This upcoming Sunday, September 4, 2016, Francis the Loquacious will declare Gonxha Bojaxhiu, better known throughout the world as Mother Teresa of Calcutta, a canonized “Saint” of the Catholic Church – at least insofar as such things are currently understood by many in our day.
And it is well that she should be so declared, and by none other than Francis, for the simple reason that Teresa of Calcutta provides a stellar image of the post-conciliar ecclesial crisis – a “Saint” whose icon and legacy provide neo-conservatives and Apostate Romans alike with much to venerate.
First, let’s talk about the neo-conservatives; a large portion of whom have all but abandoned the mission of the Church in favor of Pro-Lifeism, many without even realizing it.
For misguided souls such as these, Mother Teresa practically canonized herself more than two decades ago when, at the 1994 National Prayer Breakfast before Bill and Hillary Clinton, she said:
I feel that the greatest destroyer of peace today is abortion, because it is a war against the child, a direct killing of the innocent child, murder by the mother herself. And if we accept that a mother can kill even her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another? … Any country that accepts abortion is not teaching its people to love, but to use any violence to get what they want. This is why the greatest destroyer of love and peace is abortion.
For the neo-conservative, this is a shining example of evangelizing with boldness. The “traditionalist” (aka Catholic), by contrast, realizes that it’s nothing of the kind.
Writing in his magnificent encyclical Quas Primas, Pope Pius XI (whose own cause for sainthood is sure to remain dead in the water until the present crisis comes to an end) provided the immutable Catholic faith:
When once men recognize, both in private and in public life, that Christ is King, society will at last receive the great blessings of real liberty, well-ordered discipline, peace and harmony.
Did Mother Teresa believe this?
If so, she did a masterful job of keeping her beliefs to herself.
This, alas, is precisely one of the reasons why Mother Teresa is eminently qualified to represent the post-conciliar church-of-man and its understanding of “missionary” work; the ethos of which she famously summarized:
“I’ve always said that we should help a Hindu become a better Hindu, a Muslim become a better Muslim, a Catholic become a better Catholic.” (A Simple Path, pg. 31)
In all of this, the Apostate Roman and the neo-conservative (in particular, the Constitution-loving sort who lives right here in good ol’ God Bless America) have much to celebrate in common when it comes to Mother Teresa.
You see, all concerned consider the Second Vatican Council’s Declaration on Religious Freedom to be the non-negotiable gospel of the New Springtime, and this necessarily means that they share two core beliefs:
One, the separation of Church and State is utterly sacrosanct, and two, if not rejecting the Social Kingship of Christ outright; at the very least, it is necessary to keep the doctrine hush-hush for the sake of expedience.
For his part, the Apostate Roman, being far more Masonic than Catholic, cannot help but venerate Teresa of Calcutta all the more.
According to Fr. Brian Kolodiejchuk, MC, Postulator of the Cause of Canonization of Blessed Mother Teresa, her understanding of the mission at hand can be summed up thus:
She wanted people to come closer to God (however they understood Him) and believed that in this way they would also come closer to each other, love one another, and ultimately create a world that is better for everyone to live in.
In her own words:
I have never found a problem with people from different religions praying together. What I have found is that people are just hungry for God, and be they Christian or Muslim we invite them to pray with us. There is a large percentage of Muslims in our mission houses in Spain and France and they want to pray. So that is our main focus, to encourage them to pray, to have a relationship with God, however that may be, because when you have that then everything else will follow. (A Simple Path, pg. 32)
Compare Mother Teresa’s method and mission to the following:
The doors of Freemasonry are open to men who seek harmony with their fellow man, feel the need for self-improvement and wish to participate in making this world a better place to live. (cf International Masons)
Masons believe that there is one God and that people employ many different ways to seek, and to express what they know of God. Masonry primarily uses the appellation, “Grand Architect of the Universe,” and other non-sectarian titles, to address the Deity. In this way, persons of different faiths may join together in prayer, concentrating on God, rather than differences among themselves. Masonry believes in religious freedom and that the relationship between the individual and God is personal, private, and sacred. (Masonic Service Association of North America)
Truly, Mother Teresa could very well be considered the Patron Saint of both Free Masonry and Pro-Lifeism alike!
Lastly, one cannot help but acknowledge just how fitting it is that Francis will be presiding over Sunday’s award show as clearly he is among Mother Teresa’s most devoted disciples.
“We believe our work should be an example for people. We have among us 475 souls — 30 families are Catholics and the rest are all Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs — all different religions,” Mother Teresa noted; apparently relishing, not just religious diversity itself, but the fact that Catholics are in the minority. (ibid, pg. 31)
If you’re looking for any concern on her part over the fact the overwhelming majority of people who died in her care did so outside the Church and without the sacraments, forget about it. For her, the Church was just one “House of God” among many:
“God is not separate from the Church as He is everywhere and in everything and we are all His children — Hindu, Muslim, or Christians.” (ibid, pg. 59)
Speaking at Foot Wash Fest 2016, Francis expressed his concurrence, saying:
“All of us together, Muslims, Hindus, Catholics, Copts, Evangelical, are brothers and sisters — children of the same God.”
In other words, while the Church used to be concerned about Baptism, given all of the human suffering present in today’s world, nobody got time for dat!
As Mother Teresa put it, “I get asked my opinion on the role of the Church today … I don’t have time to worry about all these issues – there are too many things to do in my everyday work.” (ibid, pgs. 59, 60)
In sum, the life and legacy of Mother Teresa provides a crystal clear image of what Francis is Hell bent and determined to usher into being:
A Catholic Church effectively stripped of her true identity; ambivalent toward her divinely-given mission – with all that remains being an earthbound enterprise so entirely focused on temporal matters that even her most highly celebrated missionaries can’t be bothered to consider the supernatural ends for which man was created.
These are the few ways we can practice humility:
To accept insults and injuries.
To accept being slighted, forgotten and disliked.
Mother Teresa of Calcutta
Hard, hard truths. But truths nonetheless. A crying shame.
Are you suggesting that such statements mitigate horrific statements like the following?
“I’ve always said that we should help a Hindu become a better Hindu, a Muslim become a better Muslim, a Catholic become a better Catholic.” (A Simple Path, pg. 31)
The More I study Vatican II, the More I find a Masonic Connection for Masonry teaches Religious Indifferentism.
It does explain FALSE ECUMENISM.
THE TREASURE OF THE CATHOLIC FAITH
“Faith, we must remember, is a gift from God. One of our co-workers asked me once, “Do you want us to become Catholics like you? “ I answered, “I would like to give you the treasure that I possess, but it is not in my hands to give it to anyone, because it is a gift from God. What I am doing is giving you the opportunity to do works of charity. Through these works, you come closer to God because works of charity brings you closer to God. When God comes to you or you go to God, then you will have the chance to accept Him or reject Him. Accepting Him is the gift of faith.”
Mother Teresa
Reflections
1. Mother Teresa is not promoting indifferentism…her Catholic faith is a treasure
2. This treasure is a gift…the gift of faith
3. This gift cannot be forced…
WHAT WAS MOTHER TERESA’S GREATEST HOPE IN INDIA???
TO GIVE JESUS TO EVERYONE…
AN INTERVIEW WITH MOTHER TERESA
——-
Time: What did you do this morning?
Mother Teresa: Pray.
Time: When did you start?
Mother Teresa: Half-past four
Time: And after prayer
Mother Teresa: We try to pray through our work by doing it with Jesus, for Jesus, to Jesus. That helps us to put our whole heart and soul into doing it. The dying, the cripple, the mental, the unwanted, the unloved they are Jesus in disguise.
——-
Time: People know you as a sort of religious social worker. Do they understand the spiritual basis of your work?
Mother Teresa: I don’t know. But I give them a chance to come and touch the poor. Everybody has to experience that. So many young people give up everything to do just that. This is something so completely unbelievable in the world, no? And yet it is wonderful. Our volunteers go back different people.
——
Time: Why have you been so successful?
Mother Teresa: Jesus made Himself the bread of life to give us life. That’s where we begin the day, with Mass. And we end the day with Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament. I don’t think that I could do this work for even one week if I didn’t have four hours of prayer every day.
Time: Humble as you are, it must be an extraordinary thing to be a vehicle of God’s grace in the world.
Mother Teresa: But it is His work. I think God wants to show His greatness by using nothingness.
——–
Time: You are nothingness?
Mother Teresa: I’m very sure of that.
Time: You feel you have no special qualities?
Mother Teresa: I don’t think so. I don’t claim anything of the work. It’s His work. I’m like a little pencil in His hand. That’s all. He does the thinking. He does the writing. The pencil has nothing to do it. The pencil has only to be allowed to be used. In human terms, the success of our work should not have happened, no? That is a sign that it’s His work, and that He is using others as instruments – all our Sisters. None of us could produce this. Yet see what He has done.
——
Time: What is God’s greatest gift to you?
Mother Teresa: The poor people.
Time: How are they a gift?
Mother Teresa: I have an opportunity to be with Jesus 24 hours a day.
——-
Time: Beyond showing the poor to the world, have you conveyed any message about how to work with the poor?
Mother Teresa: You must make them feel loved and wanted. They are Jesus for me. I believe in that much more than doing big things for them.
——-
Time: What’s your greatest hope here in India?
Mother Teresa: To give Jesus to all.
——-
Time: But you do not evangelize in the conventional sense of the term.
Mother Teresa: I’m evangelizing by my works of love.
Time: Is that the best way?
Mother Teresa: For us, yes. For somebody else, something else. I’m evangelizing the way God wants me to. Jesus said go and preach to all the nations. We are now in so many nations preaching the Gospel by our works of love. “By the love that you have for one another will they know you are my disciples.” That’s the preaching that we are doing, and I think that is more real.
——-
Time: Friends of yours say that you are disappointed that your work has not brought more conversions in this great Hindu nation.
Mother Teresa: 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. Continually people are coming to feed and serve, so many, you go and see. Everywhere people are helping. We don’t know the future. But the door is already open to Christ. There may not be a big conversion like that, but we don’t know what is happening in the soul.
——-
Time: There’s been some criticism of the very severe regimen under which you and your Sisters live.
Mother Teresa: We chose that. That is the difference between us and the poor. Because what will bring us closer to our poor people? How can we be truthful to them if we lead a different life? If we have everything possible that money can give, that the world can give, then what is our connection to the poor? What language will I speak to them? Now if the people tell me it is so hot, I can say you come and see my room.
Time: Just as hot?
Mother Teresa: Much hotter even, because there is a kitchen underneath. A man came and stayed here as a cook at the children’s home. He was rich before and became very poor. Lost everything. He came and said, “Mother Teresa, I cannot eat that food.” I said, “I am eating it every day.” He looked at me and said, “You eat it too? All right, I will eat it also.” And he left perfectly happy. Now if I could not tell him the truth, that man would have remained bitter. He would never have accepted his poverty. He would never have accepted to have that food when he was used to other kinds of food. That helped him to forgive, to forget.
——-
Time: Feminist Catholic nuns sometimes say that you should pour your energy into getting the Vatican to ordain women.
Mother Teresa: That does not touch me.
Time: What do you think of the feminist movement among nuns in the West?
Mother Teresa: I think we should be more busy with our Lord than with all that, more busy with Jesus and proclaiming His Word. What a woman can give, no man can give. That is why God has created them separately. Nuns, women, any woman. Woman is created to be the heart of the family, the heart of love. If we miss that, we miss everything. They give that love in the family or they give it in service, that is what their creation is for.
——–
Time: The world wants to know more about you.
Mother Teresa: No, no. Let them come to know the poor. I want them to love the poor. I want them to try to find the poor in their own families first, to bring peace and joy and love in the family first.
——-
Time: What is your greatest fear?
Mother Teresa: I have Jesus, I have no fear.
—–
Time: What are your plans for the future?
Mother Teresa: I just take one day. Yesterday is gone. Tomorrow has not come. We have only today to love Jesus.
Time: And the future of the order?
Mother Teresa: It is His concern.
Divinizing “the poor” is always a mistake. They are not Jesus.
Forced no, but passed on yes! For he that denieth me denieth him who sent me. But he that shall deny me before men, I will also deny him before my Father who is in heaven.
I was born in 81. As a child I looked UP to Mother Teresa in a huge way. I used to brag to my best friend ( who’s father was a calvinist pastor!) that Mother was a Catholic! She was my hero. Now I can’t believe that I am so confused about her. I am not sure about what is written here, but the way Francis is embracing her….I don’t know….it is unsettling isn’t it? Hard truths indeed.
I believe one of the deadliest “fruits” of Vatican II is this mis-direction regarding “extraordinary means of salvation” which has become the new “norm” -ignoring how free people are to hear, understand, accept or reject Christ, His Church, and the truths of their Salvation.
The fact that God’s warns us in Scripture that “many” take the wide road to hell, makes it insane to PRESUME such an extraordinary Mercy will be applied to billions of souls in whom we attempt (in His Name) to foster the requisite invincible ignorance. Jesus commanded us to go teach all nations all that He taught, Baptizing them in the name of the Holy Trinity. Nothing in that command will ever “help a Muslim become a better Muslim”.
The poor, humble, sweet lovable Mother Teresa I see depicted by some above, obviously fell hook, line and sinker for this bait from hell, and by her actions and inactions, left all those poor souls that she dutifully failed to urge to convert, in error serving false gods, and without the Eucharistic Lord they needed to “have life within them”. God will judge her as to whether she should have known better, and how innocent or guilty she was for this.
Pope Francis and others like him who feed on the abiguity and what I believe are errors of Vatican II, foster this Catholic “silence” so intrinsic to this warped plot. Beyond ignoring the lies and blasphemies of false religions, he demanded it be applied also to the deadliest sins on earth:
“Religious fundamentalists” have been “obsessed with issues like abortion, gay marriage and contraception” and will be the reason “the Church will fall like a house of cards unless it focuses more on the essentials of preaching the Gospel and less on politics and bureaucracy.” I’m sure that news had Planned Parenthood jumping for joy, but the Gospels tell us the “world” will “hate” those who follow Jesus, while Francis courts and wins its admiration, as did Mother Teresa.
There is no Catholic charity in setting people up for eternity in hell, but it’s certain people like Francis don’t believe that a “city” or even a country or a world which rejects Jesus and the Salvation only He offers, will suffer God’s wrath in eternity, as stated in Matthew 10:
“making it more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.”
Yesterday’s Vatican news featured, Cardinal Turkson praising Pope Francis for fostering more global good by creating what he called:
” the final step of ecological conversion, a true internalization of an ecological sensibility,” after Francis officially proclaimed “Caring for the Earth” the 8th Works of Mercy–both Corporal and Spiritual.
Lemme get this straight:
We canonize nuns who “help Muslims become “better Muslims”
and we “CONVERT everyone we can to the ecology movement.
Maybe this helps explain why the “better” Muslims-those most faithful to the Koran- are busy dutifully slitting the throats of Catholic Priests; while the Catholic Church is being featured in articles on Treehuggers.com and sipping tea in the Vatican Gardens with Imams who pray for death to infidels and are happy the Church proclaims Islam a “peaceful” religion.
Never mind. There is no sense to make of it, other than diabolical disorientation.
she was right. i want nothing more but for my husband to convert. But talking to him does nothing. I just have to pray for him and try to show him the light of Christ. I see nothing wrong with what she is saying here..
Dear Ever,
Here’s some advice from Mundy you might enjoy: “…stop emoting, start thinking, and think of dinner instead.” 😉
https://mundabor.wordpress.com/2016/09/02/why-green-is-gay/
Agree. Somehow being a social worker has become the new apostle of Christ. The great missionaries didn’t do this…they preached the salvation of souls because they realized it’s primary purpose.
It sounds like Mother Teresa was confronted with the failure of her mission by the reality that nobody is converting and tried to hide behind becoming a social worker as being the same thing.
“For somebody else, something else. I’m evangelizing the way God wants me to. Jesus said go and preach to all the nations. We are now in so many nations preaching the Gospel by our works of love”.
Evangelizing the way God wants me too? Seriously? Holy modernist sentiments! Like evangelization is something OTHER than preaching the whole Gospel of Christ which should begin and end with the conversion of people into the Church. This whole messed up notion of “love” is diabolical. All the emo or corporal works of mercy are meaningless without the most loving act you can do i.e. tell the truth about Christ and invite someone to convert to His Church. I bet Satan is thrilled with this balderdash. Lucifer would go along with anything as long as souls kept dropping into hell because they didn’t hear the truth of their need to convert.
God bless~
Very well put. I can’t recall any missionary Saints in the Catholic Tradition prior to VII, who took it upon themselves to deny the mission of the Church and just help the bodies and emotional states of people they were serving, reducing love to earth-bound charity alone.
There was a lot less risk to her physical well-being and that of her sisters, because they totally avoided the hatred of the world that would likely have developed, had they been making converts.
It’s what made martyrs out of so many of our Catholic missioners of old. Instead, she was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.
Jesus didn’t come to bring that kind of peace.
St. Justin, Martyr said:
“To be able to speak the truth and yet to remain silent, is to draw down the anger of God.”
I also believe we tumble deeper into error the farther we move from the Charitable Anathema.
Hospice work is not conversion. Charity work is not conversion.
Jewish people provide hospice work. Atheists provide charity work. Do these works result in more Catholics?
St. Francis of Assis worked towards conversion, as did legions of other saints. It must be intentional, and it must be a decision. Not just “works” in hopes that they see the light.
” A better Muslim or Hindu” is still a damned Muslim or Hindu.
It’s unfortunate that we know the little nun mainly by her media image. Time-Life is a know CIA mouthpiece. Malcolm Muggeridge was an MI6 propagandist — a psychological warfare operative in the Tavistock mold. These insidious influences have creeped into all neoCatholic and pro-life-ist news organs, partly under the skirt of Mother Teresa. Disney catholicism wrapped around masonic socialism.
Dear loveconquers, But you did try, that’s the difference. We pray then share, and then let the Holy Spirit work. There doesn’t seem to be a lot of history of Mother Teresa presenting the Truth. You’ve already done much more than that, else you wouldn’t think it does nothing. Cajoling is allowed too ;-).
Archbishop Lefebvre from an interview:
“Fideliter: John Paul II defends the unity of the family, and he is against married priests and abortion. Where his moral teaching is concerned, many people think he is a good pope.
Lefebvre: That is true with regard to certain principles of natural morality. But having said that, on a practical level, no action is ever taken against priests who openly favour contraception. The Pope never takes a firm stand on anything and backs it up with vigorous action. He just professes general dispositions which are so much a part of the natural law that nobody is going to disagree with them. When the United States president, Bush, is against abortion it’s hardly conceivable that the Pope would be for it!”
Another way of practicing humility: submitting oneself to the Traditional teaching of the Church: Outside the Church there is no salvation.
http://www.traditioninaction.org/bkreviews/A_025br_MotherTeresa_Zima.htm
The source of the “charity overrules everything” problem is a fundamental misinterpretation of Matthew 25.
In Matthew’s gospel chapter 25, Jesus is describing what the Judgment will be like to His disciples, whom He calls his “little ones.” In verse 32, we see that Jesus gives a description of the final judgment of the nations gathered before him. This is consistent with the Old Testament prophecy of Joel:
Joel 3:2 I will gather all nations and bring them down to the Valley of Jehoshaphat. There I will put them on trial for what they did to my inheritance, my people Israel,…
The nations will be judged on how they treat Israel, not how Israel treats “the nations”.
In his description of the final judgment, Jesus is addressing “the nations” that is : the non-Church world. It is they who are being told to feed, clothe and visit the disciples of Jesus in prison, the Christians. It is the disciples of Christ who are the face of Jesus in the world, and it is ”the nations” who will answer for how they treated “the least of his brethren.”
So it is not that the Christians are being told to be nice to everyone else, that is understood already. It is the pagan world, the nations, who are being judged by their actions toward Christians. The judgment is a scene of the “vindication of the just,’ with Jesus as the Judge handing out rewards and punishments to “the nations” gathered before him on the basis of the reception they gave to his disciples when the gospel was preached among them.
The Church for most of its history had this primary understanding of this passage, and has only recently lost it for the most part. The “least of my brethren” is a reference to Jesus’s followers, and not to the poor and disadvantaged pagan world. It is not those in the Church who are being judged, but those outside it. The pagans are being told they will be accepted into the New Covenant only if they have first treated the family of the people of God, the Church, with charity. The basic idea is from Jesus: “Whoever receives you, receives me.”
Matthew 25 31* “When the Son of man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne. 32* Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate them one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats, 33 and he will place the sheep at his right hand, but the goats at the left. 34* Then the King will say to those at his right hand, ‘Come, O blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world; 35* for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, 36 I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’
So you see, it is the inverted understanding of this particular Gospel that has been a great source of error .
Peace and Blessings.
(Hi Jerry!)
Michael F Poulin
Question: Does anyone know if Mother Teresa christened the numerous orphan children in her care? If she did NOT I daresay she was profoundly remiss.
Did Mother Teresa christen the orphan babies and children in her care? She was their mother in a very profound sense, and if she did NOT, I shudder to think of her excuse in front of The King.
Good article, Louie.
The Church Teaches Ex Cathedra: “The Most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews, and heretics, and schismatics, can ever be partakers of eternal life, but that they are to go into the eternal fire “which was prepared for the devil, and his angels,” (Mt. 25:41) unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this Ecclesiastical Body, that only those remaining within this unity can profit from the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and that they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, almsdeeds, and other works of Christian piety and duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved unless they abide within the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.” (Pope Eugene IV, the Bull Cantate Domino, 1441) ”
Ah, the good old days. When things were black and white and to me looks like simple and direct answers were clear.
Is this even significant anymore? How could someone explain that away…Oh, but they obviously do.
So I ask the same question I once heard a priest ask: “What good is a belly full of buritos if you die and go to hell?”
It’s like a hate crime or something to speak Truth these days. After reading that quote above I thought about getting a T-shirt made:
On front: No Salvation Outside
On back: The Catholic Church
Could you imagine? I’d be spat upon or thrown in jail or something.
Of course we feel insignificant when we imagine all Mother Theresa did. But what it boils down to is who do we feel less significant than Mother Theresa or Jesus?
Will we speak on His behalf? Will we suffer persecution for the sake of His wounds? Who, besides Louie, is willing to wipe His wounds? It takes guts to be Catholic, Louie.
Just a social worker?
“Our hours of adoration will be special hours of reparation for sins, and intercession for the needs of the whole world, exposing the sin-sick and suffering humanity to the healing, sustaining and transforming rays of Jesus, radiating from the Eucharist.”
– Mother Teresa of Calcutta
Aren’t you implying that Catholic social workers don’t or can’t have generous prayer lives?
The difference between a missionary and a social worker is not how each spends their spare time. A truly Catholic missionary can do social work as well, but the main focus is on saving souls — spreading the Gospel by word as well as deed, so those who are in need of it, get a chance to know the truth God is drawing them to choose.
A social worker on the other hand, let’s other people handle that, as Mother Teresa described what she believed God wanted her to do. So yes, unfortunately for the many Hindus and others who remained in their false religions, what she self-described was just a caring social worker- regarding her work with them.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Mother_Teresa
Akita asked about baptisms. Looks like, from what this says, Mother Theresa drew many in and did save many souls. Tomorrow she will be canonized. She’s a saint. My Church in Her authority says it, and I can rest and say, St. Mother Theresa, pray for me, a sinner.
I for one believe that Pope BXVI is still our pontiff, Jorge Bergoglio can raise the whole world on the altar to no avail. Mother Teresa’s purity of intentions are known by God alone, sadly her words expressed the disorientation of the VII all paths lead to God mantra, if she did not Baptize dying children I would think that was a terrible omission and she most assuredly should have encouraged Baptism to all she cared for on their death beds,…do we know for sure that she didn’t? The fallout from the invasion of the soul snatchers is very wearying to say the least, Our Lady of Fatima, Ora Pro Nobis!
Was Mother Teresa indifferent to Jesus ??
———–
“To me – Jesus is my God. Jesus is my Spouse. Jesus is my Life. Jesus is my only Love. Jesus is my All in all. Jesus is my everything. Jesus, I love with my whole heart, with my whole being. I have given Him all, even my sins, and He has espoused me to Himself in all tenderness and love. Now and for life I am the Spouse of my crucified Spouse.”
Mother Teresa
According to Wikipedia, one of the criticisms of Mother Theresa is that she baptized many people before they died. I am glad they are in Heaven together. She baptized them. She gave them that free ticket to Heaven. That’s more than I do in a day’s work.
Thanks Cortez, my comment must have come in at the same time as yours.
Maybe the process of canonization should be halted for the next fifty years or so to allow the CC get back to in-depth authentic verification of the facts about the person being studied for sainthood. This process used to take a protracted length of time whereas since VII two popes have been declared saints & one venerable (about to be declared a saint) & now Mother Teresa although she only died in 1997.
How many unknown & un-recognized saints live among us & always have done so. They don’t get recognition because they are ordinary people – not members of the Hierarchy or even clergy/religious, yet they live their faith courageously, fighting their demons (Matt Talbot comes to mind), living in relative poverty, enduring the suffering God sends them (physical, mental, emotional crosses) without complaint, attending to their Catholic duties (Holy Mass, Sacraments etc.) & spending hours in prayerful contemplation every day. They make-up the Communion of Saints but are lost in that description until we shall meet them in Heaven (God willing).
A very wise man told me:
“The basic problem with Teresa’s approach is that she sees the poor-in-general as representative of Christ: to draw near them is to draw near to Jesus. This is wrong, and is the fundamental reason why she wouldn’t evangelize them — it would be like attempting to evangelize Jesus, in her mind. Catholics need to stop this nonsense right now, and realize that it is Christians who represent Christ in this world —no one else.”
She reportedly baptized many non Catholics into the faith upon their deathbeds, saving many souls. She literally wore Jesus on her sleeve for all to see who she was aiming to please. The Church, in its authority, will canonize her tomorrow. Yes, we are a Church in crisis, but Mother Theresa will be declared a saint tomorrow, and I am happy for her soul and for my Church, which still holds the keys to bind this canonization. I hope to be in Heaven also some day. Who, rich or poor, have we baptized today?
What abreast quote, especially the last sentence!
Best not to know. Why assemble evidence if we are not supposed to judge another?
The telling thing about this statement is the “To me” at the beginning. Maybe I’m reading too much into it, but in this ecumenical age you see a lot of statements that start off with “To me,” or “I believe”, which seems to imply – this is just what I think, but you are free to have your own opinion. You even see wording like this in the newer Catechism (As Catholics We believe…). It might sound petty, but words have meaning. Instead of using prefaces like this, which inherently give the impression that this is just one opinion among many, we need to just unapologetically state that which is objective Truth.
I understand what you wrote there, but that is a prudential call you have to make in regards to a specific individual in a specific subjective situation.
You can not apply the same “say nothing and just pray for them to convert” approach to the entire non-Catholic population of the planet, which is the bottom line of “conservative” novus ordoism.
When taken in the subjective order, this may be all thats left for a particular individual who has already heard the specific call to convert and rejected it.
When taken in the objective order and applying this approach to every non-Catholic, it is an abandonment of the Great Commission and results in apostasy…which is exactly where we’re at.
True humility is the willingness to live according to the Truth.
Worldly humility is “to accept being slighted, forgotten, and disliked.”
The Modernist Vatican institution adopted the Protestant/Masonic “religious liberty” principle primarily through the pleas of U.S. heretical bishops who have, for the most part, always been willing to leave the Catholic religion in the building and compromise it in order to avoid the wrath of the Protestant/secular/Democrats who rule the country.
Charity is first of all, love of God which demands obedience to what He has revealed to be true. Then we can love others.
It isn’t charitable to place the needs of the body above the salvation of the soul. Anyone can do social work.
Mother Teresa, as a religious, had the opportunity most of us do not-to work to convert those outside of the true, Catholic religion. Instead, she confirmed those who believed in false religions and false gods, which is not charity but a rejection of the true faith and I imagine, the vows she took as a nun.
It is really an abomination that a heretic or apostate-Francis-believes he can canonize anyone. What he has done is make a mockery of all of the true Saints who worked to bring the Kingdom of Christ into the hearts of man, sometimes laying down their lives in true humility, true charity, and true love of Christ.
To give Jesus to everyone would be to convert them to the one, true faith. That is where Jesus is to be found.
It is only we rigid, fundamentalists who refuse to divinize man and the earth.
Re Cortez’s Post about the Baptizing of the dying:
Caution is necessary here, as the sole source of these quotes is a book written by an atheist who despised Mother Teresa openly. I’ve seen the quote in 3 places on the net, all attributed to him. However, I believe it is good discussion material ethics-wise. Without any judgment being passed on Mother’s “intentions”, it is not sinful to judge a person’s actions, as long as the facts are verified.
Bearing that in mind IF, what Cortez posted is true:
“Susan Shields, a former member of the Missionaries of Charity, writes that “Sisters were to ask each person in danger of death if he wanted a ‘ticket to heaven’. An affirmative reply was to mean consent to baptism. The sister was then to pretend that she was just cooling the patient’s head with a wet cloth, while in fact she was baptising him, saying quietly the necessary words. Secrecy was important so that it would not come to be known that Mother Teresa’s sisters were baptising Hindus and Muslims.”[3]
—Doesn’t an adult Baptism requires free consent of the will of the Baptized? Assuming these were lifetime Hindu practitioners who had not converted before death, the important question is, were they aware that this “ticket to heaven” they were offered, meant they were consenting to join Mother’s Catholic religion and about to be Baptized? If not, then she was having the nuns Baptize them using trickery and deceit, and I doubt these were valid.
Hindu Faith teachers on line actually use the phrase ..There is no “ticket to heaven”, one must merit it by good works. At the very least, I would think a Hindu who was dying, would be very confused about what those words meant. If time remaining before death was an issue, they should have been asked if they were ready to accept Jesus as their Lord and Savior, to be clear about it.
How it could have happened…
“Do you want us to become Catholics like you? ”
“Yes.”
…too easy I suppose. One of the hallmarks of Novus Ordoism is giving long rambling mish mash answers when a simple yes or no would do.
The whole man made global warming shtick is a demonic NWO lie straight from the pit if hell. Its the flipside of the abortion/contaception/sodomite/population reduction agenda.
Thats why Francis’ envirocyclical was just as bad if not worse than the latest garbage emanating from the SINod on the family.
We’ve got to be nearing the end of this madness.
Bring on the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary.
I am not sure what religion you believe in. There is no “free ticket” to Heaven. Being baptized does not automatically open the Pearly Gate. That has never been a teaching of Christ nor of His Church.
Canon 865 §2. An adult in danger of death can be baptized if, having some knowledge of the principal truths of the faith, the person has manifested in any way at all the intention to receive baptism and promises to observe the commandments of the Christian religion.
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/_P2X.HTM
“Do you want a ticket to heaven?” seems a trivialization of a sacrament, (sacrilege?) Where’s the Devil’s Advocate when you need him?
Since your church teaches that any religion at all is a path to salvation, although this is not what either Christ or the Catholic Church teaches, what will you think when it canonizes a Protestant? After all, most of them believe in baptism so it isn’t a stretch of the imagination to believe they could.
That would be as possible as the sun turning into the moon. No one in the Vatican institution is about to change anything directed in Vatican II that upended the true Catholic religion and the practices within the Catholic Church the Modernists abhor. They changed the canonization process like the annulment process to reflect their own religion, which they admitted is merely a subset within their newly invented Church of Christ.
In light of this ” promise to observe the commandments” being absent from the above-reports, it would seem the suggestion that Mother was at least doing Baptisms, if not evangelizing, as a reason to support her canonization, works against her cause, rather than supporting it.
From her reported words in her interviews, she seems to have had many good intentions and will of iron in service to God. If she was misguided by the modernist churchmen of Vatican II, I personally would never speak ill of her other charitable contributions while I must condemn the false ideas that led to her silence, and the decision to “let others” do the evangelizing that I believe is the responsibility of every Christian from the time they know their Faith on, and especially of missionaries. The VII modernists teach the opposite, and Mother apparently was their poster child, which explains the world rewarding her efforts with a “peace” prize–which really when you think about it, represents and award for doing so many nice and self sacrificing acts, while acquiescing to their desire that Catholics just Shut UP about dogma and the need to accept Christ and His Church.
Dear loveconquers,
Amazing that you can look at this at all at your young age. You are doing great. And you have, by the grace of God, come to the right blog.
When I first learned these hard truths (gradually over the last 10 years), but more “completely” about 5 years ago, I cried for about a year.
Along with Rosary after Rosary, I did novena after novena to St. Peter to make sure I was not on the wrong path. It was scary leaving the “pretend world” Vatican 2 had created for me. (It was much more painful for people like Louie who had much more at stake and lost much more materially than did I.) But once you “see” the truth, you cannot “un-see” it.
One of my favorites documents that gave me clarity in that extraordinarily “painful” time was the encyclical “Mortalium Animos” — Pope Pius XI —- 1928.
–
http://w2.vatican.va/content/pius-xi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_19280106_mortalium-animos.html
–
I hope it helps you to see the truth. May God reward you and strengthen you in your search for the Truth, Who is Jesus Christ Himself.
As you said, “Hard truths indeed.”
http://www.remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/fetzen-fliegen/item/2729-francis-canonizations-are-not-infallible
–
According to this article from The Remnant, the canonizations are not infallible because Francis (be he pope or be he not pope) does not believe that they are infallible. He, therefore, does not have the “intention” for them to be infallible which is a requirement for their infallibility.
One would think that just Catholic common sense would give us the answer, but alas, those days are gone.
It is OK for Jesus to be your “all” but the idea that Jesus marries individual Christians (nuns) is a false idea that entered into the church via lonely girl’s over-active imaginations. It has no basis in Scripture or Tradition.
Thanks, Cortez!
You are exactly correct – it’s all relative to the individual. There is this quote from Mother that indicates exactly what you stated:
Life in the Spirit: Reflections, Meditations and Prayers, she says:
“We never try to convert those who receive [aid from Missionaries of Charity] to Christianity but in our work we bear witness to the love of God’s presence and if Catholics, Protestants, Buddhists, or agnostics become for this better men — simply better — we will be satisfied. It matters to the individual what church he belongs to. If that individual thinks and believes that this is the only way to God for her or him, this is the way God comes into their life — his life. If he does not know any other way and if he has no doubt so that he does not need to search then this is his way to salvation.” (Pages 81-82)
Then there is this gem:
“Of course I convert. 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.”
-Agnes Bojaxhiu (Mother Teresa), Maryknoll, Vol. 92, Catholic Foreign Mission Society of America, 1998, p. 317
Well there is this quote that counters what you just wrote:
In an interview with Christian News a nun who worked with Mother Teresa was asked the following in regards to the Hindus they worked with, “These people are waiting to die. What are you telling them to prepare them for death and eternity?” She replied candidly, “We tell them to pray to their Bhagwan, to their gods.”
And last, this:
“I love all religions. … If people become better Hindus, better Muslims, better Buddhists by our acts of love, then there is something else growing there.” [On another occasion, she again demonstrated her false gospel that ‘there are many ways to God’: “All is God–Buddhists, Hindus, Christians, etc., all have access to the same God.”] Time Magazine 12/4/89
Dear fast Ferrari,
I’m copying your comment down here because it struck me as very informative, and germane to this whole discussion and might go unnoticed- above. “To me” (pun intended) it demonstrates the VII heretical mindset when it comes to the Mandate of Christ.
fast ferrari
September 3, 2016
You are exactly correct – it’s all relative to the individual. There is this quote from Mother that indicates exactly what you stated:
Life in the Spirit: Reflections, Meditations and Prayers, she says:
“We never try to convert those who receive [aid from Missionaries of Charity] to Christianity but in our work we bear witness to the love of God’s presence and if Catholics, Protestants, Buddhists, or agnostics become for this better men — simply better — we will be satisfied. It matters to the individual what church he belongs to. If that individual thinks and believes that this is the only way to God for her or him, this is the way God comes into their life — his life. If he does not know any other way and if he has no doubt so that he does not need to search then this is his way to salvation.” (Pages 81-82)
Then there is this gem:
“Of course I convert. 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.”
-Agnes Bojaxhiu (Mother Teresa), Maryknoll, Vol. 92, Catholic Foreign Mission Society of America, 1998, p. 317
Thanks for these quotes. As I said a couple of comments earlier, we have to be cautious about the information “out there”, and assume it could be false, but the ethics involved are worth discussing as long as we keep that in mind. It seems there are a few totally contradictory “stories” coming from alleged “nuns who worked with Mother Theresa”. What we know from Mother Teresa’s own lips, has convinced me she did hold this indifferentist modernist viewpoint about other religions.
From all these quotes I guess we can see clearly that along with Mother Theresa, another certain agenda is being held up and canonized which supports their ideals. I guess this is just such a hard pill to swallow. I have been so programed my whole life. It reminds me of The Truman show. They couldn’t care less about the people whose lives, or in this case, whose salvation they’re trying to destroying. We’re so pathetic. It’s all so demonic.
I try to fall asleep and wrap my small brain around all this, and my heart aches, and my gut is wrenched by the shear fact of how twisted this whole thing is. We as people are not loved and are being taken advantage of by these crazy evil people who have infiltrated Our Lord’s Chuch, ie. The Catholic Church. It’s actually just another moment of realization that hurts, a wound opened up. Our Lady of Good Success told us in the 1600s that Our Church would be in a terrible crisis now. We are IN crisis NOW…ain’t no commercial breaks. I guess I am still blinded by the lights that have shined into my eyes for so many years. I can’t always see clearly. So sad to be so taken advantage of…all of us.
Pray that we can see the Truth and walk towards it always. We need to stay grounded in Truth. Stop this ride. I want to get off.
Sorry for the sappy stuff. Stay strong and close to Our Mother. Grab the beads and hold tight to The Faith!
Dear brother in Christ,
You may be a relative newcomer to these hard facts and realizations, but what you just wrote was nothing to apologize for. Every one of us whose eyes and ears are open, have been there, including St. Paul whose words to the Ephesians (ch6) ring as true today as when he first said them:
“..brethren, be strengthened in the Lord, and in the might of his power.
Put you on the armour of God, that you may be able to stand against the deceits of the devil. For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood; but against principalities and power, against the rulers of the world of this darkness, against the spirits of wickedness in the high places.
Therefore take unto you the armour of God, that you may be able to resist in the evil day, and to stand in all things perfect. Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with TRUTH, and having on the breastplate of justice, And your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace:
In all things taking the shield of FAITH, wherewith you may be able to extinguish all the fiery darts of the most wicked one. And take unto you the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit (which is the word of God). By all prayer and supplication praying at all times in the spirit; and in the same watching with all instance and supplication for all the saints.”
I’m glad to see such an example of Faith as you just expressed above. I’ll keep you and yours in my prayers for us all. God Bless.
Michael, I hope you revise this opinion about “lonely girl’s over active imaginations, after a bit of study. This is a concept begun by Our Lord. Mystical marriage was granted by God from earliest times, to nearly a hundred saints in the history of the Church:
From Catholic Encyclopedia:
Christian virginity has been considered from the earliest centuries as a special offering made by the soul to its spouse, Christ. Nothing else seems to have been meant in speaking of the mystical nuptials of St. Agnes and of St. Catherine of Alexandria. … the phrase mystical marriage has been taken in two different senses, one wide and the other restricted.
WIDE:
In MANY OF THE LIVES OF THE SAINTS, the mystical marriage consists in a vision in which Christ tells a soul that He takes it for His bride, presenting it with the customary ring, and the apparition is accompanied by a ceremony; the Blessed Virgin, saints, and angels are present. This festivity is but the accompaniment and symbol of a purely spiritual grace; this t the soul receives a sudden augmentation of charity and of familiarity with God, and that He will thereafter take more special care of it. All this, is involved in the notion of marriage. Moreover, as a wife should share in the life of her husband, and as Christ suffered for the redemption of mankind, the mystical spouse enters into a more intimate participation in His SUFFERINGS. Accordingly, in 3 cases out of every 4, the mystical marriage has been granted to STIGMATICS. .. estimated by Dr. Imbert that, history has recorded seventy-seven mystical marriages; they are mentioned in connection with female saints, beatae, and venerabiles
— e.g. Blessed Angela of Foligno, St. Catherine of Siena, St. Colette, St. Teresa, St. Catherine of Ricci, Venerable Marina d’Escobar, St. Mary Magdalen de’ Pazzi, St. Veronica Giuliani, Venerable Maria de Agreda. Religious art has exercised its resources upon mystical marriage, considered as a festive celebration. That of St. Catherine of Alexandria is the subject of Memling’s masterpiece (in the Hospital St. Jean, Bruges), as also of paintings by Jordaens (Madrid), Corregio (Naples and the Louvre), and others. Fra Bartolommeo has done as much for St. Catherine of Siena.
RESTRICTED SENSE
In a more restricted sense, the term mystical marriage is employed by St. Teresa and St. John of the Cross to designate that mystical union with God which is the most exalted condition attainable by the soul in this life. It is also called a “transforming union”, “consummate union”, and “deification”. St. Teresa likewise calls it “the seventh resting-place” of the “interior castle”; she speaks of it only in that last treatise which she composed five years before her death, when she had been but recently raised to this degree. This state consists of three elements:
•The first is an almost continual sense of the presence of God, even in the midst of external occupations. This favour does not of itself produce an alienation of the senses; ecstasies are more rare. Nor does this permanent sense of God’s presence suffice to constitute the spiritual marriage, but is only a state somewhat near to it.
•The second element is a transformation of the higher faculties in respect to their mode of operation: hence the name “transforming union”; it is the essential note of the state. The soul is conscious that in its supernatural acts of intellect and of will, it participates in the Divine life and the analogous acts in God. To understand what is meant by this, it must be remembered that in heaven we are not only to enjoy the vision of God, but to feel our participation in His nature. Mystical writers have sometimes exaggerated in describing this grace; it has been said that we think by the eternal thought of God, love by His infinite love, and will by His will. Thus, they appear to confound the two natures, the Divine and the human. They are describing what they believe they feel; like the astronomers, they speak the language of appearances, which we find easier to understand. Here, as in human marriage, there is a fusion of two lives.
•The third element consists in an habitual vision of the Blessed Trinity or of some Divine attribute. This grace is sometimes accorded before the transforming union. Certain authors appear to hold that in the transforming union there is produced a union with the Divine Word more special than that with the other two Divine Persons; but there is no proof that this is so in all cases. St. Teresa gives the name of “spiritual betrothal” to passing foretastes of the transforming union, such as occur in raptures.
@mpoulin,
Michael, I put in a response to your comment to SOOBS, above. Hope you’ll give it a look. God Bless
Every Holy Hour we make so pleases the Heart of Jesus that it will be recorded in Heaven and retold for all eternity
Mother Teresa
True?
False?
Maybe?
Maybe. God is the sole judge of hearts and souls, and his knowledge of the individual –even better than they know themselves–is why your pointing out only the things Mother Teresa did that appeared to be unquestionably good to you, tends to backfire.
A Holy hour can be used for good or otherwise, just like every other hour of every day. In fact, a person might entertain evil in their heart before the Holy Sacrament for an hour, due to giving in to temptations of any sort, would you not consider that displeasing to God?
Mother Teresa is obviously a person who labored very hard and long for what she convinced herself was the will of God. But she was apparently also deluded by the modernist thinking about not converting those in false religions. It’s up to God to judge whether that grave evil disqualified her entering heaven. It’s up to us who know our Faith, to consider it a grave matter, and AVOID imitating her in that.
Ideally, the hierarchy of the Church should be trustworthy in sifting through the known lives of candidates for Sainthood, and traditionally this entailed making sure that their lives were not scandalous, so they could be held up for imitation without being a detriment to souls.
Because so many in the hierarchy today have betrayed our trust, laymen like us are more than ever in need of knowing the Faith passed on to us from Christ through the Apostles, and down through the ages. I personally see a dramatic contradiction between those and the actions and words of many in the Church since Vatican II, and THEY attribute that to Vatican II and it’s “spirit”.
So while these confusing times persist, we hunker down and pray, and continue to hold fast to the Faith we were given.
Your persistence in deifying Mother Teresa by pointing only to what you find irreproachable in her words and actions, in my opinion is only hurting her reputation, as it leads people to try to verify your position via the internet.
There, they did up so-called “quotes from nuns who say they worked with her”
which may even be planted by her enemies, and only confuse the matter. So people like me then look to Mother’s own words to try to understand her better. The more we see of them, the more she appears to have been guilty of indifferentism, which is a heresy.
This is why I believe we should neither try to push her sanctity nor condemn her to hell, but leave the judgment of her “goodness” to God. Confusing times don’t make us the hierarchy. We are merely laymen with responsibilities to live according to rightly formed consciences.
We assemble evidence to judge ACTIONS, not hearts. We’re supposed to emulate the saints in what they do, not just pray for their intercession. Should we all smoke cigars like St. Padre Pio?
Here is how it is explained away by EWTN:
Quote:
(Pope Eugene IV, Cantate Domino, 1441 Question from James O’Reilly on 4/5/2002:)
This document is authentic. from the Council of Florence. Father Christopher Buckner of our diocese, commenting on it in an article, describes its historical context as follows: “The key to this passage is the four categories mentioned, pagans being listed first. They have received none of the message of salvation. The Jews have received only part of the message, that of the Old Testament. Third are the heretics who, although having received the complete message of salvation, seem to have lost some of it by way of a conscious separation from the Church. The fourth group is the one to whom the document is primarily directed, the schismatics. They have deliberately cut themselves off from the Church by a complete break from its head, the Pope. The reason for the strength of this statement was that it was hoped that it would bring the separated Eastern Churches back into unity with Rome. Such a strong statenebt was issued againnst the schismatics because of the relation between unity and charity. St. Thomas holds that unity is made by charity and therefore the schismatics are separating themselves from the unity and therefore the charity of the Church. The concern of the Council of Florence was pastoral; it was trying to bring back lost sheep.” The Church has always taught that no soul is lost except by its own fault, its rejection of truth and charity. Simply adhering to another religion does not necessarily mean such rejection. – Dr. Carroll [end]
Source: http://www.ewtn.com/v/experts/showmessage.asp?number=316548
Sorry but I will not change my opinion and here is why.
.
You said – ” This is a concept begun by Our Lord. ” Except there is absolutely no Scriptural support for a mystical marriage between Jesus and an individual – Jesus never taught it. You jump to the claim that “early saints” taught it.
.
Many early converts were raised in the milieu of Greco-Roman paganism and took their prejudices of that culture with them, especially those from Alexandria -so the private experiences of “early saints” cannot be trusted to inform the Catholic. The Church has held that private writings of Saints are not binding on Catholics, which is wise because quite honestly they are full of errors.
.
And, don’t you think it is strange that this so-called “mystical marriage to Jesus ” is only largely granted to and experienced by females? Christian men are locked out?
.
If one actually reads Scripture one reads that Our Lord said that in Heaven people neither marry nor are given in marriage, which seems to blow the whole idea out of the water.
.
Next you quote the Catholic Encyclopeadia, which is a fine source of historical information, yet it is not authoritative or binding. Then you jump into the private revelations of mystics, which again is never binding upon Catholics.
.
You bolster your arguments with examples of human made paintings and artwork, which is again non-binding and irrelevant.
.
Not saying that one cannot be granted a vision of God, such as St Stephen – but making claims that “Jesus is my husband” by females is another example of individual suppressed Catholic’s wishful erotic thinking.
Dear helpuslord,
Thank you,as there is much in what you say that is helpful and worth reflecting upon.
I would take exception however in your comment on ” deifying ” her, as opposed to defending her.
There is a tendency to focus on one comment taken out of a long and holy life, with no reference to all that is good and inspiring about the rest of that life.
One could equally pounce on St Peter’s denial of Christ, and say ” How can we learn anything from a man who would openly deny Jesus?”
Or look at the lifestyle and heresies embraced by St Augustine, and disregard all that he subsequently did and taught…
I surely wish her only comments about conversion had ended with her reference to her Catholicism being a great treasure that she wished all could discover, combined with this Faith itself being a gift.
I understand that the quotes of wanting others to be better Hindus, etc, can come across as Classic indifferentism, unless understood in the light of anyone trying to approach God ,albeit without the light of Christ, might receive an actual grace, and be given the gift of faith, perhaps sparked by them seeing her dressed as a Christian nun, willing to help anyone without demanding their conversion in order to be eligible to receive that help…along the lines of so called ” rice Christians ” of China who ” converted” for bowls of rice
If I could have rescripted her response to the question ” Are you trying to convert those you are trying to help ? “, I would have simply said…….
“Yes”
Ecumenism is the new “god” of the postconciliar “church”. Therefore, Mother Teresa is definitely a saint for our time, with JP2 leading the way.
However, the bottom line for me is if Mother Teresa is in Heaven (and therefore a saint), that is exactly where she belongs because God doesn’t make mistakes. If, however, she is not in heaven, there is no process or canonization ceremony which will open the gates of Heaven for her or anyone else. As Catholics were are obliged to pray for all the faithful departed. That alone is the answer for the Church Suffering. Mother Teresa was not canonized because of her heroic virtue alone. She was canonized for her ecumenical spirit.
The earliest example of the idea that women religious should think of themselves a spouses of Christ is St Jerome In Epistle 22 to Eustochium written about 384AD. In it he erroneously quotes the Song of Songs about 22 times. But there is nothing in Song of Songs that indicates anything beyond human love – it is something entirely made up in Jerome’s imagination. I am free to reject opinions of Catholics that just make stuff up out of thin air. Catholics continually bind onto these ideas and and, by repeating them enough times and quoting each other ad infinitum, they think it becomes “Catholic” teaching.
” ….estimated by Dr. Imbert that, history has recorded seventy-seven mystical marriages; they are mentioned in connection with female saints, beatae, and venerabiles.”
…
So, Jesus made marriage for one man and one woman – yet He takes 77 from the flock as His own spouses? Yet since I am supposed to walk in His ways I am sure my wife will accept 76 sister-wives.
That is so much bull shit I don’t where to begin.
Bishop de Galarreta, SSPX:
“Archbishop Lefebvre used to say to us, They Have Dethroned Him. Yes, they systematically disregarded the primacy and the royalty of Our Lord, His rights, the rights of God. They are for human rights. The denial of the rights of God with the declaration of the rights of man. They dethroned Our Lord in Himself, in His rights by freedom of conscience, by freedom of thought, by the freedom to sin, by freedom of worship, by religious freedom. He has truly been dethroned. But they also dethroned Our Lord in His Church through ecumenism, for if Christ is king, the Church is the queen. And they dethroned Our Lord in His Vicar and in His bishops by collegiality and by the demolition, ultimately, of all authority.”
Dear Ever mindful,
The choice of the word “deifying” rather than “defending” seems very appropriate. I hope you take this in the fraternal charity in which I offer it to you.
Until now, your only response to the many legitimate criticisms of what I call Mother Teresa’s harmful, falsely ecumenical words and actions, was to post numerous other examples of what you consider her good deeds and Catholic thought and intentions, as if the sheer number and obvious innocence of them, should make that other “little problem” go away without another mention of it. I still get that impression from what you wrote here, and humbly ask you to examine your beliefs to see if you are a modernist regarding false ecumenism, and perhaps are in denial about it.
You wrote that her words “CAN COME ACROSS AS Classic indifferentism, UNLESS UNDERSTOOD IN THE LIGHT OF etc.. and go on to describe a non-Christian who “might receive an actual grace and be given the faith, perhaps sparked” by –basically her Christian mode of dress or no-strings approach to helping everyone.
Her desire that they be mysteriously or subtly influenced in the direction of our Faith, while deliberately deciding not to SPEAK of it to them or to attempt to convert them AWAY from their false beliefs, is exactly what makes it indifferent.
You then add that YOU would have put another response in her mouth when she was asked if she wanted to convert people, and had her just say yes. But her own words make your substitute response COMPLETELY UNTRUE. She said she was trying to make them “better” Hindus, Muslims, etc, which shows she did not regard it as necessary for them to convert to the One, true Faith, in order to be saved.
The most charitable assessment of her intentiions I can give regarding that, would be that maybe she believed they would “somehow’ be saved by the Church, without ever hearing about it from her, or being urged to join it. This amounts to spiritual criminal negligence, as does the attitude you described in trying to defend her.
Basically you are excusing her decision to remain silent, and trying to claim as the modernists all do, that the best thing to DO with non-believers, is to give them worldly charity with NO dogma, NO WARNINGS that their beliefs are harmful to their souls, and most of all, leaving them without the teachings of Our Lord about their NEED to accept Him and come into His Church and receive His Eucharistic life within them, in order to be saved from eternal damnation. As her fame grew, so did her spreading of this scandalous example of unwillingness to proselytize. (Not really a surprise, given the modernist support of that behavior coming from Rome itself these days).
That lasted till her death, with no apparent change. Peter and Augustine both converted and repented from their sins, and afterward led lives that so closely followed Christ, they incurred the wrath of the world, rather than its acclamation.
Christ sent His followers out to teach the nations all that He taught, and to observe the Commandments, as well as their need to be Baptized. We Catholics -especially Catholics who call themselves Missionaries–are commanded to follow Him and to imitate Him in our speech to others, and as a result, to expect the world to hate us, for doing so. Pagans and the fallen away and sinners do not like people who tell them the truth, that their current way of life is wrong and leads to hell.
As St. Paul wrote in Romans 10:
” For if thou confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and believe in thy heart that God hath raised him up from the dead, thou shalt be saved.”
For, with the heart, we believe unto justice; but, WITH THE MOUTH, confession is made unto salvation… [11] For the scripture saith: Whosoever believeth in him, shall not be confounded. For there is no distinction of the Jew and the Greek: for the same is Lord over all, rich unto all that call upon him. For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord, shall be saved.
[14] HOW THEN SHALL THEY CALL ON HIM in whom they have not believed? OR HOW SHALL THEY BELIEVE HIM, OF WHOM THEY HAVE
NOT HEARD? ”
Modernists have fallen for false philosophies like the one you apparently believe, that condemn ordinary teaching and urging conversion for the good of souls, as uncharitable force and pressure tactics and every other appellation they can give it, in order to silence Catholics and prevent us from trying to convert the nations. They believe in a cosmic oneness towards which we are all moving. If Jesus believed in that, He would not have sent His apostles to the Jews first, nor said their rejection of belief in Him, itself, condemned them. They were told the truth and given the option to accept or reject it. He did not “accompany” them and leave the rest to the Holy Spirit.
Most of this has been said numerous times already, so I don’t expect it will immediately affect your thinking. But I do hope you will consider the likelihood, that your love for kindness and the appearance of mercy, has led you to fall for the great deception, that Our Lord said would fool “even the elect if that were possible”. I personally think about that a lot, as I study the Scriptures and Church teachings, and pray.
Yes, Julie, I had just finished reading the same thing right before I wrote. I noticed how they didn’t touch the part about even if one’s blood is spilled in the name of Jesus -it doesn’t matter unless it were done within the Church. I don’t know how much clearer it could be written. Some will NEVER open their eyes or ears -only their perfect mouths.
“Of course I convert. 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.”
-Agnes Bojaxhiu (Mother Teresa), Maryknoll, Vol. 92, Catholic Foreign Mission Society of America, 1998, p. 317
Just how do you become a better protestant? By protesting harder against Our Lord’s Church? Or by coming up with more creative ways to torture Catholics if that happens to be needed again in the future?
Dear helpusLord,
Thank you once again for your comments, and the clarity of stressing that , yes, we must proclaim the Good News, that we must proselytise, that we must make it clear that there is no other way than He who clearly said, ” I am the Way.”
Was, is Mother Teresa a saint or isn’t she? She might very well be one but why not wait a hundred years or more and see it all the more clearly then. I have a big problem with these rushed canonizations. And I think she would too.
That is exactly what I have realised.
Masonic religious indifferentism lead to false ecumenism.
False ecumenism lead to abolishing the requirement to profess the True Faith (Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis) in order to be a member of the Church – now its just Baptism + any heresy you want. That’s why heretics are welcome in the Novus Ordo Church.
It lead to the invention Novus Ordo Mass, a non-Catholic rite that was deliberately constructed to (purportedly at least) open the doors to interfaith “worship”.
Those who publicly profess religious indifferentism cut themselves off from the Church, and if they claim to be a pope, they are nothing of the sort, and not protected by the Holy Ghost from teaching error.
Well explained. The Catholic Faith is never unreasonable.
We must just stay at the foot of the Cross with Our Lady, dear Cortez.
Stay close to Our Lady, with Rosary beads and scapular, as you have often said here.
Stay strong (pray for fortitude and final perseverance) and don’t lose heart.
I have learned MUCH from your postings.
May God bless you and reward you and your dear ones, Cortez.
Dear Ever mindful,
One of the excellent points that helpusLord has posted above for you, I have re-posted here:
–
“That lasted till her death, with no apparent change. Peter and Augustine both converted and repented from their sins, and afterward led lives that so closely followed Christ, they incurred the wrath of the world, rather than its acclamation.”
–
This is an important distinction. Mother Theresa had never recalled her heretical words. Because they were made PUBLICALLY they must be recanted publically in order to make restitution or reparation.
Saints Peter and Augustine both repented of their sins, and all the world knows (or can know) their story of reparation.
May God reward you with the Truth, Who is Jesus Christ Himself.
Excellent, helpusLord.
Thank you.
Michael, please accept my apology if my response seemed to trivialized your knowledge regarding this subject, and that in turn angered or frustrated you, as it seems.
I honestly believed from what you first wrote, that you were unaware of the information I provided, and expected a response more in the line of “Oh, wow, I had no idea.” Instead I find myself saying those words.
Your opinion struck me as unusual and surprising for a fellow Catholic, as it seemed to relegate the writings of so many Saints, including doctors of the Church, to the mental trash-heap containing all victims of suppressed erotic thinking and/or carried over pagan programming –if I understand what you’re saying. That was actually a shock to read.
Claiming no expertise, I’ve studied a number of their autobiographies and writings, and not seen any indication of such things in those of St Theresa of Avila and John of the Cross, for example, who relate the concept almost entirely to progress in the practice of virtues, and never to anything physical. St. Catherine of Sienna, struck me as a reliable, strong personality, willing to correct a Pontiff and verbally chastise all who were too weak to speak the truth under fire, responsible for the condemnation of Catholic “silence”, such as we are experiencing today.
I’m not at all convinced you’re right about this, but that’s mostly my gut-reaction.
Thanks for the response. You’re piqued my curiosity about this matter, enough to set aside some research time. I still hope to find that you’ve misconstrued it, as the limited understanding I have gained from my reading so far, gave me a much different impression.
We’ll see.
God Bless.
I’ve been thinking about this, too. If she’s in Purgatory, she would obviously want no part of this modernist rush to canonize their own; and would want the world to know exactly where she seriously erred and to pray for her soul. She’d be eternally grateful to have these scandalous quotes analyzed and denounced, to prevent their leading others astray till the end of time.
On a lighter note, people can go ahead and pray to St Terese. If Mother is not in heaven, there are a few others by that name who can handle the new traffic 🙂
Correction on spelling — PUBLICLY.
The theological ancestor of Theresa’s mistaken belief to “make a Moslem a good Moslem, a Hindu a good Hindu ” etc etc is the mistaken idea that all non-Christians are our neighbors.
.
The idea that “everybody is our neighbor” bit is a sheer invention of St Augustine. It did not exist before him. The particular book that he pulls this theological sleight of hand is in:
On Christian Doctrine Book 1 Chapter 30-32 — Whether Angels are to Be Reckoned Our Neighbors
.
There is no justification for his opinion, he just flat out states it and then calls everyone who disagrees a fool. Because Christians are supposed to act neighborly, the pagans are too , so that makes them our neighbors.
.
The end result is Augustine just overulled Jesus Christ who said the man who acts mercifully is the good neighbor.
.
Of course you can act neighborly towards an outsider, act with love and mercy, but he in turn does not automatically become a “neighbor” until he acts the same.
.
So Augustine’s opinion and mis-use of scripture has blurred the distinction between the outsiders and members of the Church. His error has echoed down the ages and has been repeated so many times everyone assumes its doctrine,,., just because Augustine said it. But this is not the first time that Catholic bishops try to turn what is a mere opinion by a loquacious bishop into “doctrine” and force feed it to the laity.
Ideas have consequences, and bad ideas have bad consequences- and today’s bad consequence is that we have saints being canonized that say “don’t bother becoming Catholic – keep worshiping demons” an idea that will echo through time and knock over Catholic doctrine like bowling pins.
Good one. I often wonder what good can come from these rushed canonizations. Time will tell. Just for argument’s sake…can the Church de-saint a saint?
I wonder if you would take the time to read the personal correspondence between Mother Teresa’s personal physician and long time friend, Rama P. Coomaraswamy, who rightly labeled her as a syncretist while proving without a doubt, the Novus Ordo is an abomination.
This correspondence is very lengthy but worth the time reading it.
http://www.the-pope.com/mteresa1.html
These are the few ways we can practice humility:
To accept insults and injuries.
To accept being slighted, forgotten and disliked.
Mother Teresa of Calcutta
Well she forgot to say we can practice humility for the glory of different Hindu Devils but never for Christ.
“What I am doing is giving you the opportunity to do works of charity. Through these works, you come closer to God because works of charity brings you closer to God.” Obviously this poor nun doesn’t know basic Catechism for her work of mercy only for corporal work of mercy not the infinitely more important Spiritual Work of Mercy. She has no desire to share the Gospels because in her heart she believes another Gospels.
The interview shows she is not a Christian though she used the word “Jesus” but that is another Jesus not what Catholics believe Christ the Redeemer. In fact as long as you are poor you are Jesus to her. Just where did she get her Catechism?
“To me – Jesus is my God. Jesus is my Spouse. Jesus is my Life. Jesus is my only Love. Jesus is my All in all” Just like Protestants she believes another Gospels, another “Jesus” To here Jesus is whoever is poor materially. heresy.