I have read that once someone is considered for to be canonized a saint, the search is on to find miracles that the person being considered a saint has performed. Is this true? And would this explain why Mother Teresa has not been canonized a saint yet?

If this is true, how would one prove that a miracle has happened and that it was through Mother Teresa?

I think Mother Teresa was and still is a true saint, and should be recongnized as so.

Anyone?

-- Kathy (sorry@nomail.com), June 27, 2002

Answers

up

-- Kathy (sorry@nomail.com), June 27, 2002.

Kathy writes:

"I think Mother Teresa was and still is a true saint, and should be recongnized as so."

Kathy, I agree with you. I think that Mother Teresa is a saint, because she gave her life to love and serve Jesus. A few of my friends have met with her, and she had a profound impact on each because she paid special attention to each person that she met.

The Church may take a little while with the canonization process; but this is simply an official recognition of a truth that most of us already know: Mother Teresa is a saint who was a witness to the Gospel message, living the words of Matthew 25 in a special way that is both admirable and worth imitation.

Bless you Kathy,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), June 27, 2002.

Here is a story on Mother Teresa --

http://archive.nandotimes.com/newsroom/nt/907MOTFAIT.html

This quote is interesting: "I convert you to be a better Hindu or a better Muslim or a better Protestant. Once you've found God, it's up to you to decide how to worship him."

A saint for age, indeed.

-- Steve Jackson (SteveJ100@hotmail.com), June 28, 2002.

The perpetually ineffectual "attack pit-bull puppy," Steve Jackson, attempts to smear Catholicism again. As always, he fails.
Some day, he will learn that the apparently useless and spite-filled life he is leading displeases God. He had better hope that this happens before he kicks the buckets, rather than at the pearly gates.

The article for which Steve provides the URL is not worth reading. The "quote" that Steve splashed across this page is hearsay from a Hindu associate of Mother Teresa, spoken after the latter's death. It is unverifiable and, even if somewhat accurate, is out of context and easily susceptible to misunderstanding by a person who is blindly prejudiced (e.g., Steve) or has low intelligence (possibly Steve again).

But to someone with eyes to see, the "quotation" is not even troubling. If a Catholic helps a Muslim "convert" to being a better Moslem than he was, it is not in the hope that the person will remain Moslem, but that the person may draw nearer to God and have a heart more open to the fullness of faith found in Catholicism. Mother Teresa would have helped even someone as thoroughly evil as Steve to convert to being a better Lutheran and eventually a Catholic.

It is easy for someone familiar with Mother's life and words (i.e., someone other than Steve) to realize that the article is unreliable. It contains these blatant errors:

(1) "There were rumors -- never substantiated -- that she administered Catholic rites to dying Hindus at her homes for the poor ..."
Never substantiated? A transcript of remarks she made -- from which I quoted on this forum several weeks ago -- show that the openly admitted baptizing the dying if they accepted the rite as a blessing before going to meet God.

(2) "Abhijit Bhattacharya, 16, said Saturday that his admiration for the nun had led him to reject religion altogether. 'What Mother Teresa taught is that we should come closer,' he said. 'Religion hinders that. We should forget all those things -- religion, caste and creed.'"
The author seems to include this anecdote to imply that Mother would have approved of the boy's irreligion. Nothing could be further from the truth. She wanted everyone to be a Catholic.

Steve, just go crawl back under your rock, and stop posting messages here. They do nothing but serve to make you look worse and worse all the time.

John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), June 28, 2002.

Steve

When in hell are you going to just stop your filthy behavior? you have shown absolutely nothing but contempt for all of humankind. If you cannot at least have something decent to say on this forum then I would appreaciate it that you keep your rubbish to yourself and go of somewheree else with you playpal satan. You both deserve each other. Vile, the both of you.

-- Fred Bishop (fcb@heartland.com), June 28, 2002.

Steve writes:

"A saint for age, indeed."

If you wanted to attack Mother Teresa with your sarcasm, you probably wanted to say, "A saint for the ages, indeed." How silly it is to screw up on sarcastic attacks...

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), June 28, 2002.

According to the article, Chawla is a Hindu, not a Moslem.

It is possible, of course, that the quote isn't accurate. Perhaps it is taken out of context. I have read Mother Teresa quoted as saying similar things. I recall reading in an authorized biography of her that she encouraged her sisters to attend a Hindu ashram.

