Mothers are now told, with new medical technology, if their child carries a birth defect so that they can abort a "defective" child who will only be a "burden" to the parent and society.

3. The Killing Centers: Concentration Camps In 1930s Nazi Germany

The extermination of unwanted or "inferior" human beings before and after birth.

Asphyxiation of unseen victims inside chamber walls; killing in gas chambers

"Within 5 minutes everybody was dead" inside the chamber. (Auschwitz survivor Dr. Miklos Nyiszli, 1960)

17,280 corpses were disposed of "per twenty-four hour shift. And the ovens, with murderous efficiency, functioned day and night." (Auschwitz survivor Dr. Olga Lengyel, 1947)

4. The Killing Centers: Abortion Clinics ("Abortuaries" --Abortion + Mortuary)

The destruction of unwanted or "defective" human being before birth.

Dismemberment of unseen victims inside uterine walls.

"The abortion itself [takes] only two to three minutes." (Eastern Woman's Center, 1978)

"From eight in the morning until midnight, seven days a week, doctors working in ten operating rooms performed vacuum aspirations on an endless parade of pregnant wombs." (Former abortion clinic director Dr. Bernard Nathanson, 1976)

The similarities are frightening. Now with Obamacare, the destruction of adult "unfit" persons may not be far behind by consigning them to "health centers" with restricted or inferior health care. For screams of "anti-Semitism" there are two salient points:

  • Both Jews in Nazi Germany and the unborn in 1973 America were equally declared "non-persons"

  • If it's claimed that with the unborn we "don't know when life begins," that admission rules out abortion. The abortionist is forced to admit that at some point the fertilized egg becomes a human baby. If you're a hunter in the woods and you don't know if you see a human or a deer in the bushes, you are morally prohibited from shooting because innocent human life MAY be at stake. Likewise, the burden of proof is on the abortionist to prove the unborn are not human life worthy of protection before killing it otherwise they may be killing innocent human life. 

 Bp. Williamson was put on trial for denying certain aspects of an event that ended in 1945. He was then condemned by the false "pope" at the Modernist Vatican. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz denies the unborn, at any stage of development, are people. The Holocaust of legalized abortion is at 57.7 million and continues unabated. She will not be tried for "Holocaust denial" nor was her statement condemned by false "pope" Frankie, or any clergy of the Vatican II sect. After all, as Frankie says, why get all upset over "small-minded rules?"

Monday, April 13, 2015

Richard In Wonderland

I really don't know what to say when someone comes up with an outlandish theory, then it gets proven wrong, and the person still trumpets it as something good. This is what happened with Bishop Richard Williamson of the Society of St. Pius X of the Strict Observance (SSPX-SO). A few years back, Williamson came up with a novel idea to escape the iron clad logic of the sedevacantist position: the Concilliar "popes" are not guilty of heresy because of "mind rot" which prevents them from realizing they're heretics. Fr. Anthony Cekada ripped the idea apart, calling it "mentevacantism" (i.e. "the mind is vacant") and showing how (once again) Williamson makes assertions with no reasons and evidence from theologians and Magisterial documents to back them up. After the drubbing he took from the critique of Fr. Cekada, you think Bp. Williamson would drop the the idiotic and unsupported idea he spawned. No such luck.

 In his recent e-letter entitled Eleison Comments, Bp. Williamson resurrects his idea and, making an allusion to Fr. Cekada as a "hard-biten sedevacantist" who ridiculed his idea as "mentevacantism," states that the "label will do"! To show how utterly without merit the ideas of the "recognize and resist" so-called Traditionalists really are, I will set forth Williamson's latest explanation of his theory, and give a condensed version of why it remains theologically untenable.

1. Bp. Williamson's Thesis

  •  Since the Protestant Reformation, men have been steadily liberating themselves from God.
  • To do this they must liberate their minds from reality, because all reality comes from God.
  • This is "mind rot" or "mentevacantism" because God designed the human mind to "run on reality" not fantasy.
  • From 1517 to 1958 the popes "beat back the mind rot" but it was infecting the faithful and clergy.
  • In 1958 "even if Cardinal Siri was elected" (!) the "liberals" had the ability to force John XXIII upon the world
  • "But what is a liberal? He is a dreamer, living not in the real world but in a Wonderland of man’s own fabrication. However, as more and more human minds switch off reality and launch into the dream, so he has less and less chance of realizing what he has done, because more and more the world all around him is being taken over by the Wonderland"
  •  "Then the Conciliar Popes are not wholly conscious villains, because in their sick minds they are serving the true Church by changing the old Church out of all recognition, by Wonderlanding it."
  • Even in the case of Paul VI, he wept over vocations, condemned contraception, and issued a "Credo of the People of God" so even with him, Our Lord kept His promise to "look over Peter." 
Got all that? Now for a real reality check:

2. The Teaching of The Church

(a) As theologian Prummer taught  “The power of the Roman Pontiff is lost: …(c) By his perpetual insanity or by formal heresy. (Manuale Iuris Canonci (1927) pg. 95. In other words, if Francis is off having tea in Wonderland and "out of touch with reality" he would still not be pope for those who are out of touch with reality (e.g. schizophrenics) are precluded from papal office. 

