Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Baptist Leader Says Pope Soft on Sin
Associated Baptist Press ^ | Bob Allen

Posted on 10/05/2013 6:21:52 AM PDT by marshmallow

Russell Moore says the pope’s latest interview in an Italian newspaper “is more than just confusing. It’s a theological wreck.”

The head of the Southern Baptist Convention Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission says Pope Francis is soft on sin.

Russell Moore, president of the moral-concerns agency for the nation’s second-largest faith group behind Catholicism, criticized the pope’s comments published in la Repubblica, the largest Italian daily general-interest newspaper.

Responding to a question about whether there is a “single vision” of good and, if so, who decides, the pontiff replied: “Each of us has a vision of good and of evil. We have to encourage people to move towards what they think is good."

“Everyone has his own idea of good and evil and must choose to follow the good and fight evil as he conceives them,” the pope continued. “That would be enough to make the world a better place."

Francis said the church’s mission is not to proselytize but “to identify the material and immaterial needs of the people and try to meet them as we can.”

"Proselytism is solemn nonsense, it makes no sense,” he said. “We need to get to know each other, listen to each other and improve our knowledge of the world around us…. The world is crisscrossed by roads that come closer together and move apart, but the important thing is that they lead towards the good.”

In an Oct. 1 posting on the ELRC website, Moore said Pope Francis makes the mistake of “severing the love of God from the holiness of God.”

“From Augustine’s Confessions to ‘Well, everyone has his own ideas about good and bad’ is a mighty long path,” Moore said. “If Pope Francis wishes to reclaim the primacy of the gospel, he must simultaneously speak with kindness to........

(Excerpt) Read more at abpnews.com ...


TOPICS: Catholic; Evangelical Christian; Theology
KEYWORDS:

1 posted on 10/05/2013 6:21:52 AM PDT by marshmallow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

The new Pope is a nut. The previous two popes were consistently conservative and pro-life and pro-marriage.


2 posted on 10/05/2013 6:24:33 AM PDT by heye2monn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

counting down until apologists claim Pope Francis is “misquoted”: 10, 9, 8....


3 posted on 10/05/2013 6:27:12 AM PDT by oblomov
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: heye2monn
The new Pope is a nut. The previous two popes were consistently conservative and pro-life and pro-marriage.

I respectfully disagree that he is "a nut." Why would those cardinals elect a man who's a nut? I also don't think that he is soft on sin...soft on sinners, but not on sin.

4 posted on 10/05/2013 6:27:12 AM PDT by cloudmountain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: oblomov

Actually, I think he has a point. So there.


5 posted on 10/05/2013 6:31:47 AM PDT by Claud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: cloudmountain

You are kidding right. They have picked a variety of molesters, murderers, thieves and degenerates throughout Catholic church history. I would not trust a conclave of repressed homosexuals to elect a dog catcher, let alone a leader of the largest denomination of the Christian church .


6 posted on 10/05/2013 6:32:59 AM PDT by pburgh01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: pburgh01
I see your point. How on EARTH could Jesus' Church still be around with 1 billion members with such scalawags in charge? Couldn't be the Holy Spirit.
Besides YOU are so right to sit judgment on those people. Why on earth focus on anything but the negative? Way to go.
7 posted on 10/05/2013 6:37:00 AM PDT by cloudmountain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

You can’t talk mean to your parishioners. They might leave the church or quit religion altogether. Seems like that’s the world we live in.


8 posted on 10/05/2013 6:37:16 AM PDT by smokingfrog ( ==> sleep with one eye open (<o> ---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow
He has a point. With the nebulous nature of Vatican II, the church hemorrhaged followers. The faithful crave unchanging, clear rules of behavior, not moral relativism.

A one panel comic appeared in The New Yorker after Vatican II, showing two great doors of the Vatican, and two unhappy looking cardinals watching a devil walk through the doors carrying a sheaf of papers.

One cardinal saying to the other: "Personally, I think this ecumenism has gone too far."


