A new exposé of Mother Teresa shows that she—and the Vatican—were even worse than we thought

First Christopher Hitchens took her down, then we learned that her faith wasn’t as strong as we thought, and now a new study from the Université de Montréal is poised to completely destroy what shreds are left of Mother Teresa’s reputation. She was the winner of the 1979 Nobel Peace Prize, was beatified and is well on her way to becoming a saint, and she’s universally admired. As Wikipedia notes:

[She was] named 18 times in the yearly Gallup’s most admired man and woman poll as one of the ten women around the world that Americans admired most. In 1999, a poll of Americans ranked her first in Gallup’s List of Most Widely Admired People of the 20th Century. In that survey, she out-polled all other volunteered answers by a wide margin, and was in first place in all major demographic categories except the very young.

The criticisms of Agnes Gonxha, as she was christened, have been growing for a long time. I wasn’t aware of them until I read Christopher Hitchens’s cleverly titled book, The Missionary Position: Mother Teresa in Theory and Practice, which I found deeply disturbing. The book is polemic at Hitchens’s best, and though the facts were surprising, he was never sued and his accusations were never refuted—nor even rebutted. (You can read excerpts here and here, but I urge you to read the book.) In light of that, I accepted Mother Teresa as a deeply flawed person.

In its “criticism” section of her biography, Wikipedia summarizes the growing opprobrium related to her extreme love of suffering (that is, the suffering of her “patients”), her refusal to provide adequate medical care, her association with (and financial support from) shady characters, and her treatment of her nuns.

Now a paper is about to appear (it’s not online yet) that is apparently peer-reviewed, and that expands the list of Mother Teresa’s malfeasances.  Lest you think this is atheist hype, the summary below is from an official press release by the Université de Montréal.

The myth of altruism and generosity surrounding Mother Teresa is dispelled in a paper by Serge Larivée and Genevieve Chenard of University of Montreal’s Department of Psychoeducation and Carole Sénéchal of the University of Ottawa’s Faculty of Education. The paper will be published in the March issue of the journal Studies in Religion/Sciences religieuses and is an analysis of the published writings about Mother Teresa. Like the journalist and author Christopher Hitchens, who is amply quoted in their analysis, the researchers conclude that her hallowed image—which does not stand up to analysis of the facts—was constructed, and that her beatification was orchestrated by an effective media relations campaign.

“While looking for documentation on the phenomenon of altruism for a seminar on ethics, one of us stumbled upon the life and work of one of Catholic Church’s most celebrated woman and now part of our collective imagination—Mother Teresa—whose real name was Agnes Gonxha,” says Professor Larivée, who led the research. “The description was so ecstatic that it piqued our curiosity and pushed us to research further.”

As a result, the three researchers collected 502 documents on the life and work of Mother Teresa. After eliminating 195 duplicates, they consulted 287 documents to conduct their analysis, representing 96% of the literature on the founder of the Order of the Missionaries of Charity (OMC). Facts debunk the myth of Mother Teresa

In their article, Serge Larivée and his colleagues also cite a number of problems not take into account by the Vatican in Mother Teresa’s beatification process, such as “her rather dubious way of caring for the sick, her questionable political contacts, her suspicious management of the enormous sums of money she received, and her overly dogmatic views regarding, in particular, abortion, contraception, and divorce.”

The release levels three types of accusations against mother Teresa and her supporters (quotes are direct, and I don’t mind extensive excerpting since it’s a press release):

1.  The woman was in love with suffering and simply didn’t take care of her charges, many of whom fruitlessly sought medical care.

“At the time of her death, Mother Teresa had opened 517 missions welcoming the poor and sick in more than 100 countries. The missions have been described as “homes for the dying” by doctors visiting several of these establishments in Calcutta. Two-thirds of the people coming to these missions hoped to a find a doctor to treat them, while the other third lay dying without receiving appropriate care. The doctors observed a significant lack of hygiene, even unfit conditions, as well as a shortage of actual care, inadequate food, and no painkillers. The problem is not a lack of money—the Foundation created by Mother Teresa has raised hundreds of millions of dollars—but rather a particular conception of suffering and death: “There is something beautiful in seeing the poor accept their lot, to suffer it like Christ’s Passion. The world gains much from their suffering,” was her reply to criticism, cites the journalist Christopher Hitchens. Nevertheless, when Mother Teresa required palliative care, she received it in a modern American hospital.”