According to Wernz-Vidal:  “Barred as incapable of being validly elected [pope] are… those afflicted with habitual insanity.… By falling into certain and perpetual insanity, the Roman Pontiff would automatically lose pontifical jurisdiction… For the certain and perpetual insanity of the Roman Pontiff (not doubtful or temporary) is the equivalent to death, and through death the Roman Pontiff certainly loses his jurisdication.” (Wernz-Vidal, Jus Canonicum [Rome: Gregorian 1938] 2:415, 2:452)

If Francis is too crazy to be guilty of heresy because he's out of touch with reality, he's too crazy to be pope!

(b) Williamson sets up a totally false principle: Modernism empties the mind of the capacity to recognize truth — and absolves the individual of responsibility; evil is really produced by a sick society, so no individual has personal responsibility for his/her actions. This is what secular liberals do to to exonerate criminals; it wasn't his/her fault because of the conditions of the society in which he was raised, hence we must be lenient when they murder, rape, and steal. Catholicism teaches that we are responsible as individuals, and societal conditions are no excuse for sin. Heresy is sin.

(c) Williamson's mentevacantism is a natural outgrowth of being an Apb. Lefebvre sycophant who checks his brains at the door. As an astute commentator on my post "Pater Noster?" observed: "You ever notice SSPX guys begin each sentence with 'what would the Archbishop do?'. Or 'what would the archbishop think?' Etc..They (SSPX) act as if ABL is Jesus Christ." Indeed. They should wear a necklace "WWLD"--"What Would Lefebvre Do." Ask the SSPX or SSPX-SO about any topic and you get the same answer that conflicts with Church teaching! The New "Mass" is evil, but not promulgated correctly so it's not binding. Vatican II was "just pastoral" and not binding. The excommunication of the Archbishop and the four priests he consecrated was "unjust" and "invalid" because of a "state of emergency." And the list goes on and on and on. 

 Bp. Williamson talks about the Vatican II sect being "in Wonderland," but it's his false and ridiculous ideas that get "curiouser and curiouser." He would like us to think Francis has an empty mind, but it's the bishop's own head that seems to have space for rent. In the words of Lewis Carroll:
“I don't think..." then you shouldn't talk, said the Hatter.”  

Monday, April 6, 2015

Annihilating Hell

 The blog Southern Orders is run by a Vatican II sect priest, one "Fr." Allen McDonald. To his credit (and my surprise), he actually wonders in print if Begoglio said something heretical! His post of March 27, 2015 is entitled "IS IT HERETICAL TO BELIEVE THAT GOD CAN ANNIHILATE A HUMAN PERSON'S IMMORTAL SOUL?" In an interview (yet another!) that Francis had with an atheist journalist, the following exchange took place:

Scalfari: What happens to that lost soul? Will it be punished? And how?

The response of Francis is distinct and clear (netta e chiara): there is no punishment, but the destruction/annihilation of that soul. [The Italian word is annullamento, literally, "turned into nothing", meaning here the same as the more usual Italian word for annihilation, annientamento]

All the others will participate in the beatitude of living in the presence of the Father. The souls that are destroyed/annihilated will not take part in that banquet; with the death of the body their journey is finished. And this is the motivation of the Church’s missionary activity: to save the lost. And it is also the reason why Francis is a Jesuit to the end.”

This is public heresy. As Fr. DePauw used to say: "The Jesuits are always good for a laugh or a heresy--usually both." Remember that Catholic theology clearly teaches that a heretic cannot be pope! (For a detailed analysis with complete citations please see "Traditionalists, Infallibility, and The Pope" by Fr. Cekada at Notice, too, the way the question McDonald asks is twisted in such way as to avoid the charge of heresy for Frankie. Can God annihilate a human soul? Of course He can. The question is rather, "Has God decreed the eternal conscious bliss or suffering of a human soul, and therefore annihilation is precluded by His Own unchanging Will?" Of course, the answer, given by the Magisterium is "yes."

I will reprint the blog in red color and respond in green below.

Is what Pope Francis supposedly said heretical or not? Keep in mind that an interview with an atheist who then reports the interview from his memory is not a magisterial teaching. It is an opinion of Jorge Bergoglio as Jorge Bergoglio. Keep in mind that when Pope Benedict wrote his trilogy on Jesus he stated that theologians were free to critique and disagree with some aspects of his writings, but of course in an academic way. So popes can have opinions to which we may agree or disagree but we should be able to back up our negative critique with academic prudence.

