C
chrisb
Guest
Let’s be clear St. Francis believed people were saved through Christ not Krishna.Mother Theresa always preached the Gospel. But, like St. Francis, she only used words when necessary
Let’s be clear St. Francis believed people were saved through Christ not Krishna.Mother Theresa always preached the Gospel. But, like St. Francis, she only used words when necessary
Oh Lord, you have some wacked priorities. Are you serious that you would take the sickest (literally at death’s door), poorest, most desperate, hungriest, coldest and nakedest people, who are the ones Mother Teresa and her nuns deal with, and bash their ears with the Bible?Okay, thanks for your your possible explanation of her actions. I still think she was wrong, though.
Well, excuse me. I’ll have to check further but I have to get off now. I have someplace to be and I’m not purposefully ignoring. Who said Zooey believes it’s acceptable to pray to other gods? Did I say that? I have to go.You’re not paying attention! Clearly Zooey is calling into question the credibility of this source, and pointing out that these were not the words of Mother Theresa, but Sister Ann. I don’t know how you could possibly take from Zooey’s quote that he believes it is acceptable to pray to other gods unless you are intentionally ignoring the responses on the board.
It would be beneficial if you could provide at least one verifiable source for that claim.I always cringe when Catholics hold up Mother Theresa so highly as an example of holiness. If she was so holy, why did she not share the gospel with dying people but instead told them to pray to their own gods? Don’t try to convince me that Protestants that go to the world and preach the gospel of Christ as it’s revealed in Scripture pales in comparison to a woman who told dying people to pray to their false gods. And there are plenty of Protestants who died for their faith during the inquisitions. And plenty of missionaries that have lost their lives, I’m sure, to take the gospel to the world. I’m sorry but that’s how I see it.
This is not the first time I’ve heard Syncretistic accusations come out about Mother Theresa or Pope John Paul II for that matter. If they are true then they were in error.What? Apparently you aren’t paying attention either. Did you take the time to notice that this was not Mother Theresa, but a mysterious Sister Ann who made this statement?
The rub is that we need to demonstrate them to be true.This is not the first time I’ve heard Syncretistic accusations come out about Mother Theresa or Pope John Paul II for that matter. If they are true then they were in error.
I would like to see some proof that this was ever even said. You may not realize that Mary Ann Collins, the author of most if not all the site you linked, is a pseudonym used by anti-Catholics, to insult & defame Catholics…So, when her name is attached to a statement, all of us who have seen her before are going to be very doubtful about what she has to say.Sorry, I thought you were Catholic.Can you tell us in what kind of context it would be acceptable to answer a dying person who asks what they should do with “pray to your gods?”
No, you didn’t offend me. We don’t know each other, and I see you read my statement in a way it wasn’t intended. Putting a good person down, that, is pitiful.i dont know, maybe you like to be called pitiful, but im sure most people here dont?
just voicing my opinion, which is what forums are for, arent they?
Thank you, thank you!!You’re not paying attention! Clearly Zooey is calling into question the credibility of this source, and pointing out that these were not the words of Mother Theresa, but Sister Ann. I don’t know how you could possibly take from Zooey’s quote that he believes it is acceptable to pray to other gods unless you are intentionally ignoring the responses on the board.
I agree with you but I also believe that the Roman Catholic Church flirted with syncretism or at least gave the ‘appearance’ of such syncretism with it’s broad ecumenical overtures towards non-christian religions after Vatican II. Pope John Paul II made very generous overtures in his many visits and interfaith meetings that caused and continues to cause concerns with the Eastern Orthodox as well as other ‘more’ conservative elements of Christendom. The warm and fuzzy euphoria of the ‘spirit of Vatican II’ appear to be largely ‘over in the eyes of the Church’ and some of these overly generous overtures to Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism is and has come back to haunt the Roman Catholic Church in my opinion.The rub is that we need to demonstrate them to be true.
That’s a teriffic little website you used as your source: talk about equal opportunity bigotry: managing to “expose” Mother Teresa, Billy Graham, and Dietrich Bonhoeffer all in one breath! And buried further in your “source” site are those nasty anti-Catholic Christmas Carol “parodies” that are nothing but hate speech: Such as “That Little Town the Vatican”Feel free not to respond then.
This isn’t the gospel revealed in Scripture.
rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/exposes/teresa/general.htm
Make all the excuses you want to, she was wrong.
She (this is a she right?) wont have to go far… Someone is already way ahead of her.What’s next? Accusing Catholics of, say, introducing wax candles???
I would make the circle larger, & say that all Christians–not just Catholic Christians–have been guilty of appearing to be syncretist. We are after all,** in** the world, & what the world is doing & saying affects us. The trick is to remember that we are told that we are not** of** the world.I agree with you but I also believe that the Roman Catholic Church flirted with syncretism or at least gave the ‘appearance’ of such syncretism with it’s broad ecumenical overtures towards non-christian religions after Vatican II. Pope John Paul II made very generous overtures in his many visits and interfaith meetings that caused and continues to cause concerns with the Eastern Orthodox as well as other ‘more’ conservative elements of Christendom. The warm and fuzzy euphoria of the ‘spirit of Vatican II’ appear to be largely ‘over in the eyes of the Church’ and some of these overly generous overtures to Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism is and has come back to haunt the Roman Catholic Church in my opinion.
Now we can ‘circle the wagons’ and try to explain away some of these overtures or we can be honest when we discover them in the Church.
Sorry, I just fundamentally disagree with this post. Salvation has always come through Christ, and Christ Alone. The Church has established that. How that grace is applied to the individual is what is in question here. All the Church has stated is that if grace is truly a free gift from God, ONLY God can judge whom He will dispense it to. In other words, the Church doesn’t state beyond the shadow of a doubt that non-Christians will be saved. Rather, the Church states that it is God’s gift to give. And being that He is an infinitely merciful God, we wouldn’t put it past Him to save a “non-Christian.” God alone knows the heart. God alone can judge culpability. Paul refuses to even judge himself (1 Cor 4). Thus, it is not our place as Christians to determine who is going to Heaven and who isn’t. We fall on the mercy of God for all those who have not come to know Christ intimately in this life. That is what the Church teaches. To claim this borders on syncretism is nonsense. The grace of salvation comes through Christ alone.I agree with you but I also believe that the Roman Catholic Church flirted with syncretism or at least gave the ‘appearance’ of such syncretism with it’s broad ecumenical overtures towards non-christian religions after Vatican II. Pope John Paul II made very generous overtures in his many visits and interfaith meetings that caused and continues to cause concerns with the Eastern Orthodox as well as other ‘more’ conservative elements of Christendom. The warm and fuzzy euphoria of the ‘spirit of Vatican II’ appear to be largely ‘over in the eyes of the Church’ and some of these overly generous overtures to Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism is and has come back to haunt the Roman Catholic Church in my opinion.
Now we can ‘circle the wagons’ and try to explain away some of these overtures or we can be honest when we discover them in the Church.
Then don’t assert that a saintly woman didn’t preach the gospel.Who said anything about neglecting people’s physical needs and I don’t appreciate you saying I’m like the man who passed the man left for dead on the road. You don’t know me and obviously you don’t understand what I’m trying to get across either. I’m obviously wasting my time.
Of course it does. I agree completely. Salvation is through Christ, & Christ alone.Sorry, I just fundamentally disagree with this post. Salvation has always come through Christ, and Christ Alone. The Church has established that. How that grace is applied to the individual is what is in question here. All the Church has stated is that if grace is truly a free gift from God, ONLY God can judge whom He will dispense it to. In other words, the Church doesn’t state beyond the shadow of a doubt that non-Christians will be saved. Rather, the Church states that it is God’s gift to give. And being that He is an infinitely merciful God, we wouldn’t put it past Him to save a “non-Christian.” God alone knows the heart. God alone can judge culpability. Paul refuses to even judge himself (1 Cor 4). Thus, it is not our place as Christians to determine who is going to Heaven and who isn’t. We fall on the mercy of God for all those who have not come to know Christ intimately in this life. That is what the Church teaches. To claim this borders on syncretism is nonsense. The grace of salvation comes through Christ alone.
Hummm, so someone is on the verge of death, theres a rat chewy at the stub that used to be a foot, and Mother Theresa should have said "dear, I see you need comforting in your last moments, but I want to tell you, you’re going to hell unless you turn your heathen heart to Jesus? No one knows what she said to them, except the people she spoke to. She wouldn’t have been made a Saint if there were any grounds for any of your claims.You’re not getting it. People who worked with her are quoting her as saying these unscriptural things. And while, it’s commendable that she met physical needs in caring for the poor, that’s no excuse for what she told those people. Try as you might to get around it.
You finish what you started and reap what you’ve sown, mateIt’s obvious that there’s no point in any further response by me in this thread. Have a good evening.