Ignorance does not save anyone..if it did we would not send missionaries . It was HER stated job to be a missionary..that means she should have explained the falseness of their faith and proclaimed the gospel
Ignorance is no excuse before the throne of God
What is pathetic is reading right past her evident humility and devotion to Jesus to cherry pick quotes amenable to being interpreted as though she thought all religions were equally good.
It is not humility to believe that your good works substitute for the gospel and the work of Christ..that is nothing but pride.
Well put.
Thx.
This explains why Mother Teresa's words are not understood. I can post A and be met with an argument against, not even B or C, but Z. Bizarre!
It is not humility to believe that your good works substitute for the gospel and the work of Christ..that is nothing but pride.
I do not think you can show me where Mother Teresa said anything of the kind. The proposition you state is true but irrelevant. It has nothing to do with Mother Teresa.
It was HER stated job to be a missionary
Her "job"?
You think a vocation is a JOB?
And now you get to define terms for the Catholic Church? It doesn't say "Hanes" until you say it says "Hanes?" I grew up (well, aged anyway) in the so-called "Protestant Episcopal Church" and I knew that medical missionaries, much to everybody's surprise practiced, um, medicine.
This is now going to become a discussion of terminology? It would have been okay if she had taken a different name for her order? The problem is she used the word "Missionaries" and some Protestants think that necessitates preaching at the expense of everything else?
Part of the problem here is that your side does not trust God. You do not think that He knows how to run His missions. If someone goes out in a team that worships Him for hours every day and then goes and performs corporal works of mercy, you think that is not sufficiently Christian to warrant their use of a term in a manner common among Catholics but maybe less so among non-Catholics?
It's a very limited idea of evangelizing. If it's not confrontative and verbal it's not evangelical? "Look, ma'am, I'm sorry your kid is dying of cholera and I'm the only medical person in town, but I'm a missionary, so let him die. I have to preach now. I'll get back to you tomorrow about funeral arrangements. What's that? You'll go to the swami instead? That's okay; you were predestined for damnation. Have a cursed day."
So basically you think the Seventh Day Adventist physician, outside of maybe believing the wrong stuff, had the right idea of evangelizing because when I was in pain and drugged out of my gourd he came in to try to make me a Seventh Day Adventist? It was verbal, it was confrontative, it was urgent -- and it was contemptible.
A characteristic of co-dependents is that they force things to conclusions. They'd rather have someone stomp out of the room in a rage and receive no help than be patient so that they can receive a little help today and maybe a little more tomorrow.
Grant won the Civil War because he took his time and wasn't going for the big win tomorrow. If he'd been the addict some people thought he was, he would have preferred to force a full battle and lose it in a week rather than dog Lee's lines from Culpeper to Petersburg until Lee's army collapsed.
When I go fishing, I go prepared to take more than my lifetime to land a big one. It beats scaring them off by thrashing around in the water.Dante, Aquinas, and Mother Teresa contribute more conversions dead than the average preacher does while he's alive.
Of course, I do not have the luxury of saying Lee was predestined to win, those fish were predestined to get away. Grant was about winning. Successful fishermen are about landing fish.
Evangelizing can require patience with one's patients. I can assure you one thing I will never consider being is a 7th day Adventist.
Okay. I have been advised that sometimes it is better to back off. I'm off this pathetic travesty of a discussion until Thursday.