He said it alright! For further proof of his heretical teaching see
As far as Bergoglio saying something in his personal capacity, Canonists and theologians teach that defection from the Faith, once it becomes manifest, brings with it automatic loss of ecclesiastical office (authority). They apply this principle even to a pope who, in his personal capacity, somehow becomes a heretic. Further, in the case of Bergoglio, he was a manifest heretic before his "election" so he could never have attained the office of the papacy in the first place! He was not suggesting that he was open to correction, and he can't be ignorant (at his age) of what the Church taught pre-Vatican II. This is not an "opinion"--it is rank heresy that can be shown by Church teaching on the subject.

I was taught, maybe heretically, I am not sure, that if God ceased even to think about us we would cease to exist. It is only through the power of God that we are. This seems to imply to me that we can be annihilated in body and soul!

He wonders if the seminary taught him heresy? Thank you Vatican II! This, however, is not heresy. The power of God's conservation holds everything in existence.

But I was also taught that we are created with an immortal soul. Is that true? Or can God annihilate the immortal soul of a mortal being? Certainly this is true if God is all powerful, which of course He is!

Once again, God is omnipotent, and could annihilate the soul; but WILL He actually do so? No.

Thus what wiggle room does Pope Francis and any Catholic have in describing what hell actually is? It seems to me that there are no dogmatic descriptions of hell that are considered infallibly defined. Correct me if I am wrong.

Ok, you're wrong. According to theologian Pohle, "The Catholic Church....has repeatedly and solemnly defined that, 'the wicked [will receive] eternal punishment together with the devil'" (IV Lateran Council) And again, "Sacred Scripture inculcates this truth so frequently and unmistakeably that it has been justly said that no other Catholic dogma has such a solid Biblical basis." (See Pohle, Dogmatic Theology 12:46).

For example, I believe that the Church teaches about the existence of hell, but the Church has never taught infallibly that any human soul actually exists there, although this is true in the realm of the theoretical. The Church does teach that Satan and the other fallen angels dwell in hell. But they are angels not humans.

Not quite. While it's true we can't say for certain that anyone is in Heaven except for the canonized saints, we have All Souls Day (November 1) to remind us that there are others in Heaven, even if we can't say for certain whom. Likewise, we are not allowed to say with certainty that any man has definitely been damned, but that does not mean that Hell is empty and only for the devil and his demons. We do know of one damned soul from Scripture, "The Son of man indeed goeth, as it is written of him: but woe to that man by whom the Son of man shall be betrayed: it were better for him, if that man had not been born." (See St. Matthew 26:24) Christ clearly teaches that Judas Iscariot would be better off if he had never been born. Before conception, you do not exist. If after death you don't exist once again (annihilation) or go to Heaven, how could non-existence be better than the same condition of non-existence before birth? The passage only makes sense if he was damned as a result of betraying Christ by an act of his own free will.

A Catholic certainly can embrace the theological construct that an immortal soul condemned by God to hell suffers punishment and it is tortuous and could involve flames. But a Catholic could also believe in the torture and flames in figurative way that the immortal soul in hell experiences an absence of God by choice just as the soul did in life. The torture and flames symbolize the eternal knowledge that one has freely chosen to cut oneself off from God and reaps the fruit of their misdeeds and mortal sins. The immortal soul actually exists in hell and has knowledge.

Once again, theologian Pohle to clarify: "Must this term [fire] be taken literally or may it be interpreted in a metaphorical sense? ...The Church has never issued a dogmatic definition on the subject... However, since the literal interpretation is favored by the great majority of Fathers and Scholastics, it may be regarded as "sententia certa." (Ibid 56-57)

But if what Pope Francis believes as is reported by an atheist, that the immortal soul isn't immortal after all that God can annihilate the immortal soul and cause it to cease to exist, wouldn't this be hell too? The hell is that one is gone, completely, body and soul and has absolutely no existence of immortality even in hell, now for the soul and at the Final Judgement in the here after with their body raised from the clay of the earth.

Is it heretical to believe the soul can be annihilated by God and thus in the Final Judgement and the resurrection of the dead, only the dead bodies that have souls in heaven will be raised from the clay of the earth and fashioned after the Glorified Body of our Savior and joined to their immortal soul in heaven? (Emphasis in original)

Fourth Latern Council defines: "All men shall rise again with their own bodies, which they now have, to receive according to their deeds , whether good or bad: the latter, everlasting punishment with the devil, the former, eternal glory with the Lord."

The Athanasian Creed says: "All men shall rise again with their bodies, and shall give an account of their works; and they that have done good shall go into life everlasting, and they that have done evil, into everlasting fire."

Theologian Pohle: "Hence, it is an article of faith that the souls of the damned as well as those of the Elect will be reunited to their bodies on the last day." (Ibid, 132-133)

Conclusion: Yes, "Fr." McDonald, to believe that only the Elect will be resurrected, and the damned will be annihilated, is heretical. I ask all my readers to pray for you and your readership, so that you all may see your way out of the Vatican II sect before anyone realizes the suffering of Hell is real when you are (God forbid) already there.