Mother Terisa gets there at last

[The Big Dog]

Great. Now, lets get off the derail: Did the WaPo make up the quote? Is the quote consistent with her other writing?

Already did.read the thread. Find the transcript?

 

[Thor 2]

I think the question is not why she was doing what she did. The question is why she wasn't doing what she wasn't, such as offer suitable pain control which her charity had money to afford. Most charities wouldn't brag about that. If they were stealing, they'd just shut up and pocket the money instead of buying morphine. But in my opinion, my proposed explanation makes Mother Theresa seem better.

Her strange quotes explained it: "Suffering, pain, humiliation—this is the kiss of Jesus. At times you come so close to Jesus on the cross that he can kiss you. I once told this to a lady who was suffering very much. She answered, 'Tell Jesus not to kiss me—to stop kissing me.' That suffering has to come that came in the life of Our Lady, that came in the life of Jesus—it has to come in our life also."

That's not how the majority of people think. Among other things, they think medical charities should be trying to reduce suffering if possible, not glory in it. But it was a normal way to think for her, and it explains why she felt pain control wasn't necessary. If other people agreed and praised her, the onus is on them, not her. She was being open and honest about her philosophy.

I think it fairly obvious Mother Teresa was not right in the head. I think it was in a book by G R Taylor "Sex in History", that I read about some of the saintly ones in the past, getting great pleasure from licking the sores of lepers. Sound familiar?

 

[abaddon]

Already did.read the thread. Find the transcript?

What difference would that make? You could be handed 50 transcripts but you would dismiss all of them.

Why should anyone waste the effort? You don't.

 

[Slowvehicle]

Lovely language!

TY! One does what one can...

 

[The Big Dog]

Convenient for your position, [/INDENT]

I would not call reading an opinionated post based on a profound misunderstanding of what Saint Teresa and her Sisters stand for and that also shows an incredible misunderstanding of what the vow of poverty means "convenient."

 

[Slowvehicle]

Teresa was in TIJUANA. At that time in Tijuana the MOC ran a soup kitchen and a refugee shelter.

Are you saying that the care she was given to "alleviate (suffering)" was to be given a pallette, and be told to offer up her beautiful suffering to 'god'?

Or are you saying that, in extremeis, the care to which Bojaxhiu was treated qwas different, in kind and in degree, from the care she offered the poor whose suffering she found so beautiful?

If you are claiming that she should have gotten in an airplane or something and flew to India to get medical care in her own facility, that is almost as asinine as the guy who thought that Hitler and Stalin had a plan.

...flown...

Perhaps you might avoid this type of Clupea rubellis-flavoured person of straw in the future, and respond the the actual question you were asked, rather than the self-created version you feel qualified to deride.

 

[Slowvehicle]

as changed, I can live with that.

Speaking of improper treatment of another's words...

You have indifferently honestly misrepresented Dr. Keith's words, and ought to apologize.

In what way do you feel that Bojaxhiu's own words were misrepresented, and how do you intend to support your claim??

 

[Slowvehicle]

Someone asked about Scripps which is local to Tijuana. <snip for focus>

We will simply add "local" to the ever-growing list of terms it pleases you to use against their actual meaning.

Is it your contention that more than forty miles distance, across an international border (nearly 2 hours of drive time in normal traffic) is "local"? Perhaps you would be so kind as to demonstrate where any one of the poor, whose suffering Bojaxhiu found so uplifting, were provided that sort of service, or the sort of care for which she was transported to Scripps.

 

[Slowvehicle]

That is ridiculous and unworthy of further comment.

In what way do you intend to support this odd assertion?

"Canadian academics Larivée, Chénard, and Sénéchal" are morons who never stepped foot in India.

Perhaps you might share with teh group how much time you, personally, have spent in the City of Joy.

They are also they same clowns who claimed that she received palliartive care in the US when in fact she received it in India

Is it your contention that the protocols of treatment at Scripps exclude palliative treatment and/or anodyne intervention? If not, we shall simply have to add "palliative" to that growing list of words you cannot be bothered to use correctly.

 

[Slowvehicle]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palliative_care:

The phrase, "...relief from the symptoms of pain..." fairly leaps off the page.

 

[Slowvehicle]

Already did.read the thread. Find the transcript?

Is it your contention that WaPo did not accurately quote Bojaxhiu's words?

 

[Slowvehicle]

I would not call reading an opinionated post based on a profound misunderstanding of what Saint Teresa and her Sisters stand for and that also shows an incredible misunderstanding of what the vow of poverty means "convenient."

Might you be so kind as to explain how two hours' travel, across an international border (most likely in a more convenient [and comfortable] conveyance than oxcart) for treatment at Scripps serves the intent of a vow of poverty?

Perhaps if you deign to do so, you might also address the pacemaker, multiple surgeries, and the fact that no one appears to have made Bojaxhiu offer up her beautiful suffering...

 

[Pup]

Ahhh, the inevitable moving of the goalposts!

