Mother Teresa made a saint

[DBT]

They had no such option.

False.
Therese made some of them die in horribly pains under a roof shen they could have been curied.

That being the downfall for any claim to sainthood, either in the literal of figurative sense, and an example of her delusional thinking and harm caused by default in spite of having good intentions and providing what could have been a legacy of decency, but now thoroughly tarnished...at worst, a holy minded negligent fool who should have been questioned and disciplined by the church early in her work with the poor of India.

 

[RavenSky]

That's still not the same as 'she did no good whatsoever' 'she was completely and utterly bad' - which is what's being implied. Nobody is absolutely evil, twisted or bad.

(bolding mine)

No excuse, of course there isn't.....but also, nothing is quite as simple as some would like to think when they point the finger of blame.

(bolding mine)

It was rhetoric in relation to the level of criticism aimed at her, but not so much at the Church that supported her and readily accepted whatever they could from donations. With no apparent complaints in regard to what she was doing wrong

She didn't actually set out to kill anyone, and yes it is an example of stupid goodness, delusion and negligence, but that's long way from the acts Stalin, et al, or even the attitude of some of our current and potential leaders, Trump comes to mind.

Who is blaming her only? All criticism I've seen has been directed to the role of the religion and the catholic church. That doesn not releave her of her personal responsibility though.

There appears to be a lot of vitriol aimed at her rather the Church. Of course they are both being criticized, and otherwise quite fairly...the rational criticism falling on both, which is fair enough, but not necessarily the vitriol.

Then why are you criticizing everyone else for holding that same opinion? This thread is about Mother Teresa. There have been plenty of threads about the Catholic Church as a whole, and I don't think you will find anyone here defending them either.

I haven't criticised anyone. It's a discussion. This is a discussion forum. My contention being that regardless of the quite fair criticism of some of her attitudes and actions, she did help those living in the gutters of Calcutta, who were apparently being ignored and left to live and die in the gutter.

OK

 

[iolo]

I think the problem is that the RC Church - and others - judge by intention, whereas rougher elements like me tend to go by results.

 

[DBT]

(bolding mine)

No excuse, of course there isn't.....but also, nothing is quite as simple as some would like to think when they point the finger of blame.

(bolding mine)

It was rhetoric in relation to the level of criticism aimed at her, but not so much at the Church that supported her and readily accepted whatever they could from donations. With no apparent complaints in regard to what she was doing wrong

She didn't actually set out to kill anyone, and yes it is an example of stupid goodness, delusion and negligence, but that's long way from the acts Stalin, et al, or even the attitude of some of our current and potential leaders, Trump comes to mind.

Who is blaming her only? All criticism I've seen has been directed to the role of the religion and the catholic church. That doesn not releave her of her personal responsibility though.

There appears to be a lot of vitriol aimed at her rather the Church. Of course they are both being criticized, and otherwise quite fairly...the rational criticism falling on both, which is fair enough, but not necessarily the vitriol.

Then why are you criticizing everyone else for holding that same opinion? This thread is about Mother Teresa. There have been plenty of threads about the Catholic Church as a whole, and I don't think you will find anyone here defending them either.

I haven't criticised anyone. It's a discussion. This is a discussion forum. My contention being that regardless of the quite fair criticism of some of her attitudes and actions, she did help those living in the gutters of Calcutta, who were apparently being ignored and left to live and die in the gutter.

OK

What I said was not criticism of anyone in particular, no ad homs, no names mentioned or referred to, no personal innuendo, attacks or remarks.

My comments were not directed at any particular poster, the reference of vitriol was a reference to the things being said, not the person, nor only what was said on this thread or forum.

Just as the forum rules of discussion stipulate, my remarks were directed purely at the things being said and not at any particular poster, or posters.

 

[Juma]

(bolding mine)

(bolding mine)

It was rhetoric in relation to the level of criticism aimed at her, but not so much at the Church that supported her and readily accepted whatever they could from donations. With no apparent complaints in regard to what she was doing wrong

She didn't actually set out to kill anyone, and yes it is an example of stupid goodness, delusion and negligence, but that's long way from the acts Stalin, et al, or even the attitude of some of our current and potential leaders, Trump comes to mind.