2. She was tightfisted about helping others, seequestered money donated for her work, and took money from dictators.

“Mother Teresa was generous with her prayers but rather miserly with her foundation’s millions when it came to humanity’s suffering. During numerous floods in India or following the explosion of a pesticide plant in Bhopal, she offered numerous prayers and medallions of the Virgin Mary but no direct or monetary aid. On the other hand, she had no qualms about accepting the Legion of Honour and a grant from the Duvalier dictatorship in Haiti. Millions of dollars were transferred to the MCO’s various bank accounts, but most of the accounts were kept secret, Larivée says. ‘Given the parsimonious management of Mother Theresa’s works, one may ask where the millions of dollars for the poorest of the poor have gone?'”

3. She was deliberately promoted by BBC journalist Malcolm Muggeridge (a fellow anti-abortionist), and her beatification was based on phony miracles.

.” . .In 1969, [Muggeridge] made a eulogistic film of the missionary, promoting her by attributing to her the “first photographic miracle,” when it should have been attributed to the new film stock being marketed by Kodak. Afterwards, Mother Teresa travelled throughout the world and received numerous awards, including the Nobel Peace Prize. In her acceptance speech, on the subject of Bosnian women who were raped by Serbs and now sought abortion, she said: ‘I feel the greatest destroyer of peace today is abortion, because it is a direct war, a direct killing—direct murder by the mother herself.’

. . . Following her death, the Vatican decided to waive the usual five-year waiting period to open the beatification process. [JAC: As I recall, it took only a year.] The miracle attributed to Mother Theresa was the healing of a woman, Monica Besra, who had been suffering from intense abdominal pain. The woman testified that she was cured after a medallion blessed by Mother Theresa was placed on her abdomen. Her doctors thought otherwise: the ovarian cyst and the tuberculosis from which she suffered were healed by the drugs they had given her. The Vatican, nevertheless, concluded that it was a miracle. Mother Teresa’s popularity was such that she had become untouchable for the population, which had already declared her a saint. “What could be better than beatification followed by canonization of this model to revitalize the Church and inspire the faithful especially at a time when churches are empty and the Roman authority is in decline?” Larivée and his colleagues ask.”

All of these echo, substantiate, and expand the criticisms leveled by Hitchens.

But at the end of the press release, the university (and, I presume, the investigators) offer what I see as a complete sop to those who might be disheartened by the above. I quote directly:

Positive effect of the Mother Teresa myth

Despite Mother Teresa’s dubious way of caring for the sick by glorifying their suffering instead of relieving it, Serge Larivée and his colleagues point out the positive effect of the Mother Teresa myth: “If the extraordinary image of Mother Teresa conveyed in the collective imagination has encouraged humanitarian initiatives that are genuinely engaged with those crushed by poverty, we can only rejoice. It is likely that she has inspired many humanitarian workers whose actions have truly relieved the suffering of the destitute and addressed the causes of poverty and isolation without being extolled by the media. Nevertheless, the media coverage of Mother Theresa could have been a little more rigorous.”

A “little more rigorous”? Now there’s an understatement!

Yes, perhaps the inspirational effect of Mother Teresa’s work is a theoretical possibility, but has it happened? Is Mother Teresa’s order now actually doing something to cure illness? What’s the evidence that she has inspired people to do something they wouldn’t have done otherwise?  Have they found the lost donations?

I will be curious (and a bit surprised) if, when the paper finally comes out, the authors actually provide some evidence that Mother Teresa has had a substantial positive effect, much less a net positive effect (don’t forget her work against abortion).  This last bit of the press release is there, I think, to stave off the inevitable criticism that will arise from Bill Donohue and other Catholic cheerleaders when such an idolized religious figure is brought down. But Catholics should be used to that!

