Christopher Hitchens and Mother Theresa

[bignickel]

With the additional of Christopher Hitchens to the TAM3, a writer I was unfamiliar with, I decided to check out some of his stuff.

After checking out his book about Mother Theresa, I read thru some of the reviews. Here is a copy of the article that appeared in Stern magazine:

http://members.lycos.co.uk/bajuu/

To say that what's being posited about the possibly-not-so-good Mother is astonishing is a bit of an understatment.

It's odd: I haven't been a Catholic (or Believer) in years, not since I dropped out of the Church back in college. But I am, for some reason, livid with rage and disgust right now. Somewhere in me there is that little 10 year old Catholic boy who was collecting money for this or similar charities, in order to give poor starving people a meal. Where'd my money go to?

It's one thing to take money from the well-to-do, who won't miss it, in order to ease their consciences. But a 10 year old? I can remember right now all the guilt that is a part of growing up Catholic, and then reading about how this money all ends up ($50 million in New York, in one particular year) in a Vatican City bank... I dunno. Is it that the larger the amount of money, the more more morally bankrupt the group becomes that gets it?

A sad, sad indictment of this 'saint'. I'm still trying to hold out some doubt for 'her side of the picture', but it doesn't appear that she made any attempts to hide anything: she let the media do all the work for her.

Also see: http://fmh-child.org/AroupChatterjee.htm

[rightbrain]

This subject came up on another discussion group I'm on, and I thought we Teresa "doubters" were going to get lynched. My favorite line, "Even if she helped just one person, she's a saint." Hey, I've personally helped at least a couple of people through the years; I expect my beatification to happen any day.

I know a woman who worked for years in Calcutta, first with Mother Teresa and then with her own humanitarian organization. As she so diplomatically put it, she and Mother Teresa had different views on how to help people. Mother Teresa and her missionaries "comforted the dying." And that, precisely, is what they did (do). Not only do they not have a hospital in Calcutta, but their clinics were notoriously under-equipped. The woman I know decided that it might be more useful to actually try to save a few people, rather than just pray over them, and she and Mother Teresa parted ways, though she always had the utmost respect for the Sister.

The woman I know also worked with destitute, often unmarried mothers, who got pretty short shrift from the nuns, who viewed them as wretched sinners. Ironic, really--many of these women were seeking late-term abortions, and the woman I know started an adoption program that offered them an alternative.

To her credit, Mother Teresa was pretty upfront about what she really was: an arch-conservative nun who thought salvation of people's souls was more important than saving their bodies. She just let people believe what they wanted to.

As far as I can tell, she "bought" her sainthood from the Vatican.

I used to be a Catholic, too. Nothing like the Catholic hierarchy to turn one against organized religion...sad, really.

[CFLarsen]

Originally posted by rightbrain
This subject came up on another discussion group I'm on, and I thought we Teresa "doubters" were going to get lynched. My favorite line, "Even if she helped just one person, she's a saint." Hey, I've personally helped at least a couple of people through the years; I expect my beatification to happen any day.

I know a woman who worked for years in Calcutta, first with Mother Teresa and then with her own humanitarian organization. As she so diplomatically put it, she and Mother Teresa had different views on how to help people. Mother Teresa and her missionaries "comforted the dying." And that, precisely, is what they did (do). Not only do they not have a hospital in Calcutta, but their clinics were notoriously under-equipped. The woman I know decided that it might be more useful to actually try to save a few people, rather than just pray over them, and she and Mother Teresa parted ways, though she always had the utmost respect for the Sister.

The woman I know also worked with destitute, often unmarried mothers, who got pretty short shrift from the nuns, who viewed them as wretched sinners. Ironic, really--many of these women were seeking late-term abortions, and the woman I know started an adoption program that offered them an alternative.

To her credit, Mother Teresa was pretty upfront about what she really was: an arch-conservative nun who thought salvation of people's souls was more important than saving their bodies. She just let people believe what they wanted to.

As far as I can tell, she "bought" her sainthood from the Vatican.

I used to be a Catholic, too. Nothing like the Catholic hierarchy to turn one against organized religion...sad, really.

Can I get in touch with this person?

[Belle]

I admit complete ignorance on this subject - never did pay too much attention to either MT or any other religious charities...

I looked over the websites you posted - do you have any other information on this? Simply put, I plan to discuss this with a rather annoying outspoken Catholic MT supporter - mentions her almost daily, and I'd like to put a stop to it ;)

[Yaotl]

So when can we raid the Vatican's coffers?

[KFCA]

I don't recall that "she bought her sainthood from the Vatican" as I don't think she's been declared one yet...but correct me if I'm wrong.

