ForumGarden

It has to be mentioned, since the beatification of Mother Teresa has been realised.

Mother Teresa of Calcutta has been canonised. So called miracles are still occurring, unless of course you are a child buried under rubble as a result of an earthquake.

A bizarre notion that a woman with abdominal pains was miraculously cured, even though she was being treated by doctors. To hell with children with bone cancer, eh ?

Mother was no Saint in the everyday sense of the word. She allowed children to suffer in pain in the belief that the suffering bought them closer to God.

"There is something beautiful in seeing the poor accept their lot, to suffer it like Christ's Passion. The world gains much from their suffering,"




It's a hideous belief and hideous that so many people give her and her the adoration she clearly doesn't deserve.

She didn't suffer the way her orphans did. She was gifted the comfort of a modern American hospital to help ease the pain of her passing. Maybe she was more concerned with the pain of dying than being closer to God herself.

Mother Teresa: Anything but a saint... | EurekAlert! Science News

I can fully comprehend past Saints qualifications, as in biblical times, the evidence required would not have been available and it would be difficult to rebut claims of miracles. The technology available today, i would have thought, made it nigh impossible to claim she had performed miracles.

How to Become a Saint in the Catholic Church - dummies

There was a recent local outcry at Rome's decision to declare Junipero Serra a saint. He, with the help of his soldiers, enslaved a local population of Native Americans so the empire he represented could profit from their labor and production. He preached at those he enslaved and wore the robes of a priest while doing it, making it a "missionary effort". The descendants of those who were enslaved were horrified that Rome was honoring him and calling him a saint.

Every religion has 'saints' its just a term used to denote a person who esteems some kind of holy upon holies. I dont know why anyone would care except Catholics themselves whether mother theresa is venerated.

You're right non catholics don't care if the catholic church has saints or not but these delusional people who see nothing wong with protecting paedophiles to protect their church claim the moral high ground and interfere with the lives of non believers around the world causing great harm in the process but because they do so in the name of religion are we supposed to just turn a blind eye? That they can make someone like maria theresa a saint is not something that should not be commented on.

I see a problem in judging without knowing all the facts and motivations and understanding.

Ted;1500928 wrote: I see a problem in judging without knowing all the facts and motivations and understanding.


Why would you assume that is the case?

Why? Do we really know what happened in many cases and the motivations for the actions. Then of course they are all filtered through human brains which are never perfect. One witness saiys it was a blue car and the next that it was red????????

gmc;1500905 wrote: You're right non catholics don't care if the catholic church has saints or not but these delusional people who see nothing wong with protecting paedophiles to protect their church claim the moral high ground and interfere with the lives of non believers around the world causing great harm in the process but because they do so in the name of religion are we supposed to just turn a blind eye? That they can make someone like maria theresa a saint is not something that should not be commented on.


It used to be a very long time before anyone could be cannonised a saint. But considering (under canon law) she considered a living saint.... this particular person had people working around the clock for years to make this happen.

Plus they have an image problem at the moment.

But i find commenting on a CEO being elected to a company as none of my business unless im a shareholder.

As i said its for Catholics to get off on spiritually, it doesnt affect anyone else.

Once it does though, then complain. Otherwise its just another story on the news. Like a royal wedding......no hang on! They broadcast those events live around the world.

magentaflame;1500935 wrote: It used to be a very long time before anyone could be cannonised a saint. But considering (under canon law) she considered a living saint.... this particular person had people working around the clock for years to make this happen.

Plus they have an image problem at the moment.

But i find commenting on a CEO being elected to a company as none of my business unless im a shareholder.

As i said its for Catholics to get off on spiritually, it doesnt affect anyone else.

Once it does though, then complain. Otherwise its just another story on the news. Like a royal wedding......no hang on! They broadcast those events live around the world.


It does become yours if the actions of that company have an effect on you and you have a right to object, If a big corporation does something and you are not a shareholder does not mean you cannot object. That so many take what the pope says as the word of god is epresing in this day and age. We readily condemn the islamic fundamentalist who unquestioningly blows himself up at the behest of a priest but it's no different in principle from those who are anti homosexual because someone told them that is what is in the bible.

It only bothers me if I let it do so. I can take a different view point.

It only becomes mine if I let it become mine. I can choose.

oops double

Ted;1500953 wrote: It only bothers me if I let it do so. I can take a different view point.


You can choose not to do anything or not let it bother you - bit harder to do if it has a direct impact on the way you live your life. What the pope says about contraception and abortion, for example, doesn't just affect those who are catholic.

Best defence I heard of mother theresa (tv discussion of the matter) is that she was behaving as a catholic. to non catholics it can seem she took pleasure in the suffering of others as it helped them on their way to find god. It's a bit like converting heretic by torturing them - all for the good of their souls.

Its a bit like I found in the book "Living the Secular Life". At one point the author sounded very much like a fundamentalist evangelical atheist. Yes far to many Christians sound like they think they have the only handle on the truth but that is what the some atheists also seem to believe. I resent anyone telling me they and they alone have the sole handle on the truth. They have no Idea what I have experienced. They were my experiences not their's. Science has a good deal of the truth but not by any means anywhere close to the totality. There are great mysteries in the universe and it is unlikely we will ever know everything. As a Christian humanist I do not proselytise. I try to live what I believe and the secular humanists are entitled to love as they believe. Pontificating on either side is a no no.

gmc;1500957 wrote: You can choose not to do anything or not let it bother you - bit harder to do if it has a direct impact on the way you live your life. What the pope says about contraception and abortion, for example, doesn't just affect those who are catholic.

Best defence I heard of mother theresa (tv discussion of the matter) is that she was behaving as a catholic. to non catholics it can seem she took pleasure in the suffering of others as it helped them on their way to find god. It's a bit like converting heretic by torturing them - all for the good of their souls.




The contraception and abortion beliefs are not just a catholic issue.

The abortion is across the board religious issue especially for christiansof all denominations.

magentaflame;1500962 wrote: The contraception and abortion beliefs are not just a catholic issue.

The abortion is across the board religious issue especially for christiansof all denominations.


True I was just using it as an example. Protestant demoninations are supposed to be able to find their own way to god and follow their own cionscience catholics are not. Actually fundamemtalists protestants are every bit a nasty as anyone else they're the ones in the past that tried to ban christmas, singing and dancing and laughter. Laugh and the devil gets in you're not put on earth to be ahppy but suffer and die - bit extreme but I actually know peopple who think like that. Miserable blighters the lot of them.

I don't really care that much when it comes to saints and such it's just the attitude you get that no one is supposed to comment or criticise and because as a non-believer you're supposed to just suck it all up without comment.

posted by ted

Its a bit like I found in the book "Living the Secular Life". At one point the author sounded very much like a fundamentalist evangelical atheist. Yes far to many Christians sound like they think they have the only handle on the truth but that is what the some atheists also seem to believe. I resent anyone telling me they and they alone have the sole handle on the truth. They have no Idea what I have experienced. They were my experiences not their's. Science has a good deal of the truth but not by any means anywhere close to the totality. There are great mysteries in the universe and it is unlikely we will ever know everything. As a Christian humanist I do not proselytise. I try to live what I believe and the secular humanists are entitled to love as they believe. Pontificating on either side is a no no.


Actually I'd agree with you there I've got little time for fundamental atheists (for want of a better term) they suffer from the same kind of arrogance as the religious version, overly impressed with their perspicacity and wisdom. Religion is so much part of the fabric of our culture I think evryone should study it but not in seperate religious schools but sitting next to people of all faiths.

came across this mob

http://www.atheist-experience.com/

Some of the discussions on you tube are fascinating but as a non-american it's also like looking in on a different planet, they talk about "coming out" as an atheist which is really weird.

gmc I do agree that discussions should involve all faiths together. I would like to add though Roman Catholics make a choice personally. When they start trying to impose their beliefs my response might be different. I do not expect others to believe as I do. We must each follow our own path.

gmc;1500968 wrote:

....perspicacity and wisdom.....




Perspicasity. Thats my new word of the week. Havent heard it used since Leonard Sachs, in the BBC's "The Good Old Days"

Snowfire;1501007 wrote: Perspicasity. Thats my new word of the week. Havent heard it used since Leonard Sachs, in the BBC's "The Good Old Days"


I find myself using words in a sentence looking at it and then thinking I'd better just check that word means what I think it does and I've used it in the right context. Perspicacity is one such word I suspect I used to be more knowledgeable in the past but mu memopry is fading.

Only going by what I 've read and heard of this Mother Teresa, I certainly have mixed feelings about just how christian, in fact, she was ! There are some indisputable facts that have emerged over time, concerning some cruel methods she used in her 'ministrations' in the so called 'name of God'. Also that apparently pain is meant to be in order to get closer to God ! This attitude, imo, was so horrifying when it was affecting children ! I feel I cannot find any thoughts one way or another towards this woman. I'm just glad that I am not religious !

Interesting history though. There are many different forms of Christianity around the world: some 22 000 to be close. Which one is correct. Whatever it is a personal thing. One mans behavior to one group is a terrorist and to another group a freedom fighter.?????

I'm staying out of this thread (See: username) But I will say this: If just performing a few miracles is the basis for sainthood, I totally qualify for the many times I have cheated death in stupid, alcohol-fueled, teenage escapades.

Ted;1500984 wrote: gmc I do agree that discussions should involve all faiths together. I would like to add though Roman Catholics make a choice personally. When they start trying to impose their beliefs my response might be different. I do not expect others to believe as I do. We must each follow our own path.


Do they make a choice though? That is the origin of the conflict between protestant and catholic - Read the bible for yourself and find your own personal jesus or do you follow the teachings of the bible as laid down by the catholic church which used to burn people as heretics for daring to print the bible in the language spoken by ordinary people so they could read it for themselves. Questioning the nicene creed used to be downright dangerous.

Catholics, or any relgion come to that, can make a choice to stay or join in a religion but arguably having it drummed in to you from childhood that failing to comply means you go to hell is quite a hard thing to walk away from.

Like I said earlier the best defence I heard was that she was a good catholic following the faith.

“Pain and suffering have come into your life, but remember pain, sorrow, suffering are but the kiss of Jesus - a sign that you have come so close to Him that He can kiss you.”

― Mother Teresa


No doubt she believed what she said whether you think that makes her a good catholic or a good person is up to you. Sadly making observations such as the above leaves me open to the charge of merely being anti-catholic thus in some weird way somehow making it not real. .

Saint_;1501028 wrote: I'm staying out of this thread (See: username) But I will say this: If just performing a few miracles is the basis for sainthood, I totally qualify for the many times I have cheated death in stupid, alcohol-fueled, teenage escapades.


You too huh? Lol actually not so much alcohol fuelled.....just blind bravado and stupidity. I was definately running out of lives . And then you have children! And you begin to remember all those stupid things that could be repeated .

gmc great post. I've been studying the Bible for some 55 years both formally and informally. I've learned to translate both the Hebrew OT and the Greek NT. KI do not accept dogma or doctrine as they are man's thing. I fallow my .own path as we must each do. Am I right or wrong? I sure as hell don't know. The central tenets of all of the great faiths were originally justice in the equatable sharing of all the earths resources, which we don't have, and compassion. I try to follow the teachings of Jesus as the great human being he was. I have learned an approach to understanding the Bible from a Jewish scholar, The Rev Rabbi Dr. Daum at the Vancouver School of Theology which is basically an open type of institution.. I try to be very reluctant to judge others. It's the old idea of Don't judge a man, person, until you've walked a mile in his/her moccasins. The best outline of Jesus' teachings are to be found in Matthew 25 where we are told to clothe the naked, feed the hungry, care for the sick and dying, visit those in prison etc. A lot of the Bible is in itself midrash and ancient Jewish style of writing and interpreting. The modern view is more interpretation. The Bible like all ancient sacred texts were not to be taken literally. I have studied at WLU< Ottawa U, x2, some at Queens and some at UBC as well as my personal associations with some of the world's top scholars. This is not in any way to brag these are simply facts.

I know that Mother Therese has helped many. Whether or not I agree with her theology is unimportant but I have not walked a mile in her shoes. As Pope Francis, while I'm not a Catholic has said "Who am I to judge"?

Well Ted i was raised strict roman catholic.....i dont consider myself one anymore, yet to hand in my resigmation yet and officially renounce(its a lot of paperwork)

We as children were told to pray to Theresa as a living saint as you pray to Mary or other saints. If id been allowed to read the bible at an earlier age i would have lknown this to be wrong.

We had bible study at school until year twelve girls used the bible to prove that Mary was not a virgin. After this we were heavily supervised. Lol.

What amazes me is that there are a lot of people who do exactly what theresa did. Like i said before its only the business of Catholics, but she came to peoples attention because she fought quite often the church itself.

Ted;1501072 wrote: I know that Mother Therese has helped many. Whether or not I agree with her theology is unimportant but I have not walked a mile in her shoes. As Pope Francis, while I'm not a Catholic has said "Who am I to judge"?


It's not her theology that's the issue it's her actions. If, as is suggested, her theology led her to not give medicine to those in need because it brought them closer to god if a non religious person did that it would be regarded as sadistic neglect. I'm sorry but her actions can be judged her christian morality is not somehow superior to everyone elses

If the theology leads a fundamentalist muslim to blow himself up iin defence of his religion then his theology is not a justification imo. If the religious prevent access to contraception in aids written countries or soon to be zika virus epidemic ones because iof their faith then i'm sorry just because I don't agree with their theology does not mean I or anyone should not be able to comment. If it was only themselves they sought to govern there would be no issue.

While we're at it i find it deeply hypocritical that the pope can visit auschwitz and not even acknowledge the part two thousand years of teaching the jews killed jesus played in those events

gmc as I said earlier there are some 22000 variations on the theme. Many of them claim that they and they alone have the only truth. There are so many views and instances of misuse of the Christian message in the world today. Look at xFrod he claims the only true Christianity is fundamentalism. Historically that is pure nonsense.. The Jews did not kill Jesus of Nazareth it was the Roman army and authorities. He was killed for subversive behavior and treason. He was seen as a threat to the state. And yes some of the Gospel writers did seem to blame the Jews but they too were Jews with maybe the exception of Luke who may have been a gentile. You have one sense of morality, which I don't contest but others have a different view. I think that morality also depends on the situation. There is no black and white as such.

posted by ted

I think that morality also depends on the situation. There is no black and white as such.


I actually agree with you. That's really my point her actions because they are justified by her theology are not somehow above reproach yet that is exactly what we get from every religious organisation on the planet. It's my faith don't criticise you do not have the right as a nonmbeliever to question my actions far less my blief.

You do have the right to criticized if it becomes a public issue. ie proselytizing.