"They were medical facilities which claimed to treat hospices for impoverished patients."

The word you were looking for was "hospice."

Hospice has a well defined meaning nowadays. Even if one makes allowances for the conditions in Calcutta, a hospice is about pain control. Typical: http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=24267

"Hospice care: Care designed to give supportive care to people in the final phase of a terminal illness and focus on comfort and quality of life, rather than cure. The goal is to enable patients to be comfortable and free of pain, so that they live each day as fully as possible. Aggressive methods of pain control may be used."

Hospices are known for lack of cures. But they're known for medicating patients to reduce suffering, even overmedicating as some US complaints have alleged. That's hardly a risk in poor neighborhoods, but controlling pain is a basic goal of hospices, as well as administering to emotional, social, and spiritual needs, which Mother Theresa seems to have done well, especially for Catholics.

Her insistence on the importance of the suffering of the poor stood in the way of her desire to provide pain control. It's ironic. Without that insistence on the importance of suffering, she might never have been obsessed to do what she did. Thousands might have died without even a friendly caregiver to hold their hand or a safe bed to lie in. But that insistence stood in the way of proper pain control. People suffered both more and less, thanks to who she was

 

[The Big Dog]

Hospice has a well defined meaning nowadays. Even if one makes allowances for the conditions in Calcutta, a hospice is about pain control. Typical: http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=24267

"Hospice care: Care designed to give supportive care to people in the final phase of a terminal illness and focus on comfort and quality of life, rather than cure. The goal is to enable patients to be comfortable and free of pain, so that they live each day as fully as possible. Aggressive methods of pain control may be used."

Hospices are known for lack of cures. But they're known for medicating patients to reduce suffering, even overmedicating as some US complaints have alleged. That's hardly a risk in poor neighborhoods, but controlling pain is a basic goal of hospices, as well as administering to emotional, social, and spiritual needs, which Mother Theresa seems to have done well, especially for Catholics.

Her insistence on the importance of the suffering of the poor stood in the way of her desire to provide pain control. It's ironic. Without that insistence on the importance of suffering, she might never have been obsessed to do what she did. Thousands might have died without even a friendly caregiver to hold their hand or a safe bed to lie in. But that insistence stood in the way of proper pain control. People suffered both more and less, thanks to who she was

Well she has been dead for almost 20 years and I would caution you against applying first world standards to hospices primarily designed for dying people literally scooped off the street.

She had no insistence on the importance of suffering, she recognized that it was inevitable. As we all should.

 

[fuelair]

I think it fairly obvious Mother Teresa was not right in the head. I think it was in a book by G R Taylor "Sex in History", that I read about some of the saintly ones in the past, getting great pleasure from licking the sores of lepers. Sound familiar?

I am certain the lepers would have much preferred having their genitals so treated!!!!!

 

[ddt]

Well she has been dead for almost 20 years and I would caution you against applying first world standards to hospices primarily designed for dying people literally scooped off the street.

First world or third world does not change the meaning of the word "hospice". And in India, too, effective painkillers are available for a pittance, not just aspirin which was the only painkiller present in the apothecary of these mock-hospices.

She had no insistence on the importance of suffering, she recognized that it was inevitable. As we all should.

We've gone a couple of pages over a quote where she did exactly that. Suffering is important because it brings you closer to Jesus' suffering (on the cross). Must we "plagiarize" that quote again?

 

[fuelair]

yeah, you are wrong.

Perhaps you would be so kind as to drop the grossly disingenuous and patronizing tone.

Surely you do not wish him to hurt his foot/feet !!!!

 

[Darat]

Well she has been dead for almost 20 years and I would caution you against applying first world standards to hospices primarily designed for dying people literally scooped off the street.

She had no insistence on the importance of suffering, she recognized that it was inevitable. As we all should.

The issue is not judging her houses for the dying by "first world standards", even by the standards of many of the countries she operated in the standards were sub par.

She (as her writings and speeches show) did not think poverty was anything bad or anything that should be alleviated. Indeed she considered poverty a blessing and the suffering of the people dying in her house was a gift from god. She did not want to give treatments, spend money on making the dying people more comfortable, in her belief system doing so would have been a disservice to the poor and those suffering.

 

[Rincewind]

The issue is not judging her houses for the dying by "first world standards", even by the standards of many of the countries she operated in the standards were sub par.

She (as her writings and speeches show) did not think poverty was anything bad or anything that should be alleviated. Indeed she considered poverty a blessing and the suffering of the people dying in her house was a gift from god. She did not want to give treatments, spend money on making the dying people more comfortable, in her belief system doing so would have been a disservice to the poor and those suffering.

Of course, if she had property and huge amounts of cash donated, she could have give all the sufferers first-world health care.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

I'm unclear on the distinction. Perhaps you can clarify for me?

Palliative care is simply care which eases symptoms of a disease, rather than addressing the underlying cause. whether or not the patient is dying is irrelevant.