9 posted on 10/05/2013 6:37:21 AM PDT by yefragetuwrabrumuy (The best War on Terror News is at rantburg.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Claud
Actually, I think he has a point. So there.

You will find yourself anathema for defending His Holiness. I happen to agree with you too! So double there. :o)

10 posted on 10/05/2013 6:38:13 AM PDT by cloudmountain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

ALL of “Organized Religion” is “soft” on SIN!


11 posted on 10/05/2013 6:40:30 AM PDT by US Navy Vet (Go Packers! Go Rockies! Go Boston Bruins! See, I'm "Diverse"!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

And the Pharisees and the scribes grumbled, saying, “This man receives sinners and eats with them.”


12 posted on 10/05/2013 6:44:17 AM PDT by Kirkwood (Zombie Hunter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kirkwood

This is not about whom he’s eating with. This is what he is teaching. The whole purpose of the Petrine office is to uphold the doctrine of the faith.

Christ had hard words for the actions of the Pharisees but he also told people to observe what they taught because they occupied the seat of Moses.


13 posted on 10/05/2013 6:50:59 AM PDT by Claud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow
As a back sliding Baptist; my question for Russell Moore is, why do you even give a crap what the Pope says. I would think you have enough problems with YOUR church to keep you busy for the next 20 years or so. By then the Catholic Church will probably be two or three Popes down the line.
14 posted on 10/05/2013 6:53:26 AM PDT by Tupelo (Snatching Defeat from the jaws of Victory, an old Republican Tradition.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cloudmountain

He is not consistent or coherent. One day he says something liberal and is lavishly praised by liberals. Then he says something conservative in a failed attempt to make up for it. He engages in lengthy interviews and wanders all over the place.

He is a nut in a political or theological sense, if not neurologically. He actually called evangelizing “solemn nonsense”! Who knows what he will say next?


15 posted on 10/05/2013 6:54:41 AM PDT by heye2monn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

You know the Catholic Church is in trouble when a Baptist call out is on the money.


16 posted on 10/05/2013 7:09:43 AM PDT by piusv
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

What concerns me are the phrases “Everyone has his own idea of good and evil and must choose to follow the good and fight evil as he conceives them. . .”

Are “good” and “evil” what WE conceive them to be?

And, this one, “The world is crisscrossed by roads that come closer together and move apart, but the important thing is that they lead towards the good.”

But, I thought the “good” was whatever WE conceive it to be, right?

Look, I’ll be upfront - I’m a Baptist, but I certainly do not hate Catholics or this Pope. I appreciate that the Catholic church has preserved many of the Greek/Hebrew texts of the Scriptures. I respect their pro-life position and how they have never wavered from it. But, in this day and age of moral and religious relativism and pluralism, I think sending out “fuzzy” statements only contributes not only to confusion, but to a false sense of security with God for the unbeliever.

A non-Christian hearing those statements would probably think the Pope is saying, “hey, whatever you think is right is right, whatever YOU think is wrong is wrong - God will accept that”.

Now, maybe that’s NOT what the Pope means, but it sure sounds like that is what he is saying.

I don’t condemn anyone, that’s God’s prerogative, but we are to “test” the spirits, test and discern, and yes, judge right and wrong according to God’s standards, not ours.


17 posted on 10/05/2013 7:16:00 AM PDT by rusty schucklefurd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

I was raised baptist. This guy shouldn’t be casting stones, but sadly they’re really good at that.


18 posted on 10/05/2013 7:24:02 AM PDT by goodwithagun (My gun has killed fewer people than Ted Kennedy's car.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

“Everyone has his own idea of good and evil and must choose to follow the good and fight evil as he conceives them,”

Classic moral relativism, unless “he” is capitalized referring to God. The last two popes spoke against this nonsense.

More and more, this guy seems to be fulfilling the prophecy of the last pope. I know this is sad commentary coming from a Catholic convert.