One good thing, despite the sop, is that the faithful won’t be able to dismiss this as easily as they could the criticisms of Hitchens. (“He’s just a militant atheist who hates all religious people.”) This is a peer-reviewed paper written by academics, not a hatchet-job written by an atheist with strong opinions.

If there’s one thing that Catholics should have learned by now, it’s that their heroes often have feet of clay.  But that’s not surprising in a faith that encourages chastity, sexual repression, and authoritarianism.  In Mother Teresa it found perhaps its most bizarre flowering: a woman who actually wanted her charges to suffer because it brought them closer to Jesus.

I ran into Mother Teresa once: we were flying on the same plane, and as I disembarked from the coach section, she appeared right in front of me as she exited from the first-class section.  Not even wondering why a woman who professed humility was flying first class, I was elated and gobsmacked, feeling quite fortunate to have run into her. But I had bought into the myth, and that was well before the pushback began.

I will make the Montreal paper available when it’s finally published.

mother_teresa_love_o7lLjqV1zdzx-1

203 Comments

  1. Debra Keller
    Posted July 8, 2013 at 10:40 am | Permalink

    I believe she was not a saint. She had many flaws–as we all do.

    • gbjames
      Posted July 8, 2013 at 4:06 pm | Permalink

      Some flaws are bigger than others.

  2. Posted July 8, 2013 at 11:21 am | Permalink

    Reblogged this on Sarvodaya and commented:
    Very disturbing, though it confirms what I’ve already read and seen from other sources.

    • Kim
      Posted February 6, 2014 at 1:01 pm | Permalink

      What do you find disturbing? That M.T. is being revealed as the malevolent human being she was? I find that encouraging. Always a positive to learn the truth.

      • Posted February 7, 2014 at 9:10 am | Permalink

        I agree, I meant more so the implications; how many other saints have such skeletons in their closet?

        • Posted February 9, 2014 at 3:24 pm | Permalink

          Those were my thoughts too. We live in an age where information is easily found & it is easier than ever to check something out, so i wonder just how many other “Saints” have been given a pass with their “Fake” miracles (is there another kind)? I would guess that the vast majority of these saints have gained their dubious awards because it was in some way convenient for the Vatican.

  3. Posted July 8, 2013 at 11:24 am | Permalink

    The argument that the myth of Teresa may inspire genuine good work, despite her own reputation being so grossly undeserved may be compelling, However when you build something up from a foundation of a dishonesty lies and general marketing bullshit it can be pretty shaky, Because in addition to the work you also have to maintain the lie, which is a waste of resources and time that could be put to better use. Do good work because you have a genuine concern for the well being of other people, not because you want to impress someone or be like someone else.

    • Posted July 9, 2013 at 1:18 am | Permalink

      Why are you so envy of her sitting on the first clas?? Why take it against her when she’s too old already!! Cant you just give her that geriatric rights!!

      • Kalyani Kurup
        Posted January 1, 2014 at 8:56 am | Permalink

        You cannot preach poverty for others and insist on comforts for yourself.

      • Gary
        Posted January 4, 2014 at 9:03 am | Permalink

        Are you seriously suggesting that promoting lies, deceit and rewarding evil and sadism honors the god of the faith?

        Or are you simply running to default thinking to defend and deflect any criticism of the church?

    • aroup chatterjee
      Posted January 1, 2014 at 2:50 pm | Permalink

      I do not believe any good stemmed from the Teresa myth industry

  4. John
    Posted July 8, 2013 at 5:33 pm | Permalink

    Another Kardashian moment from WordPress.com

  5. Posted July 8, 2013 at 10:33 pm | Permalink

    Reblogged this on nothing shakes the smiling heart.

  6. Micke Ostlund
    Posted July 8, 2013 at 11:20 pm | Permalink

    There isn’t anything wrong with accepting money from dictators or criminals but these money should of course be used to help those who suffers.