I think there was an effort to "fast-track" her to sainthood by the Pope immediately after her death, but there's still a "sainthood process", the exact steps which I can't remember.

The first step involved the necessity of two "miracles" being attributed to her, which apparently "happened"... though at least one (maybe both) was questioned by experts in the medical field at the time as being miraculous.

[T'ai Chi]

I'd read Hutchins book with heavy skepticism.

[hgc]

Originally posted by jzs
I'd read Hutchins book with heavy skepticism. Agreed. I don't know much about this topic, but I know that Hitchins' raison d'être is skewering sacred cows. He usually makes a compelling argument, but not a balanced one.

[rightbrain]

Originally posted by hgc
Agreed. I don't know much about this topic, but I know that Hitchins' raison d'être is skewering sacred cows. He usually makes a compelling argument, but not a balanced one.

True, but there's independent corroboration of much of what he writes.

I don't think anyone is trying to say she was an awful person. While my friend had differences with her, she thought Teresa radiated holiness. Sister Teresa *did* work with the poor and comfort the dying. She won the Nobel Peace Prize.

The problem is this huge myth that's grown up around her. I bet if you polled most people, they would tell you Mother Teresa ran hospitals and clinics in Calcutta and saved many of the sick and dying. In fact, she ran hospices. The nuns made the dying reasonably comfortable, comforted them, and baptized them (a controversial practice--should a dying person be baptized into a religion he/she does not profess?). From a western standpoint, however, more than a few of these people didn't need to die, and could have been saved by medicine and techniques we consider very basic and which could readily have been purchased in great quantities by the Missionaries of Charity. Obviously, all the donations the good sisters were getting weren't going to the hospices.

Everything she did was in harmony with Catholic doctrine, however. If she truly believed the dead were going to a "better place" (at least if they were baptized Catholics first), then letting them die rather than attempting to save them makes sense. Her very strong anti-abortion stance, which came under fire from those who say that overpopulation is one of the biggest causes of poverty in places like India, was also in harmony with her theology.

The myth of MT comes largely from one guy. This from Wikipedia:
"By the early 1970s, Mother Teresa had become an international celebrity. Her fame can be in large part attributed to the 1969 documentary Something Beautiful for God by Malcolm Muggeridge and his 1971 book of the same title, which is still in print. During the filming of the documentary footage taken in poor lighting conditions, particularly the Home for the Dying, was thought unlikely to be of usable quality by the crew. When, after returning from India, the footage was found to be extremely well lit. Muggeridge claimed this was 'divine light' from Mother Teresa herself. Others in the crew thought it more likely ascribable to a new type of Kodak film. Muggeridge later converted to Catholicism.

Now *that* trips my skepticism meter.

Wikipedia on Mother Teresa (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mother_Teresa)

[rightbrain]

Originally posted by KFCA
I don't recall that "she bought her sainthood from the Vatican" as I don't think she's been declared one yet...but correct me if I'm wrong.

I think there was an effort to "fast-track" her to sainthood by the Pope immediately after her death, but there's still a "sainthood process", the exact steps which I can't remember.

The first step involved the necessity of two "miracles" being attributed to her, which apparently "happened"... though at least one (maybe both) was questioned by experts in the medical field at the time as being miraculous.

You're right, she's not a saint yet. Though if the current Pope lives long enough, bet he'll declare her one. He seems to be out to break the Guinness Book of World Records for saint-making.

The controversy revolves around the "fast-tracking" part. Beatification is supposed to take more time--if only to allow people such as those medical experts to question the miracles.

[Skeptical Greg]

rightbrain:Now *that* trips my skepticism meter. Which part?

[KFCA]

I'm not exactly positive on this, but I seem to recall reading in an article in Vanity Fair by Hitchens on the MT subject that the Vatican had done away with "The Devil's Advocate" position in the "sainthood chain", which, of course, leaves no one around to say "Well, Yes, But...."

[rightbrain]

Originally posted by Diogenes
rightbrain: Which part?

The "divine light" Kodak moment.

[kimiko]

The order should be tried for fraud. When people designate a gift for a particular purpose, and the order gives the impression the money will be used to that end but instead shuffles it off to Rome, they are breaking the law, in the US at least, but probably many other places.

She wasn't a saint in any sense. Taking people's money and not using it for anything isn't saintly. Maintaining poor conditions in her death houses isn't saintly. Refusing to treat people for medical problems and pain is downright evil, especially considering she received medical care in some of the most expensive clinics in the world and certainly received enough money to do something. Jesus was said to have healed people, for free even!, I don't think she's above his example.