Who is blaming her only? All criticism I've seen has been directed to the role of the religion and the catholic church. That doesn not releave her of her personal responsibility though.

There appears to be a lot of vitriol aimed at her rather the Church. Of course they are both being criticized, and otherwise quite fairly...the rational criticism falling on both, which is fair enough, but not necessarily the vitriol.

Then why are you criticizing everyone else for holding that same opinion? This thread is about Mother Teresa. There have been plenty of threads about the Catholic Church as a whole, and I don't think you will find anyone here defending them either.

I haven't criticised anyone. It's a discussion. This is a discussion forum. My contention being that regardless of the quite fair criticism of some of her attitudes and actions, she did help those living in the gutters of Calcutta, who were apparently being ignored and left to live and die in the gutter.

OK

That's not criticism of anyone in particular, no ad homs, no names mentioned or referred to, no persomal remarks. My remarks were not directed at any particular poster, the reference of vitriol was directed at the things being said, not the person and not only what was said on this thread.

Just as the rules stipulate, directing remarks at the things being said, not the poster.

Your position in this thread is as if someone wanted to make Hitler a saint and the crowd goes WHAT??? and you go:
-but he wasnt all bad...

 

[DBT]

Your position in this thread is as if someone wanted to make Hitler a saint and the crowd goes WHAT??? and you go:
-but he wasnt all bad...

BS. Stop misrepresenting what I said.

You raised the Hitler strawman even after I made the comment that ''you'd think she's worse that Hitler, Stalin, et al, rolled into one''......meaning that no such comparison can be made. Which I also stated in a later post.

There being no such comparison to be made, it certainly is not my position.

You are the one who engages with ad homs and insults whenever you don't agree with something, for which several posters have turned on you because of your poor manners.

 

[Juma]

You are the one who engages with ad homs and insults whenever you don't agree with something, for which several posters have turned on you because of your poor manners.

So this isnt an ad hom???

You have really bad self insight...

But really: the Hitler comparison is on the spot. Just once try to realize what it means, instead of your knee-jerk reaction.

 

[DBT]

You are the one who engages with ad homs and insults whenever you don't agree with something, for which several posters have turned on you because of your poor manners.

So this isnt an ad hom???

You have really bad self insight...

I don't deny that it is. But I didn't start this exchange of ad homs, for that you need to look at the style of your own response whenever you don't like what someone happens to be saying. Which, when a poster retaliated to your rudeness, you have tried to justify it by saying you apply it fairy when its needed, according to your own assessment of fairness of course.

If you have something to say, address what is actually said, not the poster, not using your own version of what you imagine was said rather than what has actually been said. Like your Hitler BS, even after I had twice said there is no comparison to be made.

 

[Juma]

So this isnt an ad hom???

You have really bad self insight...

I don't deny that it is. But I didn't start this exchange of ad homs, for that you need to look at the style of your own response whenever you don't like what someone happens to be saying. Which, when a poster retaliated to your rudeness, you have tried to justify it by saying you apply it fairy when its needed, according to your own assessment of fairness of course.

Come on. This is ridiculous. All i said what that you was too focused on a tiny aspect of the question and this made you start to whine... Stop perpuating this side discussing.

If you have something to say, address what is actually said, not the poster, not using your own version of what you imagine was said rather than what has actually been said. Like your Hitler BS, even after I had twice said there is no comparison to be made.

Of course there is a comparison to be made!
zoidberg has a very valid point there.

 

[DBT]

I don't deny that it is. But I didn't start this exchange of ad homs, for that you need to look at the style of your own response whenever you don't like what someone happens to be saying. Which, when a poster retaliated to your rudeness, you have tried to justify it by saying you apply it fairy when its needed, according to your own assessment of fairness of course.

Come on. This is ridiculous. All i said what that you was too focused on a tiny aspect of the question and this made you start to whine... Stop perpuating this side discussing.

No, It's your little snide remarks that you attach to your posts that I find objectionable: ''Try to have more than one thought in your mind at the same time...'' ''and this made you start to whine'' etc.

I doubt that you'd talk like that in person, to strangers, yet being online and anonymous you feel empowered to offer slights and insults at will. This is not whining, just pointing out your obnoxious manner of interacting with those with whom you disagree, and not just that this ignorance and lack of basic courtesy now happens to be directed at me.

Of course there is a comparison to be made!
zoidberg has a very valid point there.

There is no comparison between well meaning but incompetent administration by a nun caught up in religious dogma and applying this to her patients, which should have been addressed by her superiors in the Church (it being their duty of care and the reputation of the Church) and intentionally attempting to exterminate a whole sector of the population, the Jews, starting a world war and causing death and suffering on a global scale.

 

[Juma]

Come on. This is ridiculous. All i said what that you was too focused on a tiny aspect of the question and this made you start to whine... Stop perpuating this side discussing.

No, It's your little snide remarks that you attach to your posts that I find objectionable: ''Try to have more than one thought in your mind at the same time...'' ''and this made you start to whine'' etc.

I doubt that you'd talk like that in person, to strangers, yet being online and anonymous you feel empowered to offer slights and insults at will. This is not whining, just pointing out your obnoxious manner of interacting with those with whom you disagree, and not just that this ignorance and lack of basic courtesy now happens to be directed at me.

I'm the obnoxious one here? You have been ignoring a bunch of posters coming with well grounded stguments against your posts which you in your selfassured way simply dismisses without anything more than simply repeating the same arguments in absurdum.
THAT is being obnoxious.

Of course there is a comparison to be made!
zoidberg has a very valid point there.

There is no comparison between well meaning but incompetent administration by a nun caught up in religious dogma and applying this to her patients, which should have been addressed by her superiors in the Church (it being their duty of care and the reputation of the Church) and intentionally attempting to exterminate a whole sector of the population, the Jews, starting a world war and causing death and suffering on a global scale.

Could as well have cut and pasted from previous post.

Why do you bother when you actually doesnt adress wgat I write?

DBT: this a discussion board, not an echo valley.

 

[lpetrich]

Here are the originals of these miracles:

• Did MT ever speak in several languages without having to learn them? -- Francis Xavier
• Did MT ever calm any storms? -- Genevieve
• Did MT ever miraculously fill an empty oil can with oil or recharge a dead battery? -- Genevieve
• Did MT ever miraculously desalinate seawater? -- Francis Xavier
• Did MT ever point out any monster-containing trees? -- Genevieve
• Did MT ever get a lost crucifix returned to her by a crab? -- Francis Xavier
• Did MT ever cure anyone's blindness? -- Genevieve
• Did MT ever strike blind anyone who stole from her? -- Genevieve
• Did MT ever cause an earthquake in a town whose citizens said nasty things about her? -- Francis Xavier
• Did MT ever miraculously create any big piles of bread and fish? -- Jesus Christ
• Did MT ever raise anyone from the dead? -- Jesus Christ
• Did MT ever cure anyone with magical spit therapy? -- Jesus Christ
• Did MT ever walk on water? -- Jesus Christ
• Did MT ever turn water into wine? -- Jesus Christ
• Did MT ever zap some Missionaries of Charity employee who kept too much for herself? -- Peter
• Did MT ever turn some sticks into snakes? -- Moses
• Did MT ever sic a pack of stray dogs on some kids who teased her about being a wrinkled old hag? -- Elisha
• Did MT ever have a competition with some Hindu priests about whose god was better at making a rain of fire from on high? -- Elijah

Here's a nice biography of St. Genevieve (419/422 CE - 502/512 CE): MEDIEVAL WOMEN - Scriptorium: St. Genevieve Complete with the miracles that she allegedly worked.

St. Francis Xavier (1506 - 1552) was discussed in Debunking Christianity: Xavier and the Evolution of Legendary Miracles, drawing on Andrew Dickson White's book "A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom". While he was not reported to have worked miracles during his lifetime, he got credited with oodles of miracles some decades later. Miracles Of St. Francis Xavier lists some of them.

 

[RavenSky]

Moderator Advisory

/mod

 

[ideologyhunter]

If this thread is the end result of religion -- heated argument concerning dead people in the sky -- then I'm glad I own a dachshund. His kind of crazy at least relates to biscuits, toys, you know, real things.