Sadistic Celebrity Nun Sainted.

[dafluff]

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/progre...religious-fanatic-mother-teresa-was-no-saint/

Dr. Chatterjee said he found a “cult of suffering” in homes run by Mother Teresa’s organization, with children tied to beds and little to comfort dying patients but aspirin. In addition, Dr. Chatterjee confirms Teresa allowed practices like the reuse of hypodermic needles and tolerating primitive facilities that required patients to defecate in front of one another.

Yet when it came to her own death, Teresa refused to be treated in one of her own unsanitary facilities that glorified and promoted the suffering and pain of others. Researchers said that when it came to her own treatment, “she received it in a modern American hospital.” Apparently for Teresa suffering was beautiful only if it was someone else doing the suffering.

Just throwing this out here to balance the Vatican hype machine.

 

[Puspawarna]

Apparently Mother Teresa was a real piece of work. Probably the only reason that this view is not more universally embraced is because Christopher Hitchens made it his mission to debunk her. He was so vicious about it (and so contemptuous a writer in general, regarding religion) that I think his efforts backfired. CH is a good case study in how you don't win converts (so to speak) by being relentlessly nasty.

 

[Tupai Hitam]

CH is a good case study in how you don't win converts (so to speak) by being relentlessly nasty.

He won me over.

 

[atlantis]

He won me over.

Come on, you can do better than that TH.
Why did he win you over? Would you please enlighten us about the reason why you believe Mother Theresa should not be considered a Saint?

My question and interest are genuine. I know very little about Mother Theresa and even less about Christopher Hitchens.

 

[Puspawarna]

He won me over.

Sure, TH, but you are a rational person and most likely predisposed to agree with Hitchens anyway, as am I. But he's just "preaching to the choir"* if he only informs people who are suspicious of religious institutions anyway. The real accomplishment would be if his writing made sincere Catholics take a more skeptical look at Mother T. As far as I know (and I could be wrong), he did not achieve that.

He was not her only critic, of course. But he was her loudest and best-known.

*Interesting how religious idioms keep cropping up.

 

[Puspawarna]

atlantis - here is some commentary about the Hitchens/Teresa matter. It's quite partisan (what else would one expect, given the source?) but shows the sort of response Hitchens tended to elicit.

http://www.nationalreview.com/artic...-christopher-hitchens-charity-catholic-church

 

[Tupai Hitam]

Why did he win you over? Would you please enlighten us about the reason why you believe Mother Theresa should not be considered a Saint?

I had been raised to believe that she was virtually a saint, living in extreme hardship to help the poorest of the poor. But Hitchens pointed out that she was not trying to alleviate any of the root causes of poverty. Instead, she was telling people to suffer (and become Roman Catholics on their deathbeds) in order to get to heaven. Much funding went to her missionary work, rather than poverty alleviation programs. (That said, I think A LOT of modern development aid programs are a big waste of time and money.)

I don't think anyone should be made a saint (unless it's just for fun). I think organized religion is dumb. I don't mind a modicum of spirituality (provided it fosters a sense of yearning for scientific learning). I prefer kindness to be motivated by inherent compassion, rather than any religious motivation.

As for Mother Teresa's miracle: A load of crap. Conjuring tricks are not medicine. Positive thinking is wonderful and can aid recovery, but purveying prayer as a cure-all is dangerously dumb.

 

[Bad_azz]

I had been raised to believe that she was virtually a saint, living in extreme hardship to help the poorest of the poor. But Hitchens pointed out that she was not trying to alleviate any of the root causes of poverty. Instead, she was telling people to suffer (and become Roman Catholics on their deathbeds) in order to get to heaven. Much funding went to her missionary work, rather than poverty alleviation programs. (That said, I think A LOT of modern development aid programs are a big waste of time and money.)

I don't think anyone should be made a saint (unless it's just for fun). I think organized religion is dumb. I don't mind a modicum of spirituality (provided it fosters a sense of yearning for scientific learning). I prefer kindness to be motivated by inherent compassion, rather than any religious motivation.

As for Mother Teresa's miracle: A load of crap. Conjuring tricks are not medicine. Positive thinking is wonderful and can aid recovery, but purveying prayer as a cure-all is dangerously dumb.

What he said.

I see MT as the RC church glorifying a female figure 'cos so many of the male figures have been too busy shafting choirboys.
Sadly old MT was a product of her generation. A saint? well so am I, at times.

I cured my assistant's boil... I put my potion on it and told him to hope it worked - and it popped 30 minutes later.

 

[Scooterindo]

She saw human suffering as an act of god to be accepted and embraced by the sufferer as way of them turning to god and asking for forgiveness. What a load of bullshit.

 

[Puspawarna]

I cured my assistant's boil... I put my potion on it and told him to hope it worked - and it popped 30 minutes later.

Saint Bad_Azz!

 

[Puspawarna]

Much funding went to her missionary work, rather than poverty alleviation programs. (That said, I think A LOT of modern development aid programs are a big waste of time and money.)

A distinction between most "modern development programs" and her programs is that at least the funds provided to government programs are documented and audited, with reports on expenditures routinely issued. As far as I know, her charities have never produced financial reports showing where the money goes.

 

[Bad_azz]

A distinction between most "modern development programs" and her programs is that at least the funds provided to government programs are documented and audited, with reports on expenditures routinely issued. As far as I know, her charities have never produced financial reports showing where the money goes.

Probably because she was a Saint-in-waiting and therefore beyond reproach- *eyeroll*

 

[William King]

Money which is still unaccounted for.

She is also a hypocrite, denied pain reliving medicines to the poor in her clinics, went to 1st class hospitals in Italy and US when she was ill.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/krithika-varagur/mother-teresa-was-no-saint_b_9470988.html

 

[ukcouple]

A quick Google for Mother Teresa Clinics..

"..her order includes nearly 600 clinics, orphanages, soup kitchens, maternity homes, refugee centers, and homes for the poor, sick, and dying in more than 100 countries."

These are facilities which would not exist without Mother Teresa.

I think she deserves credit for what she has done. Many have benefited from her charity work.

So lets do the maths:
Mother Teresa Clinics and Orphanages = 600
ukcouple Clinics and Orphanages = 0

Botton Line.. Credit where credit is due.

 

[jstar]

Now that makes a lot of sense ukcouple, glad you bring it up. I don't know her and don't know what's true about these allegations. But for an old school nun (cf. Jezuites) some things might be normal what would make other people shiver. (I remember the hitting on the hand by ruler if you wanted to write with your left hand.)

And I realize the good and bad she did was probably also (partly) stimulated by her own religious beliefs. And yes, there could be side effects but for some everything that is a bit 'religious' must have hidden motives or is at least suspicious. So let's throw away the baby with the bathwater; she was a sadistic stealing hypocrite [sic].

a quote from her:

If you judge people, you have no time to love them.

 

[Tupai Hitam]

... at least the funds provided to government programs are documented and audited, with reports on expenditures routinely issued.

Documentation alone is not enough to prevent development programs from becoming obscene gravy trains. Look at this awesome project by AusAID to save Kalimantan's peatlands, A$47 million down the drain: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...-carbon-project-abandoned-20130702-2p98w.html

I've been involved in development projects where double book-keeping was employed, where there were flagrant mark-ups, where targets were massively scaled back, where third-party contractors were grossly overpaid to cock things up, where vast funds disappeared in meetings, hotels and "capacity building training" (which involved a PowerPoint slideshow in a village shed). Lots of overpaid halfwits in some development projects. Sure, some projects and organizations are good, but some are rotten, especially when operating hand-in-hand with the halfwits at Bappenas.

 

[Puspawarna]

Documentation alone is not enough to prevent development programs from becoming obscene gravy trains. Look at this awesome project by AusAID to save Kalimantan's peatlands, A$47 million down the drain: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...-carbon-project-abandoned-20130702-2p98w.html

I've been involved in development projects where double book-keeping was employed, where there were flagrant mark-ups, where targets were massively scaled back, where third-party contractors were grossly overpaid to cock things up, where vast funds disappeared in meetings, hotels and "capacity building training" (which involved a PowerPoint slideshow in a village shed). Lots of overpaid halfwits in some development projects. Sure, some projects and organizations are good, but some are rotten, especially when operating hand-in-hand with the halfwits at Bappenas.

I strongly disagree with your characterisation that the development world is universally corrupt, but setting that aside for a moment: Mother Teresa's charities are not financially accountable to anyone, whereas many development projects do have to account for their expenditures and that information is a matter of public record. Surely that's a distinction that matters.

 

[john madden]

I strongly disagree with your characterisation that the development world is universally corrupt ...

C'mon Puspa, TH has never said that.

 

[waarmstrong]

Unlike the saints of old, it was unfortunate for Mother Teresa that she was born into a time of letters where her actual works and beliefs are pretty well documented. Fortunately for her, or at least for her posterity, the Church has a celebrated history of ignoring facts when such serves its need for heros. Hitchens views are certainly, deliciously nasty, but they are more in tune with the facts than the story of fiction composed by the saint-makers in the Vatican.

 

[William King]

A quick Google for Mother Teresa Clinics..

"..her order includes nearly 600 clinics, orphanages, soup kitchens, maternity homes, refugee centers, and homes for the poor, sick, and dying in more than 100 countries."

These are facilities which would not exist without Mother Teresa.

I think she deserves credit for what she has done. Many have benefited from her charity work.

So lets do the maths:
Mother Teresa Clinics and Orphanages = 600
ukcouple Clinics and Orphanages = 0

Botton Line.. Credit where credit is due.

Millions of dollars ....for what ? Substanard and dirty clinics where pain relief is banned?