    Apart from that I’m sure Mother Theresa had a good heart. The problem is all those people who put her on a piedestal. She was probably very much a human being with all her flaws as well as all her good things just like everybody else. She wasn’t a living Saint and she was way too hard on the nuns whom she was responsible for.

    We the people often put certain people on piedestals and condemn them when they are not living up to the standards we think they ought to. We forget that they don’t deserve to be idolized as much as the are. Many of them find their way to drugs or other means to get away from reality because they themselves don’t want to be put on high horses.

    Some of those people may be like Mother Theresa, humble in a way but unable to correct people. They accept the glorification because they are not interested in making people feel dissapointed about their heroes. Some may keep their silence about it because there’s a couple of bucks to be made. Others because as much as they hate being idolized they also have great needs for being loved and cherised. It’s only human you know and I’m quite certain Mother Theresa was human.

    Please note I’m not a fan of hers but not an enemy either. I can certainly see where she fell through. Sick people should get medications, food and shelter. Not only sympathy for being sick.

    Micke Östlund,
    Vaxjo, Sweden

    • Posted July 9, 2013 at 1:21 am | Permalink

      I agree with you! These people are so immoral! Im not Catholic but I know shes right on her stand against anti abortion!

      • Posted July 9, 2013 at 1:23 am | Permalink

        There isn’t anything wrong with accepting money from dictators or criminals but these money should of course be used to help those who suffers.

        Apart from that I’m sure Mother Theresa had a good heart. The problem is all those people who put her on a piedestal. She was probably very much a human being with all her flaws as well as all her good things just like everybody else. She wasn’t a living Saint and she was way too hard on the nuns whom she was responsible for.

        We the people often put certain people on piedestals and condemn them when they are not living up to the standards we think they ought to. We forget that they don’t deserve to be idolized as much as the are. Many of them find their way to drugs or other means to get away from reality because they themselves don’t want to be put on high horses.

        Some of those people may be like Mother Theresa, humble in a way but unable to correct people. They accept the glorification because they are not interested in making people feel dissapointed about their heroes. Some may keep their silence about it because there’s a couple of bucks to be made. Others because as much as they hate being idolized they also have great needs for being loved and cherised. It’s only human you know and I’m quite certain Mother Theresa was human.

        Please note I’m not a fan of hers but not an enemy either. I can certainly see where she fell through. Sick people should get medications, food and shelter. Not only sympathy for being sick.

        Micke Östlund,
        Vaxjo, Sweden

        — very well said!

        • Notagod
          Posted July 9, 2013 at 10:14 am | Permalink

          Did you miss the part where she rejoiced at their suffering? Like any “good” catholic would.

          Apart from that I’m sure Mother Theresa had a good heart.

          Not really, Mother Teresa; Died: 5-Sep – 1997 Location of death: Calcutta, India Cause of death: Heart Failure.

          • BeyondRedemption....
            Posted July 9, 2013 at 10:29 am | Permalink

            She had a heart???????????

        • gbjames
          Posted July 9, 2013 at 2:32 pm | Permalink

          Almost all of us do better. Very few of us systematically fail to ease the pain of others when we have the chance. This woman made a fetish of the pain of others. This was not someone who deserved any honor.

    • gbjames
      Posted July 9, 2013 at 4:58 am | Permalink

      I’m sure Mother Theresa had a good heart

      How do you know that?

      Read Hitchens’ short book “Missionary Position”. You may change your mind. She was a cruel to many thousands of people whom she could have helped, but didn’t because she thought suffering (mostly of others) was divine. Religion poisons everything, including “good hearts”.

    • Draken
      Posted July 10, 2013 at 3:07 am | Permalink

      There isn’t anything wrong with accepting money from dictators or criminals

      Hell yes, there is. Anything from ‘silent condonement’ via ‘whitewashing’ to ‘aiding and abetting’ jumps to mind.

