Has anyone read "The Science of the Cross" by Edith Stein?  

"The Science of the Cross" is a commentary on the "Dark Night of the Soul" by St John of the Cross. Edith Stein was a convert to the Catholic Faith. At the time that she wrote it she was a nun in a Discalced Carmelite convent in the Netherlands. Just as she finnished it, the nαzιs came and arrested her and her sister. (also a discalced carmelite in the same convent) She died in a cσncєnтrαтισn cαмρ.      

Quote from: Zeitun

I try to stay away from heretical works.

I have not read any of her works, why is she a heretic?

Marsha

She is not a heretic. She was a convert who entered the discalced Carmelites. She wrote a commentary on St John of the Cross while she was in their house in the Netherlands at the request of the mother superior there. As she srote the last words the nαzι police were banging on the door of the convent to arrest her and her sister. She gave her life for Christ and offered herself as a victim for her people. What have we done for Christ?    

I heard that she continued to attend the ѕуηαgσgυє after converting.

Thanks Pax! You're a font of knowledge on World War II.

Seems she's another fake saint.

I don't know much about Edith Stein (Theresa Benedicta). I recall reading information online that Jєωιѕн organizations protested when she was canonized because it was difficult to use the excuse of "self-hating Jєω" or implications of mental impairment to describe her conversion based on her writings.

Also, I read an article in Culture Wars from 2007 that referenced her dislike of тαℓмυdic sophistry in one of her books:

In her autobiography, Life in a Jєωιѕн Family, St. Edith Stein, the most renowned Jєωιѕн convert to Catholicism in recent history, relates a story about an observant Orthodox friend. And at the end of it, she makes a quite candid statement of her opinion of the тαℓмυd [Heb., study].

Quote

One day, when out walking with him, I had an errand in one of the houses we passed. In the doorway I suddenly handed him my briefcase to hold while I went in. Too late, it occurred to me that it was Saturday and one ought not to carry anything on the Sabbath. I found him dutifully awaiting me at the doorway. I apologized for thoughtlessly causing him to do something forbidden. ‘I haven’t done anything forbidden,’ he replied quietly. ‘Only on the street is one not to carry anything; it is allowed in the house.’ For that reason, he had remained in the entrance-hall, taking care not to put even one foot into the street. This was an example of the тαℓмυdic sophistry which I found so repugnant. But I made no comment.1

Of course, at the time of this event, St. Edith Stein was not judging the тαℓмυd as a Catholic, but merely as a secular Jєω with a decent head on her shoulders (to put it modestly), and uncommonly strong natural virtue.2 Yet, hers strikes me as the only proper Catholic attitude towards this collection of books. For that matter, Catholics have far weightier reasons to find the тαℓмυd repugnant than that it is sophistical, namely because it overturns the Word of God in Sacred Scripture and takes credit for the killing of Christ. To find it repugnant, then, is I think the only possible position a Catholic may take, once he knows everything these books contain. So, it will be my endeavor in this article to simply show people what’s in the тαℓмυd, and hopefully inculcate a proper attitude in Catholic readers, and correct the opposite error. To adapt a phrase from St. John Chrysostom (and yes, I know the original phrase was over the top), some, I know, respect the тαℓмυd and think that its method of biblical exegesis is a venerable one. This is why I hasten to uproot and tear out this deadly opinion.3....

Footnotes:
[1] St. Edith Stein, Life in a Jєωιѕн Family (Washington, D.C.: ICS Publications, 1986) pp. 212-213

[2] Jєωιѕн author David Novak writes, “Jєωs have been able to dismiss most modern Jєωιѕн converts to Christianity as people motivated by social or professional ambition, self-hatred, ignorance, or mental imbalance. But anyone who knew Edith Stein or who knows anything about her life would have to admit that none of these categories applies to her. Indeed, Edith Stein comes across as sui generis [i.e. one of a kind]. She might be the most uniquely problematic Jєω for us since Saul of Tarsus” (“Apostate Saint,” First Things 96 (October 1999) p. 15).

[3] Adapted from his first homily against the Judaizers.

The remainder of the article is available here: http://www.culturewars.com/2007/тαℓмυd.htm

I'm puzzled as to why she continued to go to the ѕуηαgσgυє and why she wasn't rejected by the local Jєωιѕн community.

She continued to go to the ѕуηαgσgυє with her mother, for awhile, to try to convince her mother that Catholicism was not what she thought it was and perhaps even to convert her.  

Quote from: Sigismund

She continued to go to the ѕуηαgσgυє with her mother, for awhile, to try to convince her mother that Catholicism was not what she thought it was and perhaps even to convert her.  

You think it is acceptable for a "convert" to attend a synagoge and celebrate Jєωιѕн religious holidays?

What if it is as a means to bring about the conversion of others? Her sister not only converted but went into the convent. In fact when the nαzιs soldiers came for her and her sister she went to get her sister. She said, Come sister, we are being called to die for our people." To die for the people is not to die so that they can have a miserable existence in this life. Her death was an offering to god for the conversion of her people. In fact I would ask you to join me in prayer for the conversion of others to the Catholic Faith.