Myth of Mother Teresa

Originally posted by Nellinator
Unnecessary suffering is not a part of the calling of Christ... just thought I'd clear that up.

Withholding painkillers from those that desire them seems cruel, Mother Teresa wasn't all bad, she did afford comfort to a lot of people it seems.

There are numerous evidence which show us she was not great. She did not separate terminal from non terminal illnesses and had literally caused people to die, who didn't need to.

She also ''converted'' Hindus at their bedsite! That was unethical, to say at least, no?

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
There are numerous evidence which show us she was not great. She did not separate terminal from non terminal illnesses and had literally caused people to die, who didn't need to.

She also ''converted'' Hindus at their bedsite! That was unethical, to say at least, no?

Well, the second part is not really unethical for a Chrisitan.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Well, the second part is not really unethical for a Chrisitan.

I guess.

Waiting for people to be near death, when they don't know what they are saying, and some of them are too weak to resist, and she continues to baptise them.
Its creepy.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
I guess.

Waiting for people to be near death, when they don't know what they are saying, and some of them are too weak to resist, and she continues to baptise them.
Its creepy.

Yeah, though she was convinced to be right, and basically to save their souls....and....if the Hindus were right, it would not matter anyways, so, kinda a win-win situation.

Do you think it's possible that Mother Teresa truly beleived she was doing "the right thing" rather than just intending to impose her religion upon others ?

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Do you think it's possible that Mother Teresa truly beleived she was doing "the right thing" rather than just intending to impose her religion upon others ?

T-that's what I just said.

Originally posted by Bardock42
T-that's what I just said.

I know, I wasn't asking you. I was asking Lil B

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
I know, I wasn't asking you. I was asking Lil B

Yeah, I think she agrees with that though, she just thinks that it is unethical regardless.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
You are generalising, because you are assuming that Christianity = Catholicism.
You are also generalising because you make no distinction between the Churches of the East and those of the West.

Furthermore, you are off-topic.

I was unaware that any of those mattered as Mother Teresa was a Catholic. Furthermore, the idea of suffering is pervasive throughout western Christianity, not just Catholicism.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
I did not ask WHY Mother Teresa did what she did.
I asked WHY is is seen saintly like, STILL in the face of evidence, by atheists and on-atheists alike.

If what she did is common practice or an extension of a common belief, why would people have a problem with it? People, when trying to glorify someone, look past their faults. If she's on the "fast track to sainthood," why would want to expound on the fact that she committed actions that some people find questionable?

The point is, if you're seeing someone up as a HOLY role model, they should be faultless, so you ignore evidences to the contrary, just like every church has done fairly consistently throughout history.

Additionally, rephrasing the question of "why" is extremely pertinent. If she generally believed she was helping people, then sure, we can say she was wrong, but she wasn't malicious as your quote makes her out to be. People's motivations for their actions are very much pertinent if one is attempting to evaluate the validity of those actions.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
So, take your christian bashing in some other thread where its relevant.

I was unaware that "bashing" was relevant anywhere on these forums. I was also unaware that stating a relevant criticism politely and backing it up constitutes bashing.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Yeah, I think she agrees with that though, she just thinks that it is unethical regardless.

It is unethical to force someone to endure pain when they ask for the pain to be taken away...I agree

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Do you think it's possible that Mother Teresa truly beleived she was doing "the right thing" rather than just intending to impose her religion upon others ?

Maybe I would be convinved of that, if she did not keep the stolen money asked to be returned, and if she did not seek the best medical care when she was ill.

If she truly was convinced of what she was doing, when she fell ill, she should have let Christ ''kiss her'' like other people.

As for conversions. She must have been convinced of saving those people, otherwise she wouldn't have been a Catholic, and all that stuff.

I just don't understand, overall, why people continue to see her saint like. Regardless of wether she believed in what she was doing, or not, it wasn't doing a favour to those people...Where did the money donated go? Not in her centres, thats for sure.

If Vatican says ''Mother Teresa is a saint'', then I can understand that on their level (although Vatican dirtied its hands many things in the history, but thats beside the point), but it is why some other people, who are not Christian, persist to accept this theory...its just strange.

Every human have their flaws. Mother Teresa is no exception. Heck! Even Ghandi had his flaws and people still revere him as a great man. I think we should acknowledge peoples contribution as well as their flaws. No one can be 100% all good. Even the great Catholic saints had their little wild times....believe it or not Saint Thomas Aquinas was one heck of a party dude back in his youth.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
Every human have their flaws. Mother Teresa is no exception. Heck! Even Ghandi had his flaws and people still revere him as a great man. I think we should acknowledge peoples contribution as well as their flaws. No one can be 100% all good. Even the great Catholic saints had their little wild times....believe it or not Saint Thomas Aquinas was one heck of a party dude back in his youth.

Now that you mention Gandhi. I read a book in regards of some of the things said and done by Gandhi. He had flaws indeed. And some strange ideas.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Now that you mention Gandhi. I read a book in regards of some of the things said and done by Gandhi. He had flaws indeed. And some strange ideas.

I love Penn and Teller

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
The common belief is that Mother Teresa worked with the sick and destitute to lovingly return them to health.

An examination of her missions will show that this is far from the case. Mother Teresa believed that there is spiritual value in suffering.

Once, when tending to a patient dying of cancer, she said "You are suffering like Christ on the cross. So Jesus must be kissing you." (!!!)
(Christoper Hitchens - The Missionary Position: Mother Teresa in Theory and Practice, p. 41).

For this reason she would not prescribe pain killers in her clinics, choosing instead to allow her patients to experience the suffering that she believed would bring them closer to Christ. Despite the tens of millions of dollars donated to her charity each year, her missions were rudimentary and offered no real health care. Her missions mainly catered to the critically ill and simply afforded them a place to go to die.
Intrestingly, when Mother Teresa became ill she would travel to the finest health care facilities to receive treatment.

Furthermore, her main object appears to have been spreading of the most extreme form of Catholicism, through help of Vatican, rather than saintly helping of the poor and sick.

So, why is it that a great majority of people still hold this saint-like view of Mother Teresa?
Does anyone here believe Mother Teresa was a 'humanitarian'? Or just a ruthless missionary?

Discuss.

She did more then most and less then some, regardless of the total outcome of her "help" she actually achieved a great deal, more then most people.

Plus no one forced the sick into her care for the most part so if people disagree with her methods it's true that people volunteered themselves for her care.

She has alot of achievments 💃

Originally posted by Soleran
She did more then most and less then some, regardless of the total outcome of her "help" she actually achieved a great deal, more then most people.

Plus no one forced the sick into her care for the most part so if people disagree with her methods it's true that people volunteered themselves for her care.

She has alot of achievments 💃

That is what is doubted though, it is clauned that she did more badthan good even. And she seems to not have used the means she got provided by people in a wa that it was intended.

Originally posted by Bardock42
That is what is doubted though, it is clauned that she did more badthan good even. And she seems to not have used the means she got provided by people in a wa that it was intended.

Sure I understand that. Unless someone has hard facts on it then it's a discussion of gossip.

Her actions during the trial of Charles Keating, which resulted in a ten-year sentence for his fraud in the S&L debacle, are particularly illuminating. Mother Teresa wrote to the trial judge and appealed for leniency because Keating had donated a large sum to her projects. Oddly enough, it never occurred to her that the money really belonged to the people Keating swindled it from, and she never responded to a request from the judge that she return the stolen funds.

It has been alleged by former employees of Mother Teresa' s order that Mother Teresa and her followers accepted donations specifically earmarked for the sick and the poor, but that the funds were transferred to the Vatican Bank for other purposes, particularly evangelism. The Missionaries of Charity do not disclose either the sources of their funds, or details of how they are spent.

I suggest you read Christopher Hitchens's book about Mother Teresa.

Some of other silly outbursts, damaging to society and religious people (mainly Christians) -

- “Abortion is the worst evil, and the greatest enemy of peace... Because if a mother can kill her own child, what will prevent us from killing ourselves or one another? Nothing.”
- 1979 acceptance speach for Nobel Peace Price

- “Let us promise our Lady who loves Ireland so much, that we will never allow this country a single abortion. And no contraceptives.”

Evidently mother teresa does not see a correlation between poverty and too many children, nor does she see correlation between AIDS and other diseases and lack of contreception.

One of Mother Teresa’s volunteers in Calcutta described her ''Home for the Dying'' as resembling photos of concentration camps such as Belsen. No chairs, just stretcher beds. Virtually no medical care or painkillers beyond aspirin, and a refusal to take a 15-year-old boy to a hospital. Hitchens adds, ''Bear in mind that Mother Teresa’s global income is more than enough to outfit several first class clinics in Bengal. The decision not to do so... is a deliberate one. The point is not the honest relief of suffering, but the promulgation of a cult based on death and suffering and subjection.''

If you want to show the 'greatness of Christians', Mother Teresa proves just the opposite.

Evangelism is such a fluke....

You're telling me that money that could have went to feed the hungry, shelter the poor, and all that stuff went to promotion of Evangelism instead ?