      • Jckson
        Posted July 10, 2013 at 3:28 am | Permalink

        I suppose you also believe a dying man shouldn’t take food from a dictator. Please, go on. Tell us how the poor should die. It’s “condonement!” Why? Please, explain!

        • infiniteimprobabilit
          Posted July 10, 2013 at 11:00 pm | Permalink

          Your argument might have some validity if any of the money from the dictators had actually, like, reached the dying and helped them.

          We can certainly say how the poor should die and it’s “in better conditions than Mother Teresa gave them”.

          That aside, it’s true there are arguments both ways on whether ‘dirty money’ can or should be used for good. Just in this case it’s kind of irrelevant because Mother T didn’t use it for good anyway.

          • aroup chatterjee
            Posted July 11, 2013 at 1:38 am | Permalink

            Teresa did NOT actually feed many dying men or women. All she did was feed her own ego, her (false) reputation and that of the Vatican.

            • BeyondRedemption....
              Posted July 11, 2013 at 3:11 am | Permalink

              BINGO!!!!

        • Ed
          Posted January 1, 2014 at 11:34 pm | Permalink

          Where does a dictator get his money? The poor in his own country. So the most you could possibly say is she took from the poor and gave to the poor. But as others note, she really didn’t give the poor anything more than a floor mat to die on. In the meantime, she used the money to fly first class around the world, hobnob with celebrities, collect her Nobel Peace prize (what a disgrace), and get decent medical care for herself when she was sick. Sounds like a real saint to me.

      • Amandonor for it.
        Posted January 31, 2014 at 7:16 am | Permalink

        There is indeed nothing wrong with accepting money from dictators. There is a MAHOR problem with aiding them. This evil woman accepted the money and gave them honor for it.

        Had she accepted the money secretly and spent it on good it would have been good. She however rewarded and validated them in order to raise her own reputation.

        If I was a xtian I would be less bothered by her since I would be certain that she would rot in Hell for eternity and suffer as she made other suffer.

  7. connie
    Posted July 9, 2013 at 2:10 am | Permalink

    OMGG is there nothing true in this world…..

    • BeyondRedemption....
      Posted July 11, 2013 at 3:12 am | Permalink

      Remember the old saying, ”If it seems too good to be true, it probably is”

  8. cynthia caldwell
    Posted July 9, 2013 at 7:53 am | Permalink

    i’m glad to see the truth finally coming out.my question is why didn’t it come out sooner?

    • Grania Spingies
      Posted July 9, 2013 at 8:00 am | Permalink

      Aroup Chatterjee’s book ‘Mother Teresa – The Final Verdict’ came out in 2002; so this has been around for a few years at least.

      I guess the book didn’t get the publicity it should have. Also, I guess people don’t want to believe something less than admirable about a person they thought was the epitome of goodness.

  9. Risa
    Posted July 9, 2013 at 10:49 am | Permalink

    After reading this now I admire her more. Flawed personalities and antiheroes are way more interesting. Her personality and morals might be questionable if you believe what these authors say about her but doesn’t change the fact that she aided hundreds. I really want to know more about this but I’m not sure my views on her will change at all. People are never 100% evil or 100% good and it’s the mix or good and bad deeds what define us as humans.

    I can see why the catholic church want to make her a saint. A lot of saints had questionable morals as well and they need new idols.

    I really admire Mother Teresa and I think the more I’ll learn of her shortcomings the more I’ll admire her. How many of us could do better than her?

    • microraptor
      Posted July 9, 2013 at 2:24 pm | Permalink

      If we were given the kind of financial backing she had, I’d say that most of us could do a lot better than her.

    • Notagod
      Posted July 9, 2013 at 3:15 pm | Permalink

      Being better than a christian god is a rather low bar to set for yourself.

    • Draken
      Posted July 10, 2013 at 3:16 am | Permalink

      Just about any nongovernmental aid organisation with less than 20% overhead does better than Mother Theresa, Inc.

    • Andy
      Posted November 19, 2013 at 7:51 pm | Permalink

      That’s the problem with admiration, it is mostly based on unsubstantiated biases (in this case, the media hype) and makes it hard to acknowledge that your long held belief was farce. You could sit in your plush living room and feel good that someone else is taking care of the poors. You just sent her $100 and got over your guilt.

      Can you tell one specific work that her, so called, charity actually did, in any mentionable magnitude?

  10. Patti
    Posted July 9, 2013 at 1:10 pm | Permalink

    “Phony miracles”??? Are there any other kind?

  11. carl mosconi
    Posted July 9, 2013 at 2:24 pm | Permalink

    Truly unfortunate that there was no hell for her to go to!

    • microraptor
      Posted July 9, 2013 at 2:27 pm | Permalink

      Hey! Just because she was a fraud who hurt people while supposedly helping them still doesn’t justify eternal torture. We’re supposed to be taking the moral high ground compared to the religious wing-nuts, remember?

      • Draken
        Posted July 10, 2013 at 3:18 am | Permalink

        But I think when she died purgatory was still in effect.

  12. Jackson
    Posted July 9, 2013 at 7:16 pm | Permalink

    Seriously? Taking money from dictatorships is one of your main qualms? Hey, at least Cuba doesn’t bomb the middle east, dude.

  13. Posted July 9, 2013 at 10:31 pm | Permalink

    almost too funny that they glorify mother theresa but rejecting existence of pope joan :)

  14. Ranjith
    Posted July 9, 2013 at 11:30 pm | Permalink

    I am not surprised how people misuse opportunity for selling… Even if God comes to earth for healing people, there will be objections/rejections from society… It is the fact that happened 2000 years back with Jesus… I do not feel pity for these people, because they were/are/will do it…. For any good there will be always bad….

    And off course I am not catholic nor bothered about sainthood…

    For those who say they do anything for money, why you earth you are NOT doing it(helping needy)???

  15. Posted July 14, 2013 at 3:20 am | Permalink

    A great many years ago, in a meeting with Ann Wigmore, in a friend’s apartment, she recounted how in Calcutta she met a young mother and her small children begging on the street. She came back the next day and gave that young woman a sewing machine and some lengths of cloth so that the woman could work and earn a living. Soon after, the young mother had a thriving little business and had pulled her children and herself out of abject poverty and homelessness. This deeply angered Mother Teresa who harshly criticized and attacked Ann Wigmore. This is when I started doing some research and questioning the authenticity of Mother Teresa, and found out that she refused to buy cheap and effective medicines that could have quickly cured a great many people in her Homes for the Dying

  16. Ken Miller
    Posted August 18, 2013 at 10:45 pm | Permalink

    Quantum reality is strange, troublesome, and downright illogical, but its unexpected discovery solves one of the key philosophical problems faced by any religious person: How can a world governed by precise physical law escape a strictly deterministic future?…

    The indeterminate nature of quantum behavior means that the details of the future are not strictly determined by present reality….few theologians appreciate the degree to which physics has rescued religion from the dangers of Newtonian predictability.

    I suspect that they do not know (at least not yet) who their true friends are!

  17. Thomas McLoughlin
    Posted November 13, 2013 at 4:27 pm | Permalink

    The problem with this review of her achievements or fakery is that I can’t judge how cynical or jaded they are, perhaps out of personal anger and angst at a grand old institution with alot of problems.

    Some obvious points:

    1. Slums – real slums – have a totally different moral compass. Rather I understand from survivors of slums (eg in Santiago in the 60ies) that they are ammoral places. Child abuse is normalised. Everyone is crawling over everyone else to surive. A slum is a dangerous scary reality that hardly conforms to comfortable middle class mores.

    2. First class seat on a plane? Are you serious? Don’t you think the if only for PR purposes it was donated by the airline? This is such a no brainer it sort of undermines the reality of all the rest of the critique as naive and shallow.