If the quote is accurate, it represents an anti-Christian position. A person who is a better Hindu, Moslem or whatever is a person who adheres more strongly to his religion and tries to covert people to it. I don't want to see a Moslem become more devout in his belief that the doctrine of the Deity of Christ is blashpemy. I want him to realize that he is without hope unless he believes in Jesus.

-- Steve Jackson (SteveJ100@hotmail.com), June 28, 2002.

Folks,

Here is an interview with Mother Teresa from Time, in which she says something quite similar --

http://www.time.com/time/reports/motherteresa/t891204.html

Here is part of it:

Q: Friends of yours say you are disappointed that your work has not brought more conversions in this great Hindu nation.

A: Missionaries don't think of that. They only want to proclaim the word of God. Numbers have nothing to do with it. But the people are putting prayer into action by coming and serving the people. Everywhere people are helping. There may not be a big conversion like that, but we do not know what is happening in the soul.

Q: What do you think of Hinduism?

A: I love all religions, but I am in love with my own.

Q: And they should love Jesus too?

A: Naturally, if they want peace, if they want joy, let them find Jesus. If people become better Hindus, better Muslims, better Buddhists by our acts of love, then there is something else growing there. They come closer and closer to God. When they come closer, they have to choose.

I don't believe that this -- taken as a whole -- is consistent with the Bible. First, Christians are never commanded to "love" all religions. Second, as I said before, a person who is more devoted to his non-Christian religion isn't getting closer to God. Take Hindus for example. They are polytheists for the most part. How does a polytheist get closer to God by being "better" in his polytheistic beliefs? Romans 1 has a much different view of paganism.

-- Steve Jackson (SteveJ100@hotmail.com), June 28, 2002.

Steve

Your track record is too lousy for me to even trust one single post of yours. Who do you think is going to look at questionable stuff that you post. Not I. Thanks anyway

-- Fred Bishop (fcb@heartland.com), June 28, 2002.

Steve writes:

"I don't want to see a Moslem become more devout in his belief that the doctrine of the Deity of Christ is blasphemy."

It's not reasonable to seriously entertain the notion that either:

1) Mother Teresa was intentionally ambivalent/neutral on the centrality of Christ in salvation; or,

2) Mother Teresa had made statements about other religions without knowing the dangers of religious relativism.

Steve, Mother Teresa was faithful to the Christian message. You are correct in denouncing relativism as an error, either intentionally or unintentionally. Mother Teresa is not one of those people in error.

Up to a point, we can all applaud another's spiritual journey, without compromising our own beliefs. As a mundane example, I can understand the value of a Muslim who faithfully fasts for Ramadan, even though I will never fast for Ramadan. I can appreciate a Mormon who uses his faith to build a strong family. At the same time, I deny both Islam and Mormonism.

I'm a spiritual/intellectual lightweight next to Mother Teresa. I think it would be foolish for me to presume that she didn't understand her views and the ramifications of expressing her views. I think John G. made a good estimation of the meaning of the hearsay comments from Mother Teresa.

Steve writes:

"I want him to realize that he is without hope unless he believes in Jesus."

Well, the Church has a clear, logical view on those who do not believe in Jesus. Here's the Catholic.com's short explanation on "Salvation Outside the Church".

Steve writes:

"If people become better Hindus, better Muslims, better Buddhists by our acts of love, then there is something else growing there. They come closer and closer to God. When they come closer, they have to choose."

Steve, in my estimation, your misunderstanding is probably endemic of the Protestant view. This is a fundamental difference between the Catholic Church and many Protestants.

You think that Mother Teresa was helping the poor as a means to converting them to Christianity. Surely, most Protestant missionaries are focused almost exclusively on converting others. But read Mother Teresa's statement: "If people become better ______ by our acts of love..." You see, Steve, Mother Teresa is too busy living Matthew 25, and Jesus' message "Love thy neighbor." She and her order were the living the life that Jesus Christ called us to lead. If others chose to value God more, then that's just a happy by-product; but that's not the mission. Mother Teresa is witnessing as a Christian, she's not going door-to-door. The primary beneficiaries--the ones being converted to Christ--are those who serve the poor, not the poor themselves.

Here's some Gospel quotes that seem relevant:

John 13:14-17 - If I then, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another's feet. For I have given you an example, that you also should do as I have done to you. Truly, truly, I say to you, a servant is not greater than his master; nor is he who is sent greater than he who sent him. If you know these things, blessed are you if you do them.

Mark 9:33-35 - "And they came to Caper'na-um; and when he was in the house he asked them, 'What were you discussing on the way?' But they were silent; for on the way they had discussed with one another who was the greatest. And he sat down and called the twelve; and he said to them, 'If any one would be first, he must be last of all and servant of all.'"

Luke 22:24,26,27 - "A dispute also arose among them, which of them was to be regarded as the greatest...let the greatest among you become as the youngest, and the leader as one who serves. For which is the greater, one who sits at table, or one who serves? Is it not the one who sits at table? But I am among you as one who serves."

I pray that we can all see and strive to imitate the example that Mother Teresa offers us all.

In Christ,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), June 28, 2002.

Matteo --

I'm sure Mother Teresa was sincere in her desire to help the poor. I'm sure she would help people whether they showed any interest in becoming Christian.

My point is that I do not think she was accurate in saying that somehow people are getting closer to God by being better Moslems, Hindus or whatever. Say I am trying to become a better Mormon. I read the works of Joseph Smith and how he taught polytheism and that men can become gods. He taught that God (or what he believed to be God) was once a man. Then I read Brigham Young and read how he taught that God was Adam. I adopt the views of Smith and Young. I guess I'm a better Mormon. But am I closer to God? No -- I'm farther away.

-- Steve Jackson (SteveJ100@hotmail.com), June 28, 2002.

Steve,

Your post presumes that Mother Teresa intentionally or unintentionally meant what you have read into her statements. You are attacking a straw man (or in this case a straw woman).

The fact remains that many rational people have chosen religions besides Christianity. I attribute part of this to the fact that much of what they teach is in line with Christianity, though they get some areas terribly wrong.

If being a better Lutheran means rejecting abortion, being selfless, and exhibiting other virtues, why shouldn't I be happy when you become a "better Lutheran." Just the same, Martin Luther and his followers are totally wrong when the depart from the teachings of Jesus Christ and His Church. I think you get the point...

In Christ,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), June 28, 2002.

Matteo,

I think if someone becomes a "better Lutheran" that person is becoming a better Christian because Luther taught the doctrines of Scripture. Are you saying that Lutherans aren't Christians?

I'm not positive what Mother Teresa meant to say. My point is that taken literally, her statement is heretical.

-- Steve Jackson (SteveJ100@hotmail.com), June 28, 2002.

Steve

You are totally out of order in calling one of the bravest women ever to serve the church a heretic. I am appalled at your selfish conduct.

-- Fred Bishop (fcb@heartland.com), June 28, 2002.

Fred,

I said: "My point is that taken literally, her statement is heretical." I did not say she was a heretic.

-- Steve Jackson (SteveJ100@hotmail.com), June 28, 2002.

Steve

AS Mateo has said you as well as many who are sola scriptura DO TAKE everything literally and that is in itself very dangerous. Mother Teresa had more faith in GOD thatn many of us will ever have and her life is living proof of that fact. When you stop being a literalist then you will see the GOLD that is in her loving heart. We call it HOLINESS.

-- Fred Bishop (fcb@heartland.com), June 28, 2002.

Mother Teresa was not out looking to pull the splinters out of anyones eyes Catholic or not. She loved all. She did not put herself above others.

We should all live by her example, not to find fault about her!!

Whatever faults Mother Teresa had, if any, will never outweigh the goodness of her heart.

I find it appalling that anyone would have anything negative to say about her.

God have mercy,

-- Kathy (sorry@nomail.com), June 28, 2002.

Thank you, Mateo, for writing this: "I think John G. made a good estimation of the meaning of the hearsay comments from Mother Teresa." In fact, I was surprised that Steve followed my comments with that "Time" quotation, which not only verified my interpretation, but (in my opinion) made Mother Teresa look absolutely wonderful.

In his prejudice, Steve forgets that Mother was not a theologian or brilliant author, but a hard-working holy woman. She was not making precise theological statements to have them analyzed for potential heresy by a lost guy who belongs to a denomination that is only 150 years old.

If not blinded by prejudice, Steve would realize that, when Mother said, "I love all religions," she did not mean that she loved every doctrine and practice in all religions. She did not mean that she hoped every false religion would continue to exist for all time. Rather, she meant that she loved all the people who practice all religions and that she loved each nugget of truth found in the various religions.

Steve, you blundered worst of all by criticizing Mother Teresa (as Kathy has so kindly pointed out). But you also blundered twice more:

(1) You whined at me: "According to the article, Chawla is a Hindu, not a Moslem."
Take another look. I called N. Chawla a Hindu, not a Moslem.

(2) You wrote: "I think if someone becomes a 'better Lutheran' that person is becoming a better Christian because Luther taught the doctrines of Scripture."
Your error here is in regard to Luther. He taught only some of the "doctrines of Scripture." Of what he did teach, he taught some rightly, some wrongly. Just as bad as this, he failed to teach some doctrines altogether. And also terrible, he taught others to do evil by his bad example of disobedience, vow-breaking, and gross violence. No Christian in his right mind would want to be a follower of Luther.

God bless all.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), June 28, 2002.

Mr. Jackson.

This is about your 30th post that you look so silly. You are such a "joke"! You were in this forum on Easter day talking about the Catholic Church. Are you that bored with yourself?

Oh, by the way. Mateo is a very nice guy and he probably won't correct you on this! But you mispelled his name wrong, AGAIN. There is only one t. You spelled his name Matteo.

If you are so desperate for attention, than please spell the man's name correctly. :-)

Learn to spell, Jackson, before you try and debate relegion.

David

-- David (GetLost@Jackson.com), June 28, 2002.

Steve writes:

"Are you saying that Lutherans aren't Christians?"

No, Steve. But I am saying that Lutherans have an incomplete (and at times erroneous) understanding of the Gospel message. Jews, Muslims, and everyone else has an even less complete understanding of the Gospel message. Though you may have a different opinion, I think my original point is simple enough.

Steve writes:

"I'm sure Mother Teresa was sincere in her desire to help the poor. I'm sure she would help people whether they showed any interest in becoming Christian."

Steve, you belittle her example, almost suggesting that this isn't what Christ asks of us. Read Matthew 25. Jesus didn't even mention evangelization when he separated the sheep and the goats. I would like to take your comment and make a minor modification so that it makes more sense. Here's my version:

I'm sure Jesus Christ was sincere in His desire to help the poor. I'm sure He would help people whether they showed any interest in becoming Christian.

Steve writes:

"I'm not positive what Mother Teresa meant to say. My point is that taken literally, her statement is heretical."

This is correct, you are not positive. Yet, you jump to conclusions. I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to see that your interpretation is incompatible with the reality of who Mother Teresa was. If you really have trouble in comprehending John and my estimation of her position regarding other religions, I would guess that maybe you don't want to see.

What is my proof that John and my can more accurately describe Mother Teresa's position? Well, here goes:

1) John G. and I both believe that the Catholic Church is the Church that Jesus Christ founded.

2) Mother Teresa has lived her life both living the Gospel message and proclaiming that the Catholic Church is the Church that Jesus Christ founded.

3) John and I explained a "Cliff Notes" version of the Catholic Church's position with regard to how it relates to other religions (both Christian and non-Christian).

4) Mother Teresa, living most of her life as a missionary in a non-Christian country, must have had an intimate knowledge of the Catholic Church's teachings regarding non-Christian religions. If its reasonable to believe that she was a faithful daughter of the Church, why would you think that she would have held the relativist view that you imagine?

If you would like a brief introduction, read the Catholic Catechism paragraphs 839-856. Here's a link. Here's a small taste:

"The missionary task implies a respectful dialogue with those who do not yet accept the Gospel. Believers can profit from this dialogue by learning to appreciate better 'those elements of truth and grace which are found among peoples, and which are, as it were, a secret presence of God.' They proclaim the Good News to those who do not know it, in order to consolidate, complete, and raise up the truth and the goodness that God has distributed among men and nations, and to purify them from error and evil 'for the glory of God, the confusion of the demon, and the happiness of man.'"

Remember, Steve, Catholic missionaries evangelize by living the Gospel message, not by merely "saying" the Gospel message. Mother Teresa was not serving the poor so that you would view her as a good person. She served the poor because this is what Jesus Christ asks of all of us!

I continue to pray that her example inspires us to more completely give our lives to Jesus.

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), June 29, 2002.

Mateo,

I don't question Mother Teresa's or anyone else's sincerity. I'm sure her missionary works were done from good intentions and consitent with what she understood as the Gospel call to evangelize. Someone can act charitably with others with the best intentions and still believe things that are wrong.

As I've written before, I don't agree with the Roman Catholic view of non-Christian religions. (Which I have read a fair amount of, by the way.) However, nothing that I've read in Vatican II or the Catechism has as favorable of non-Christian religions as Mother Teresa expressed. Does the Roman Catholic church teach that we should "love" other religions? Does it teach that we should strive to see Hindus become better Hindus and this is a pathway to their conversion to Christianity? Yet Mother Teresa appeared to believe these things.

-- Steve Jackson (SteveJ100@hotmail.com), June 29, 2002.

Steve writes:

"I'm sure her missionary works were done from good intentions and consitent with what she understood as the Gospel call to evangelize."

Steve, you're still thinking with the mindset of a Protestant. Her primary purpose was to live out the Gospel message. The success happened in her life because she followed Jesus' teachings...it's not just her "interpretation," and it's ignorant of you to assume that she is somehow misunderstanding what is so clearly written in the Gospels.

Her object was not solely proselytizing; though, as you are a Protestant, I'm not surprised that you think that proselytizing is the main thing that Jesus asks of us. Christianity isn't Amway. All too often, Protestants sell Christianity like Amway soap; but, like Amway, many Protestants focus is on the selling, and few peole end up using the soap.

The Catholic Church teaches us that Jesus didn't just expect lipservice from everyone; we are all called to live life as Jesus commanded us. To believe that this position is a mere opinion of Mother Teresa's "understanding" of the Gospel is quite disingenuous. Or maybe you are just ignorant of the scriptures? It's either one or the other...

This all is beginning to sound like a broken record. She didn't merely have good intentions. She was following the marching orders of our Lord, Jesus Christ. I have worked to understand where you are coming from; but I get the impression that you are not a person in the habit of listening. You might try taking your hands off of your ears.

Steve writes:

"Does the Roman Catholic church teach that we should "love" other religions? Does it teach that we should strive to see Hindus become better Hindus and this is a pathway to their conversion to Christianity? Yet Mother Teresa appeared to believe these things."

Again, Steve, I find it hard to believe that you don't have the intellect to understand a simple concept. You are making a heroic effort to repeat misinterpretations of Mother Teresa that no rational person could hold.

Regarding the Catechism, you may have read it and simply chose not to absorb its true meaning. Here's a clear statement from the Catechism:

"Paragraph 843: The Catholic Church recognizes in other religions that search, among shadows and images, for the God who is unknown yet near since he gives life and breath and all things and wants all men to be saved. Thus, the Church considers all goodness and truth found in these religions as "a preparation for the Gospel and given by him who enlightens all men that they may at length have life."

You may want to reread the Church documents that you mention. Though you claim to have read them, it appears that you haven't understood their most basic points.

To answer your question, yes, the Catholic teaches that we should respect all religions, because they all have a portion of the Catholic truth, and many promote Christian virtues. Even the various, conflicting groups in who follow Martin Luther's teachings resemble a subset of true Christian beliefs. :-p

Should we "Love" other religions? In as much as they are on the side of justice, virtue, love, and faith in God, the answer is: Yes, we should "love" other religions. I don't understand how you can't use your brain and see this simple truth, and why you instead jump to your illogical conclusion. It seems that you're keeping your intellect hostage so that it won't betray your biases against Catholocism. We're not talking quantum mechanics here. It's all simple stuff.

Can God use an imperfect religion like Lutheranism as part of the path to Jesus Christ's Church? Yes, He can. Here are some examples of Lutherans who used Lutheranism as a stepping stone to the true Church:

1. Tim Drake. Here's a book of Lutheran-to-Catholic conversion stories by Tim Drake.

2. Todd von Kampen

3. Dr. William Marshner

I have no doubt that these people grew in their love for Jesus Christ, even as they were in a group that rejects part of the Christian message and the Church that Jesus founded. In the end, they grew enough to realize that the Catholic Church held the full expression of Christ's teachings and it alone was guaranteed to be inspired by the Holy Spirit.

In Christ,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), June 29, 2002.

Mateo,

I guess I'm old fashioned. I take people at their word. Mother Teresa said things that if taken literally are heresy. The fact is she said these things. Maybe she didn't speak English well, or whatever. But don't try to evade the clear meaning of what she said.

I don't love non-Christian religions. They have some truth, but taken as a whole they are false and of the evil one. Hinduism is pure evil and from the devil. It is leading its followers to hell.

-- Steve Jackson (SteveJ100@hotmail.com), June 29, 2002.

Steve,

I envision you covering your ears and saying "la-la-la-la..."

If you want to delude yourself, it's up to you. I don't know why you're so afraid of Mother Teresa's innocent statement...especially in light of the Catechism's teachings.

My favorite accusation is that now you announce that "Hinduism is pure evil and from the devil." Well, what about the heretic Martin Luther? He rejected Christ's Church, no less than Hindus reject it. His teachings have led his followers down a path of unending division.

Even the website www.lutheran.org has links to three divided sects of the followers of Luther. It's funny and sad that you believe that you are in the "truest" Lutheran Church and that you denounce other Lutheran groups...at some level, you must realize how fundamentally wrong Luther's ideas are, because his ideas are the direct cause of the endless divisions of Lutheran teachings. Yet, you don't want to admit that the only solution to find Christ's true Church is to leave your Lutheran mindset behind you.

Enjoy,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), June 30, 2002.

Mateo

The topper is that the ideals of Luther have been so watered down over the years that one has a very difficult time believing any of it to begin with. His theologies have been changed and added to so much that the protestants have dozens of books with different views of Luther. This alone may have a lot to do with the divisions within the Baptists, Evangelicals, Lutherans and more. The thoughts of Luther and his thoughts just plain scare me as they are not that easily confirmed anymore. Blessings. PS> Look at the Methodists, they cannot come to the conclusion as to whether Christ is GOD or not. What a joke that is.

-- Fred Bishop (FCB@heartland.com), June 30, 2002.

Mateo,
Glad you linked in that Todd von Kampen conversion story. I think that I saw him on "The Journey Home" not so long ago. Todd is an especially good example to Steve, since he was in Steve's denomination -- the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod.
JFG

-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), June 30, 2002.

Hey Mateo. You're going to hate me for this, but the quote of Mother Theresa, if taken at face value, is actually not in keeping with... well, whatever. =)

She could very well be misunderstood, but it is a consistent theme in the book.

Some saints of old have unwittingly and innocently held 'material heresy'... obviously, they aren't in Hell for it or they would not have been cannonized.

To say something may be amiss with these statements in no way speaks against her holiness and life of self sacrifice, *unless* one specifically intends it to speak against such, and to use the issue of these statements to point a boney finger of blame at her, and this certainly would be the height of arrogance.

Thus the outrage against anyone who speaks ill of her... and I think the outrage understandable. It is a speck in Mother Theresa's eye and a telephone pole in the eye of the accuser of Mother Theresa if there ever was one.

To be clinical, though... to be clinical... at face value, and if not misunderstood, the comments do miss the truth a bit.

The enemy wishes to point out our errors and mistakes and will stand before God night and day accusing us. The great accuser.

-- Emerald (emerald1@cox.net), October 29, 2002.

No, Emerald. Mother's comments do not "miss the truth."
Did you read this whole thread, including the various defenses of Mother Teresa, or did you just read the out-of-context statements that she is alleged by Steve to have made?
God bless you. JFG

-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), October 29, 2002.

Hey John;

I got it a while ago from the book "Simple Path", not from any threads or from Steve.

-- Emerald (emerald1@cox.net), October 29, 2002.

Steve Jackson! Remarkable! This guy already exists! He must be the oldest frequenter of this forum. He was already here when I came in 1999!

What I think fuuny about him is that he has only one theme: bashing the Catholic Church because of ecummenism. Well, if we were not ecumenical, why would we bother to accept his presence inside this forum? After all, it is ecumenism that makes us accept him, who is not a Catholic!

From Mother Teresa, quoted by Jackson:

"A: Naturally, if they want peace, if they want joy, let them find Jesus. If people become better Hindus, better Muslims, better Buddhists by our acts of love, then there is something else growing there. They come closer and closer to God. When they come closer, they have to choose. "

What I love in saints is this simple, concise and powerful way they have to present truths sometimes difficult. Must come from their intimate relantionship with God.

This sentence, I think, summarizes explendidly what orthodox ecumenism is.

By the way, Saint Josemaria Escriva talked about ecumenism in a very similar way.

Many many many converts to Catholicism started their way towards truth by being honest, pious and dedicated to their original religion (think of Cardinal Newman). God gave them the gift of the true faith, somehow rewarding them for their honest search. This forum is full of people with this kind of personal history.

"Search, and you will find..."

-- Atila (me@somewhere.com), October 29, 2002.

Matteo, for me, lutheranism is much more evil than hindhuism, in a sense.

Luther had access to the Truth and rejected it.

Hinddhus did not have access to the Truth. They are ignorant. Luther threw the pearls he had to the pigs.

-- Atila (me@somewhere.com), October 29, 2002.

Sorry to seem to labour this point but if some atheists of good will can gain salvation, then they must find some truth. Thus it surely follows that some Hindus must also find some truth, enough for the grace of Christ to save them. Unless we argue that atheists are closer to God!

-- Kiwi (csisherwood@hotmail.com), October 30, 2002.

"Naturally, if they want peace, if they want joy, let them find Jesus. If people become better Hindus, better Muslims, better Buddhists by our acts of love, then there is something else growing there. They come closer and closer to God. When they come closer, they have to choose."

This is substantially different from the other quote:

"There is only one God and He is God to all; therefore it is important that everyone is seen as equal before God. Iíve always said we should help a Hindu become a better Hindu, a Muslim become a better Muslim, a Catholic become a better Catholic. We believe our work should be our example to people. We have among us 475 souls - 30 families are Catholics and the rest are all Hindus, Muslims, Sikhsóall different religions. But they all come to our prayers."

...because the first includes this: "When they come closer, they have to choose."

Big difference. If the first quote is more reflective of Mother Theresa's stance, then the second can be said to be out of context with her thinking.

My only point is, and always has been, Christ instituted the Catholic Church as the means to salvation. Anything and everything must be weighed carefully so as to not compromise this fact in any way, shape or form.

Nothing wrong with a little vigilance.

-- Emerald (emerald1@cox.net), October 30, 2002.

You are all nuts.

Christ did not institute the Catholic Church. Human beings did. But forgetting all the Catholic Church trashing that is possible and deserved, let us remember that Jesus was a revolutionary because of the Love that he showed to all human beings. If Mother Theresa went around and acted according to Unam Sanctam, which by the way was created by a power hungry pope, then she would not be considered saintly. Indeed, she is saintly because she acted like Jesus, acted in love.

I have heard things said about Mother Theresa's actions, such as having much money sent to the creation of more convents instead of more shelters, and I would say this makes her a good Catholic, but I don't think it would make her a saint.

And before any of you flame me, remember to keep both an open mind and a christian heart.

-Jeff

-- Jeff (harlequino15@hotmail.com), February 11, 2004.

"Christ did not institute the Catholic Church. Human beings did."

A: We know from history that no Christian Church but the Catholic Church existed for 1,000 years after Christ. Therefore, either the Catholic Church is the Church founded by Christ, or Christ didn't found any Church - in which case He lied when He said "upon this Rock I WILL BUILD MY CHURCH".

"Indeed, she is saintly because she acted like Jesus, acted in love."

A: She is saintly because she acted in love within the context of the truth revealed by the Church. Pagans can act in love too - but they cannot become saints.

"I have heard things said about Mother Theresa's actions, such as having much money sent to the creation of more convents instead of more shelters"

A: You have a problem with the fact that she housed and fed her ever- increasing number of workers, even while sending them forth to minister to the poorest of the poor??? What would you suggest as an alternative???

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), February 11, 2004.

Jeff, you just gave me the best laugh I have had at the forum in quite a while!

You ended your message with these words:
"And before any of you flame me, remember to keep both an open mind and a christian heart."

But you started your message with these words:
"You are all nuts."

An apology is in order, pal! (Or maybe not, since you made me laugh.)
JFG

-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), February 11, 2004.

You guys should really consider thinking about what you write. I have come across this web site whilst researching an assignment, and the crap that you people go on about just amazes me, it's as if you have nothing better to do. Here's what I suggest, go out, get away from the computer, stop thinking about Jesus and God and actually do something with your lives. I mean really, in the big scheme of things... no one really cares. Love Damian

-- La La head (poobum@nomail.com), August 29, 2004.

"I mean really, in the big scheme of things... no one really cares. Love Damian "

You must care or you wouldn't of dug out a thread 6 months old a nd commented on it. :-)

-- - (David@excite.com), August 29, 2004.

"go out, get away from the computer, stop thinking about Jesus and God and actually do something with your lives."

A; Apart from God you can't do anything with your life that will really matter in the long run. "Unless the Lord builds the house, the laborers toil in vain".

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), August 29, 2004.