"her theology... Dabhar... earthiness as the meaning of humility... pantheism... divinization ...trust of images ... God as Mother ... fleshy
http://www.sol.com.au/kor/5_02.htm
The 1913 Catholic Encyclopedia article may be a bit more objective.
You wrote:
“She promoted “God as Mother”:”
Actually what she recognized was the generative power of Christ’s sacrifice. Hildegard of Bingen and Julian of Norwich both recognized that Christ’s lance wound would look like the entry way to a womb. Knowing that and their orthodox theology, they saw that Christ’s love filled heart was like a womb, and that His blood sacrifice nurtured the Church (and all the saved thereby). Hence, this (scroll down to the second picture; notice how it is coupled with Adam and Eve above it?):
http://home.comcast.net/~fraterholme/moralisee.html
The Church has long recognized these things:
“Indeed, in the sacrifice of the Cross, Christ gave birth to the Church as his Bride and his body. The Fathers of the Church often meditated on the relationship between Eve’s coming forth from the side of Adam as he slept (cf. Gen 2:21-23) and the coming forth of the new Eve, the Church, from the open side of Christ sleeping in death: from Christ’s pierced side, John recounts, there came forth blood and water (cf. Jn 19:34), the symbol of the sacraments (30). A contemplative gaze “upon him whom they have pierced” (Jn 19:37) leads us to reflect on the causal connection between Christ’s sacrifice, the Eucharist and the Church. The Church “draws her life from the Eucharist” (31). Since the Eucharist makes present Christ’s redeeming sacrifice, we must start by acknowledging that “there is a causal influence of the Eucharist at the Church’s very origins” (32). The Eucharist is Christ who gives himself to us and continually builds us up as his body. Hence, in the striking interplay between the Eucharist which builds up the Church, and the Church herself which “makes” the Eucharist (33), the primary causality is expressed in the first formula: the Church is able to celebrate and adore the mystery of Christ present in the Eucharist precisely because Christ first gave himself to her in the sacrifice of the Cross. The Church’s ability to “make” the Eucharist is completely rooted in Christ’s self-gift to her. Here we can see more clearly the meaning of Saint John’s words: “he first loved us” (1 Jn 4:19). We too, at every celebration of the Eucharist, confess the primacy of Christ’s gift. The causal influence of the Eucharist at the Church’s origins definitively discloses both the chronological and ontological priority of the fact that it was Christ who loved us “first.” For all eternity he remains the one who loves us first.”
Feminists twist this: http://www.sfsu.edu/~medieval/Volume%201/Hudson.html And some Protestants here at FR know too little to speak intelligently about these matters, but that never seems to stop them from posting about them anyway.
No she didn’t. Ninety percent of the stuff written about her is garbage from feminists and new-agers who distort her into a New Ager. Benedict has read her actual writings. They are fully orthodox.
Before you make judgments about her you have to cut through all the drivel written by fools about her.