    3. I agree Catholicism has a sickness in it about original sin and masochistic embrace of suffering, for instance celibacy as a virture as distinct from perversity. Compare say Buddhism. I rejected that concept as a Catholic a long time back.

    4. What I don’t get from the criticism is a sense of balance – are you saying she did no good at all, despite her fame and expansion of her order? That itself doesn’t sound very credible.

    5. Hundreds of millions of dollars in donations? Given the costs involved that doesn’t sound like alot of money over time for the size of the operation.

    6. Accepting money from dictators and criminals – well you can deconstruct that in many ways. Do the poor give a flying proverbial where it comes from? Shoud we? Yes but should they? I expect not.

    • Andy
      Posted November 19, 2013 at 7:28 pm | Permalink

      It is well known that she constantly used her (fake) “working for poor” image to humiliate the airlines emolyees into giving her a first class seat, for free (not coach class). Airlines couldn’t do much given her towering image created by western media. Indian media, to prove their (pseudo) secular credentials, totally ignored the lies spread by the leading figure of the minority religion (read Christianity).

      To your point 4 – your asking the question itself proves the point. Had she done anything worth mentioning, you probably would have mentioned thaykt here as a counter arguement. Absence there of, proves that her claims were mere myths and nothing substantive was ever done. Go to Kolkata (Calcutta) and see if you can even find her organization, let alone to extent you ever inagined (blame media).

  18. Charlie
    Posted November 15, 2013 at 8:34 am | Permalink

    “Religion allows billions to believe things only lunatics could believe on their own.”

    Sam Harris

    • shiroijin
      Posted November 15, 2013 at 3:34 pm | Permalink

      I’ve always loved that quote!

  19. Posted November 25, 2013 at 9:01 am | Permalink

    And now the criticism section of her wiki bio is gone. Fuckers

  20. lisaestus
    Posted November 28, 2013 at 2:41 pm | Permalink

    For a lucid and unflinching account of serving in Missionaries of Charity close to Mother Theresa, see Mary Johnson’s memoir “Unquenchable Thirst.”

    http://www.maryjohnson.co/book-an-unquenchable-thirst/

  21. Posted December 17, 2013 at 1:12 pm | Permalink

    Reblogged this on π's blog.

  22. fanci64
    Posted January 19, 2014 at 3:59 am | Permalink

    This woman was a terrible person. I hope there is never another like her to spread her lies and push her agenda while letting people starve right in front of her. Giving rosaries and telling them that god would save them and when that wasn’t happening telling them well then it was gods will. She as deplorable and so are her teachings. Take your lies and deceit and use the money to actualy feed the hungry and give homes to the homeless. Give condems and education on aids to those that are in danger. Shit just actually help someone instead of spreading your myths about some non-entity. Ugh!

  23. Willard Bolinger
    Posted February 12, 2014 at 11:44 am | Permalink

    No one mentioned that Hitchens book claimed that she did not even sterlize any medical instruments. No pain medicines were given, as someone mentioned. Some food and water was provided and a place out of the weather.No beds either just a mat on the floor. Not much else.

  24. sarahlearichards
    Posted April 7, 2014 at 7:34 am | Permalink

    Eye-opening article. Comments I’d read on FB led me to learning more about her. She didn’t sound like a very compassionate woman to me. The point of Christ suffering was so we didn’t have to. Some suffering, because of this world we live in, is unavoidable, but to withhold succor from the poor and sick and suffering, well, that’s evil. Jesus, when He was on this earth (I am guessing, by the title of your blog, you are not a believer–that’s fine, but this is where I’m coming from), healed people–He didn’t let them suffer. I’ve heard that Mother Teresa helped cloak the sins of the pedophile priests, but I don’t know if that’s true.

  25. SmilingAtheist
    Posted May 13, 2014 at 6:18 am | Permalink

    Bottom line…………… in order: To become a ‘Saint’… first you must have been a HUGE PIECE of SHIT, while you were alive…..

    • Kalyani Kurup
      Posted May 13, 2014 at 5:00 pm | Permalink

      Very interesting comment!

  26. Posted June 4, 2014 at 9:06 am | Permalink

    Reblogged this on Ahaa and commented:
    I’m not sure that there is a lot to say about this story as it’s fairly well known now. However, it should be pointed out that the claim about the ‘missing millions’ is simply that …a claim… not substantiated. However the conditions of her hospices and disposition to leave her patients untreated are much easier to support. As in fact the contrast with her own life were she was able to access first class medical care. while they “…suffered in Christ”. The ‘miracle’ that she needed to have her canonisation pushed through was it seems simply a product of a new Kodak film quality and the rapture with which Malcolm Muggeridge received it. Perhaps it’s better to have the truth about our icons that to keep adding further embellishments to history.

  27. Posted June 19, 2014 at 6:03 am | Permalink

    She encouraged poor woman to procreate.


9 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. [...] A new exposé of Mother Teresa shows that she – and the Vatican – were even worse than w… (whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com) [...]

  2. [...] This is one of the several recent posts on Mother Teresa, whose Nobel Peace Award is questioned by many. The plain and simple truth about her is that she did whatever sort of social work a Catholic Church worker could possibly be expected to do. Such work never can be very highly regarded, but, on account of successful propaganda, she won the Noble Peace Award which, we observe, is sometimes controversial and motivated by political considerations. But to attribute miracles to her is an insult to human intelligence, which only the Catholic Church is capable of trying out. The following section from Hindu writer Sita Ram Goel's book "PAPACY, its Doctrine and History" (Voice of India, 1986) is well worth quoting in this connection: CHRISTIANITY AND FREEDOM OF RELIGION The less said about the Christian call for Freedom of Religion the better. The record of Christianity in this respect exists in cold print and need not be reproduced here. Christianity has been and remains one one of the greatest and most persistent enemies of every freedom, let alone freedom of religion. Some of the most unrelenting crusaders against freedom in every form are still being hailed as saints by the Church. We have yet to hear of a Christian theologian who has betrayed anything but awe towards men like St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas and St. Francis Xavier. As recently as 1984, Mother Teresa gave an interview to INDIA TODAY which had come out a cover story on her in one of its issues. One of the questions put to her was: "With whom would you have sided between Galileo and the Church?" It did not take her even a split second to say, "With the Church." Galileo was not propounding any theology opposed to Christianity. In fact, he was a believing Christian. he had only reported a physical phenomenon which he had seen with his own eyes and which he was prepared to show to the inquisitors appointed by the Pope. His discovery has since then been accepted by the whole world, including the Catholic Church. But Mother Teresa finds it difficult to forgive the man simply because differed with the Church, even though he was right and the Church was wholly in the wrong. What the Church really means by Freedom of Religion is that it should have an unbridled opportunity spread its superstition and extend its hierarchy with the help of mammoth finances from the West. What it does not endorse a Freedom of Religion is a non-Christian's right to live his own life without its ministrations. It insists that it has an inalienable right to inflict its missionaries and its mumbo-jumbo on everyone everywhere. If anyone objects to this uncalled for and aggressive interference, he is violating Freedom of Religion. (See also whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com) [...]

  3. […] Continue Reading… […]

  4. […] A new exposé of Mother Teresa shows that she—and the Vatican—were even worse than we thought […]

  5. […] Great info from Jerry Coyne -> A new exposé of Mother Teresa shows that she—and the Vatican—were even worse than we thought […]

  6. […] Bonus article: Why Mother Teresa is Even Worse than We Thought […]

  7. […] A new exposé of Mother Teresa shows that she—and the Vatican—were even worse than we thought […]

  8. […] have since looked into this and have found no such bylaws. See this report, quoted […]

  9. […] have seen Bono’s halo smudged, and encountered very troubling challenges to the image of the penultimate ‘good celebrity’, namely Mother Theresa. Fortunately, we have also learned that there are critical voices around tackling the global […]

Post a Comment

Required fields are marked *
*
*

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 27,027 other followers

%d bloggers like this: