Mother Teresa was no saint

[MattusMaximus]

Of course, anyone who's read Christopher Hitchens's Missionary Position know this, but it's good that the news is getting out more widely now...

http://guardianlv.com/2013/10/mother-teresa-was-no-saint-says-study/

Internationally revered Catholic nun Mother Teresa and her legacy are the subjects of a new study released by University of Ottawa researcher Carole Sénéchal Serge, and University of Montreal researchers Larivée and Genevieve Chenard. The study authors found that Mother Teresa was the farthest thing from a saint. Instead, the study authors say, she was a cruel woman who believed that there was glory in the suffering of the sick. She made people with grave illnesses sicker by denying them medication and forcing them to writhe in pain while she squirreled away “enormous sums of money” that could have been used to help them. ...

 

[Foster Zygote]

I do hope that the general public becomes more aware of the truth about Anjezë Bojaxhiu. She doesn't deserve the reputation or the reverence that her mythologization has granted her.

 

[Ribbitalu]

I remember traveling in India in 2007 and being fascinated by the local newspapers' coverage of her death. Since I really never thought much about her, and everyone seemed to think she was doing good, I was thrown for a loop when it seemed that she was, just as described in the OP's post, strangely fascinated with pain, didn't provide medications, and preached a strange view of Christianity (which was problematic in of itself). It was completely opposite of what I was expecting, and made the 17 hour train ride go by quickly.

 

[Foster Zygote]

The Vatican is keen to cash in on the mythos started by Malcolm Muggeridge by making a saint of her. I wonder if this might not cause them more embarrassment in the end should growing awareness of her real actions generate a controversy.

 

[ravdin]

What?! Next you'll tell me that the Dalai Lama is an ex-dictator who wants his country back and Mahatma Gandhi was a racist enema enthusiast.

 

[Craig B]

What?! Next you'll tell me that the Dalai Lama is an ex-dictator who wants his country back and Mahatma Gandhi was a racist enema enthusiast.

If either of them is proposed for canonisation on the grounds of their goodness, these things will become serious issues. Both had imperial enemies who, by contrast, make or made these individuals look good. And in fact, be good - compared with these enemies.

But it will be most salutary if Mother Teresa is unmistakably debunked in the near future. The Vatican has recently forgotten an important thing: never do or say anything in the guise of an infallible statement, if it can be checked and potentially falsified by people not under the control of the Church. Who knows, maybe one day we'll find out that Padre Pio's stigmata were a scam!

 

[abaddon]

Of course, anyone who's read Christopher Hitchens's Missionary Position know this, but it's good that the news is getting out more widely now...

http://guardianlv.com/2013/10/mother-teresa-was-no-saint-says-study/

I recall my reaction when the weasel was beatified.
"huh? you are making this freak a saint?"

 

[kedo1981]

She was exactly a saint, who by the way is a person who manipulates the ignorance, superstition and suffering of the religious.
Remember that to be a saint there has to be several supernatural events, before their death and after, and since the supernatural is a delusion then she is every bit a saint as
St. Francis or any of the others.

 

[Belz...]

The Vatican is keen to cash in on the mythos started by Malcolm Muggeridge by making a saint of her. I wonder if this might not cause them more embarrassment in the end should growing awareness of her real actions generate a controversy.

In order to become a saint all you need to do is postmortem miracles.

 

[Brainiac2]

I do hope that the general public becomes more aware of the truth about Anjezë Bojaxhiu. She doesn't deserve the reputation or the reverence that her mythologization has granted her.

John 8:7 (KJV)

So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

 

[Belz...]

John 8:7 (KJV)

So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

Belz II, 4:9, "there are some who are worse than others, and I reserve the right to judge even those better than me."

 

[Polaris]

John 8:7 (KJV)

So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

Well, since there is no such thing as sin outside the minds of believers, I'm disappointed I'll never get to bash the sleaze ("Mother Theresa") square in the face with a really big one. See how she likes suffering when it's actually her experiencing it.

 

[Professor Yaffle]

In order to become a saint all you need to do is postmortem miracles.

I read that as postmodern miracles.

 

[Brainiac2]

I recall my reaction when the weasel was beatified.
"huh? you are making this freak a saint?"

You confuse beatification with canonization:

Canonization (or canonisation) is the act by which the Catholic Church or Eastern Orthodox Church declares a deceased person to be a saint, upon which declaration the person is included in the canon, or list, of recognized saints. Originally, individuals were recognized as saints without any formal process. Later, different processes, such as the two methods used by the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church were developed.


Catholic Church

In the Catholic Church (both the Western and Eastern Catholic Churches) the act of canonization is reserved to the Holy See and occurs at the conclusion of a long process requiring extensive proof that the person proposed for canonization lived and died in such an exemplary and holy way that he or she is worthy to be recognized as a saint.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canonisation

Beatification is just a step toward that direction.

 

[Craig B]

John 8:7 (KJV)

So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

There's quite a wide area of human merit or demerit between being declared a saint on one hand. and being stoned to death on the other. It is being asserted that Mother Teresa was located in that area.

If indeed she maltreated sick people because of her asinine primitiveness and bigotry, and squirrelled away monies intended by donors to alleviate suffering, then she is entitled to be criticised, and the critics are not required to be immaculate in all respects.

<SNIP>

Edited by Locknar: 

Edited, breach of rule 12.

 

[abaddon]

You confuse beatification with canonization:





Beatification is just a step toward that direction.

I care not a whit for your religious distinctions. Beatified, canonised, whatever. The evil weasel remains an evil weasel.

 

[Mojo]

I read that as postmodern miracles.

A narrative in which miracles occur is just as valid as one in which they don't.

 

[Brown]

Even during her lifetime, it was far from clear that her conduct was saintly. It just seemed to be a "given" that she was on the path to sainthood, but there didn't seem to be any good reason why that should be the case.

Further, it was clear that many people gave her huge sums of money to alleviate the suffering of the people in her charge, and she did not use those sums for that purpose.

 

[Brainiac2]

There's quite a wide area of human merit or demerit between being declared a saint on one hand. and being stoned to death on the other. It is being asserted that Mother Teresa was located in that area.

If indeed she maltreated sick people because of her asinine primitiveness and bigotry, and squirrelled away monies intended by donors to alleviate suffering, then she is entitled to be criticised, and the critics are not required to be immaculate in all respects.

<SNIP>

Edited by Locknar: 

Moderated content removed.

It applies only when the criticism is inhumanely severe and unwarranted and those who are doing the criticizing are reluctant in being equally as critically severe with themselves.

 

[angrysoba]

Further, it was clear that many people gave her huge sums of money to alleviate the suffering of the people in her charge, and she did not use those sums for that purpose.

I think this is the most damning charge against her; that she embezzled the money she was given with donors expecting it to go on proper healthcare.

Having said that, I still think that what she provided was better than nothing, but her reputation is hugely inflated.

Maybe attempts to canonize her will provide the opportunity to have an honest accounting of her life and Hitchens will get his revenge from the grave.