19 posted on 10/05/2013 7:24:02 AM PDT by grumpygresh (Democrats delenda est. New US economy: Fascism on top, Socialism on the bottom.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tupelo
As a back sliding Baptist; my question for Russell Moore is, why do you even give a crap what the Pope says.

Probably so HE doesn't become a back-sliding Baptist...

20 posted on 10/05/2013 7:33:40 AM PDT by Iscool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: rusty schucklefurd

The Pope isn’t saying anything new.

He’s not saying that good and evil are what we think they are. He’s saying that each man is obliged to pursue the good as he understands it.


21 posted on 10/05/2013 7:35:36 AM PDT by Arthur McGowan (If you're FOR sticking scissors in a female's neck and sucking out her brains, you are PRO-WOMAN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: grumpygresh

The Pope’s statement is not moral relativism. Read it again.


22 posted on 10/05/2013 7:39:30 AM PDT by Arthur McGowan (If you're FOR sticking scissors in a female's neck and sucking out her brains, you are PRO-WOMAN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

“Protestant Padre Disagrees With Pope”

Who’d a thunk it.....


23 posted on 10/05/2013 7:41:34 AM PDT by wonkowasright (Wonko from outside the asylum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow
Aren't the Baptist predisposed to being "Anti-Catholic" to begin with..

24 posted on 10/05/2013 7:51:23 AM PDT by skinkinthegrass (who'll take tomorrow,$pend it all today;who can take your income & tax it all away..0'Blowfly can :-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow
“Everyone has his own idea of good and evil and must choose to follow the good and fight evil as he conceives them,” the pope continued. “That would be enough to make the world a better place."

I love you Pope Francis but you are as wrong as you can be on this one. Certain Muslims think that it is good and Allah's will to kill innocent people that they perceive as "infidels". That is their good and it most assuredly does NOT make the world a better place. There is evil and there is good and you should know the difference Your Holiness. It is not what someone's IDEA of good is. That is what the holy mother Church is for, to lead souls to Christ and what is good.

25 posted on 10/05/2013 8:10:54 AM PDT by mc5cents (Pray for America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goodwithagun

You were a member of the Southern Baptist denomination?


26 posted on 10/05/2013 8:11:04 AM PDT by ansel12 ( 'I'm on That New Obama Diet... Every Day I Let Vladimir Putin Eat My Lunch' .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

Moral relativism does not match with the job of

Pope


27 posted on 10/05/2013 8:19:18 AM PDT by FlyingEagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: heye2monn

Everything happening to the Roman Catholic Church subsequent to the ill-conceived and translated Vatican II has been a catastrophe!

Liturgy, tenets, theology and everything that was germane and good about the Church was tossed out the window. Those popes following Pius XII were wholly complicit in establishing a new modernist religion. They stated that change (ala Obama) was necessary to bring the Church up-to-date so it would fit into the new century.

Apparently they believe that Jesus Christ and God have changed and are running about heaven in Nikes!

The new religion is a one-way ticket to the kingdom of Satan!


28 posted on 10/05/2013 8:25:47 AM PDT by IbJensen (Liberals are like Slinkies, good for nothing, but you smile as you push them down the stairs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Arthur McGowan

The problem is a CATHOLIC pope shouldn’t be telling everyone is obligated to pursue the good as he understands it. He should be telling everyone to pursue the truth of the , wait for it, the CATHOLIC Faith.


29 posted on 10/05/2013 9:17:06 AM PDT by piusv
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen

Agreed 100%. We have yet to see the “fruits” of this new, modernist religion. Can’t wait to see what Francis has up his sleeves. He’s only been at this for 6 months.

Lord, have mercy.


30 posted on 10/05/2013 9:25:59 AM PDT by piusv
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: piusv

Everyone, at all times and places, is obligated to pursue the good as he understands it.

The CORRECT understanding of what is good is taught by the Catholic Church.


31 posted on 10/05/2013 9:43:39 AM PDT by Arthur McGowan (If you're FOR sticking scissors in a female's neck and sucking out her brains, you are PRO-WOMAN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: piusv
The problem is a CATHOLIC pope shouldn’t be telling everyone is obligated to pursue the good as he understands it. He should be telling everyone to pursue the truth of the , wait for it, the CATHOLIC Faith.

I really don’t see any difference between what the Pope is saying and what Oprah says.

32 posted on 10/05/2013 9:51:23 AM PDT by rusty schucklefurd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Arthur McGowan

Yes, but we never hear Francis (or any conciliar pope) make that clear.


33 posted on 10/05/2013 10:38:09 AM PDT by piusv
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: piusv

I doubt that that’s true. Have you read EVERYTHING Ratzinger has ever written?

The “conscience” abusers really had a field day in the decades after Humanae Vitae. They constantly misstated the meaning of the word “conscience” in a way that simply gutted the Church’s authority to teach ANYTHING.

They repeated, endlessly, the truth that each married couple must “follow their conscience.” But they repeated it in isolation. They NEVER reaffirmed the truth that, if a married couple believe it is not sinful to use birth control, they are WRONG.

The fact that it is true that each married couple must follow their conscience doesn’t alter the fact that, if they call themselves Catholic, they must follow the teaching of the Church. If they believe the Church teaches falsehood, they are not Catholics.


34 posted on 10/05/2013 11:19:25 AM PDT by Arthur McGowan (If you're FOR sticking scissors in a female's neck and sucking out her brains, you are PRO-WOMAN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen

With doctrine tossed out the window, everything is permitted. The Church is very “democratic” now. Catholicism is up for a vote. The new Pope is quite popular among Catholics, both church-going and lapsed. That will encourage him to continue his same mindless course.


35 posted on 10/05/2013 12:48:34 PM PDT by heye2monn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Arthur McGowan

At best, his statement that I have referenced, is ambiguous. I’m not referring to other statements that he has made, just this one.

“Everyone has his own idea of good and evil and must choose to follow the good and fight evil as he conceives them,”

I fully understand that people have their own view of good and evil, however, in this sentence when the pope refers to “he” the pope is referring to the individual’s conception of evil. If an individual can conceive or determine what is evil, then an individual can determine, conceive or rationalize which actions and thoughts are evil.

So for example, I might think that the act of homosexuality is evil and you might not or vice versa. But if I have the ability to “conceive” that an act is evil or not, I have made a moral determination and that’s moral relativism.

I do think that this pope good person, but it does seem that he lacks clarity, and certainly does not possess the high level of intellectual vigor that the last two popes had. I think you would have to admit at least, that this statement is ambiguous and unfortunately this is the type of thing that will lead to confusion and dissension among the flock.


36 posted on 10/05/2013 1:13:21 PM PDT by grumpygresh (Democrats delenda est. New US economy: Fascism on top, Socialism on the bottom.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: heye2monn

We are in complete agreement!


37 posted on 10/05/2013 2:06:20 PM PDT by IbJensen (Liberals are like Slinkies, good for nothing, but you smile as you push them down the stairs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: piusv

...and Christ have mercy.

Thank the Good God for creating a sedavacantist movement where one can truly worship in the way that served practical practicing Catholics for centuries.


38 posted on 10/05/2013 2:08:35 PM PDT by IbJensen (Liberals are like Slinkies, good for nothing, but you smile as you push them down the stairs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: grumpygresh

You are hanging to much on the single word “conceives.” The Pope means by that, “thinks,” or “judges.” Which is the function of the intellect. Which is also called the “conscience.” (A word I wish had never been invented.

If a man thinks or judges that sodomy is not evil, then he has no obligation to refrain from practicing it. He does not sin when he practices it. He WILL suffer lots of negative consequences, but sin is not one of them.

A relativist would say that, because of the man’s judgment, sodomy “for him” (a meaningless expression) is not wrong or evil. A relativistic priest would say that, in such a situation, the man can practice sodomy AND be a practicing Catholic.

A non-relativistic priest would say that the man can practice sodomy without moral culpability, but he would not tell the man he can at the same time be a practicing Catholic. Moral culpability is dependent on one’s sincere judgments, and one’s sincere judgments MUST be followed, whether they are objectively right or wrong. Being a practicing Catholic is an objective situation knowable by objective criteria.

Cardinal Donald Wuerl and most bishops in the U.S., by refusing to obey Canon 915 (i.e., they refuse to deny Communion to pro-abortion activists), teach that a person can be a pro-abortion activist AND be morally blameless, AND be a practicing Catholic. Their teaching is loud and clear: promoting abortion is not a sin. They are true relativists. Actually, they are lawless.

I personally, think the Pope has been careless in his speech on many occasions. But your position seems to be that he is deliberately teaching fundamental error. And your primary “evidence” is the way he used the word “conceive.” I think you are unfairly insisting on a non-existent distinction between “conceiving” and “thinking” or “judging.” You haven’t convinced me that he has knowingly taught relativism.


39 posted on 10/05/2013 6:36:05 PM PDT by Arthur McGowan (If you're FOR sticking scissors in a female's neck and sucking out her brains, you are PRO-WOMAN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: cloudmountain

The way is narrow and 1 billion is not narrow.


40 posted on 10/05/2013 6:42:48 PM PDT by jodyel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: goodwithagun

No stones...just want everyone to know the truth and be filled with the Spirit.


41 posted on 10/05/2013 6:44:36 PM PDT by jodyel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: skinkinthegrass

Anti-Catholicism, not anti-catholic.


42 posted on 10/05/2013 6:45:58 PM PDT by jodyel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: rusty schucklefurd

Neither are led by the Holy Spirit.


43 posted on 10/05/2013 6:47:50 PM PDT by jodyel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: jodyel

Yep. Stones. But hey, whatever helps you sleep at night.


44 posted on 10/05/2013 7:23:19 PM PDT by goodwithagun (My gun has killed fewer people than Ted Kennedy's car.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: goodwithagun

Don’t brush everyone with the same broad strokes.....some of us would just like to see others born again and Spirit filled. We want that for all.

I sleep fine at night.

Perhaps one day you can tell me why so against believers. I was once in need of hearing the Gospel and God made sure I did. Why would we then not want to tell others?


45 posted on 10/05/2013 8:07:44 PM PDT by jodyel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Arthur McGowan

“You are hanging to much on the single word “conceives’”

Wow, you’ve really strayed off topic. I didn’t say “conceives”, the pope did. He unwittingly introduced unnecessary confusion at the very least through his choice of words. I don’t see how you can deny that the pope lacks the same type of clarity that we have come to expect with his predecessors. You can’t maintain that the pope has been clear, because if he had been clear, we would not have had this controversy.

As to whether he pope is deliberately engaging in false teaching, I would agree that he is probably not. And of course, the pope is human, and too err is human. But he is the pope, not a pundit, and we should expect better.

I can tell you one thing. If this pope make doctrinal statements on theology that rise to the level of dogmatic infallibility, he better have some experts on theology and grammar looking over his shoulder. That will make your job as unwavering papal apologist much easier.


46 posted on 10/05/2013 8:45:08 PM PDT by grumpygresh (Democrats delenda est. New US economy: Fascism on top, Socialism on the bottom.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: grumpygresh

I didn’t say that the Pope didn’t say “conceives.” I said that your presumed sharp distinction between the meaning of “conceives” and “thinks” was baseless.

My point was that the Pope didn’t say anything new, and that his use of the word “conceives” doesn’t introduce anything new.

The Church and all moral theologians have always held that no one is culpable if he obeys his sincere judgment about what is right and wrong.

I don’t know who you think you are talking to, but “unwavering Papal apologist”? Have you read my posts? Did you even read my post to YOU?


47 posted on 10/05/2013 9:38:23 PM PDT by Arthur McGowan (If you're FOR sticking scissors in a female's neck and sucking out her brains, you are PRO-WOMAN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson