More lies. Anathema does not mean "condemned to hell", and those anathemas that disturb you so much only applies to Catholics. The Church has developed past the 16th century but you are stuck in it. You refuse to grow up.
Anathemas apply to Catholics, get it? Not to persons, but to doctrines. The Church stopped using the term 200 years ago. Stop pretending you understand Trent (that took 18 years to complete) and Catholic teaching and
development of doctrine because obviously you haven't a clue.
"The vivid Greek term
anathema, meaning “accursed,” is directed by the Council of Trent and other Catholic ecumenical councils primarily towards
doctrines, rather than
persons, based on the ancient practice in the Church of condemning heretical teachings — a procedure itself derived biblically from passages such as Galatians 1:8-9 and 1 Corinthians 16:22 (the latter has
anathema both in Greek and in many English versions). There is nothing improper whatsoever in defining correct doctrine and rejecting contrary notions. St. Paul does this constantly. The Catholic Church, however, makes no presumption as to the eternal destiny of any individual whatsoever (not even Martin Luther, whom many Protestants might suspect was on our “damned” list).
Most emphatically: neither
anathema nor
excommunication means “proclaimed
damned (by the Church),”
as many Protestants mistakenly suppose. The more literal meanings are “out of the Church” (in the sense of divergence from its doctrines) or “out of communion” (with the sacraments and the Christian fellowship of believers). Excommunication is perfectly in accord with Pauline practices and teachings as expounded in, e.g., 1 Corinthians 5:3-5, 2 Thessalonians 3:6, 1 Timothy 1:19-20, 2 Timothy 2:14-19, 4:14-15, as well as our Lord’s express injunction in Matthew 18:15-18.
We hold that no one can be saved outside the Church, but a knowing and
deliberate disobedience against it would render one unsaved. Others not formally members of the Catholic Church can be saved in their sincerity and ignorance, whether or not they are conscious that the Church was crucial in the process.
A person will end up in hell
if they (continue to) fight against the Church and do not resist temptations of evil and Satan. This is essentially no different than a Protestant saying “a person will not be saved if they do not accept Christ as their Lord and Savior,” or the Bible stating that “fornicators will not inherit the Kingdom of God.” None of these examples are definitive, prophetic, absolute statements of any given person’s eternal destiny, but rather, statements of theology, of what will happen, given the fulfillment of certain conditions.
The Church does not pronounce definitively on any individual’s eternal destiny (with perhaps the exception of of Judas). The Church hopes for every person to be saved, and applies penances in order to attain that end. The point of the anathemas is not condemnation per se, but a sanction which will hopefully cause the person to realize the seriousness and peril of their situation. This is all very biblical and Pauline.
The Church has neither the intrinsic power to condemn anyone to hell (that is God’s prerogative), nor the knowledge of who is there or not (except for that which it claims in the case of canonized saints). It
does however, have the power to exclude people from communion with itself, for the purpose of ultimately reclaiming their souls. A deliberate and obstinate refusal to submit to the Church in such circumstances constitutes a serious, grave, mortal sin, which — if unrepented of — self-condemns one to hell by its very nature.
The Council of Trent (in the historical context of a revolt against Catholic teaching and authority) understandably emphasized Catholic teachings and condemned divergences from it, just as councils had always done with what they considered false teaching. Vatican II had a pastoral and ecumenical emphasis, so it stressed commonalities with other Christians and even other religions. Both are valid concerns and truths."
read more here