Mother Teresa made a saint

[DrZoidberg]

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.

Which seems odd because I would place far more blame and vitriol at the feet of the Church hierarchy than a poor deluded servant of the Church who was being sanctioned by the Church. The Church hierarchy have far more to answer for than she.

Catholic agents are given quite a lot of freedom. The church really only cares about image. I read an internal review. The Catholic church is an odd construction. More than anything it's full of misguided goodness, and church officials think that they don't have to communicate. As long as they just do good deeds, it'll all just sort itself out. They've never had any kind of plan.

I don't think the church had a clue what was going on in Mother Theresa's missions. As long as the church wasn't getting bad press they didn't care. The church itself doesn't oversee what the missions do. There's no regular oversight or even machinery to do it.

The review system only kicks in when they get bad press. Then a cardinal is sent out to deal with it. Which in practice just means quietly replacing people, and switching them around. That was what the pedophile priest stink was all about. Philandering priests weren't exposed or fired, just moved somewhere else where they could keep doing God's work, ie sodomizing young boys.

It wasn't until after she was dead that people started asking questions, and then it was a bit too late. But her missions are still operating. So they can do something about it. They're just not.

 

[Juma]

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.

Which seems odd because I would place far more blame and vitriol at the feet of the Church hierarchy than a poor deluded servant of the Church who was being sanctioned by the Church. The Church hierarchy have far more to answer for than she.

Try to have more than one thought in your mind at the same time... She was fully responsible for her own actions and the catolic church is responsible for theirs.

 

[DBT]

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.

Which seems odd because I would place far more blame and vitriol at the feet of the Church hierarchy than a poor deluded servant of the Church who was being sanctioned by the Church. The Church hierarchy have far more to answer for than she.

Try to have more than one thought in your mind at the same time... She was fully responsible for her own actions and the catolic church is responsible for theirs.

So it's down to snide remarks and insults. Your stock in trade, going on past experience, keep it civil.

She was an agent of the church and what she did reflects back on the Church regardless of the leeway the church allows its agents.

Even now, rather than question her methods, the Church makes her a Saint.

And you miss the point that I am not defending her incompetence or the way she treated the people under her care or the absurdity of her beliefs, and those of the Church. These are indefensible.

I am simply pointing out that not everything she did was bad. Simply a roof and a bed is a net gain for many of the poorest folk in India.

If nothing else, that much is a good thing.

 

[DBT]

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.

Which seems odd because I would place far more blame and vitriol at the feet of the Church hierarchy than a poor deluded servant of the Church who was being sanctioned by the Church. The Church hierarchy have far more to answer for than she.

Catholic agents are given quite a lot of freedom. The church really only cares about image. I read an internal review. The Catholic church is an odd construction. More than anything it's full of misguided goodness, and church officials think that they don't have to communicate. As long as they just do good deeds, it'll all just sort itself out. They've never had any kind of plan.

I don't think the church had a clue what was going on in Mother Theresa's missions. As long as the church wasn't getting bad press they didn't care. The church itself doesn't oversee what the missions do. There's no regular oversight or even machinery to do it.

The review system only kicks in when they get bad press. Then a cardinal is sent out to deal with it. Which in practice just means quietly replacing people, and switching them around. That was what the pedophile priest stink was all about. Philandering priests weren't exposed or fired, just moved somewhere else where they could keep doing God's work, ie sodomizing young boys.

It wasn't until after she was dead that people started asking questions, and then it was a bit too late. But her missions are still operating. So they can do something about it. They're just not.

Then the buck stops with the Church hierarchy. An organization is responsible for the actions of its agents.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Catholic agents are given quite a lot of freedom. The church really only cares about image. I read an internal review. The Catholic church is an odd construction. More than anything it's full of misguided goodness, and church officials think that they don't have to communicate. As long as they just do good deeds, it'll all just sort itself out. They've never had any kind of plan.

I don't think the church had a clue what was going on in Mother Theresa's missions. As long as the church wasn't getting bad press they didn't care. The church itself doesn't oversee what the missions do. There's no regular oversight or even machinery to do it.

The review system only kicks in when they get bad press. Then a cardinal is sent out to deal with it. Which in practice just means quietly replacing people, and switching them around. That was what the pedophile priest stink was all about. Philandering priests weren't exposed or fired, just moved somewhere else where they could keep doing God's work, ie sodomizing young boys.

It wasn't until after she was dead that people started asking questions, and then it was a bit too late. But her missions are still operating. So they can do something about it. They're just not.

Then the buck stops with the Church hierarchy. An organization is responsible for the actions of its agents.

My point is that they're both bad and they both share blame.

 

[DBT]

Then the buck stops with the Church hierarchy. An organization is responsible for the actions of its agents.

My point is that they're both bad and they both share blame.

Very few businesses or organizations allow their agents to do whatever they please, thereby tarnish the reputation of the organization without penalty.

It's in the interest of the Church or any organization to set policy, set rules, to define the role of the agent and what he or she can or cannot do in the course of duties.

The fault is not equal.

 

[DrZoidberg]

My point is that they're both bad and they both share blame.

Very few businesses or organizations allow their agents to do whatever they please, thereby tarnish the reputation of the organization without penalty.

It's in the interest of the Church or any organization to set policy, set rules, to define the role of the agent and what he or she can or cannot do in the course of duties.

The fault is not equal.

Ok, fine the Catholic church deserves most of the blame. But that doesn't exonerate not-my-mom Theresa.

 

[Angry Floof]

The RCC is a depraved organization that operates under and spreads an ideology that breeds depravity.

It's an inhumane, inbred, delusional belief system that allows those most depraved within it to speak publicly, with a straight face, bullshit like this:

NY Bishop Rape Shames Abuse Victims: Boys Are ‘Culpable’ For Their Actions At 7 Years Old

Whatever you think is "good" in the RCC is only ordinary human goodness that arises in spite of an ideology that truly is not.

 

[DBT]

Very few businesses or organizations allow their agents to do whatever they please, thereby tarnish the reputation of the organization without penalty.

It's in the interest of the Church or any organization to set policy, set rules, to define the role of the agent and what he or she can or cannot do in the course of duties.

The fault is not equal.

Ok, fine the Catholic church deserves most of the blame. But that doesn't exonerate not-my-mom Theresa.

At no time did I suggest that she was, is or will be exonerated. Got to go, I'll be away for a couple of days.

 

[DBT]

The RCC is a depraved organization that operates under and spreads an ideology that breeds depravity.

It's an inhumane, inbred, delusional belief system that allows those most depraved within it to speak publicly, with a straight face, bullshit like this:

NY Bishop Rape Shames Abuse Victims: Boys Are ‘Culpable’ For Their Actions At 7 Years Old

Whatever you think is "good" in the RCC is only ordinary human goodness that arises in spite of an ideology that truly is not.

An old boys club that lost touch with reality a long time ago.

 

[Juma]

Try to have more than one thought in your mind at the same time... She was fully responsible for her own actions and the catolic church is responsible for theirs.

So it's down to snide remarks and insults. Your stock in trade, going on past experience, keep it civil.

She was an agent of the church and what she did reflects back on the Church regardless of the leeway the church allows its agents.

Even now, rather than question her methods, the Church makes her a Saint.

And you miss the point that I am not defending her incompetence or the way she treated the people under her care or the absurdity of her beliefs, and those of the Church. These are indefensible.

I am simply pointing out that not everything she did was bad. Simply a roof and a bed is a net gain for many of the poorest folk in India.

If nothing else, that much is a good thing.

Why then not point out that not everything Hitler did was bad?

Just the fact that you search for things that wasnt downtright horrid makes your posts look very weird indeed. The point is that Theresa wasnt so good as people beleive.

Saying things like you do then makes no sense whatever.

 

[lpetrich]

So she has now officially worked two miracles. But they are so absurdly paltry by the standards of past centuries. Where did the big miracles go? Why don't we see the sorts of miracles that one finds in the Bible? Or that medieval saints allegedly worked? Saints like St. Genevieve and St. Francis Xavier.

Can any of you recognize any of these miracles?

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

I will concede that she had worked some miracles:

• "Curing" the stomach cancer of Monica Besra, someone who was being medically treated for it.
• Creating an image of herself as a great humanitarian.
• An inverse bread-and-fish miracle: the disappearance of large amounts of money from the bank accounts of the Missionaries of Charity, her order of nuns.

 

[DBT]

So it's down to snide remarks and insults. Your stock in trade, going on past experience, keep it civil.

She was an agent of the church and what she did reflects back on the Church regardless of the leeway the church allows its agents.

Even now, rather than question her methods, the Church makes her a Saint.

And you miss the point that I am not defending her incompetence or the way she treated the people under her care or the absurdity of her beliefs, and those of the Church. These are indefensible.

I am simply pointing out that not everything she did was bad. Simply a roof and a bed is a net gain for many of the poorest folk in India.

If nothing else, that much is a good thing.

Why then not point out that not everything Hitler did was bad?



Just the fact that you search for things that wasnt downtright horrid makes your posts look very weird indeed. The point is that Theresa wasnt so good as people beleive.

Saying things like you do then makes no sense whatever.

You need to read more carefully. You are missing the point. Apparently you only see the world in stark black and white terms.

Maybe it comes from reading too many Marvel Comics, I don't know.

I've already pointed out that, given the conditions in India for Lepers, untouchables, etc, living on the streets, offering a roof and a bed is huge net gain for people in that position.

Unlike Hitler, Stalin, et al, she did not set out to kill anyone, exterminate people, etc, so there is no comparison to be made.

I've also pointed out that the greater blame for her failure to do better for the people in her care lies with the Catholic Church hierarchy, which is, or should be, responsible for the behaviour of its agents.

I say should be because it is the behaviour of its agents that reflects back onto the Church.

If this is too hard for you to gasp, and you have to resort to personal remarks (as you usually do when you disagree with someone), I can't help you to understand complexity in your stark black and white, good or bad, but never a blend of both, world.

That's all I have to say to you.

 

[Juma]

Why then not point out that not everything Hitler did was bad?



Just the fact that you search for things that wasnt downtright horrid makes your posts look very weird indeed. The point is that Theresa wasnt so good as people beleive.

Saying things like you do then makes no sense whatever.

You need to read more carefully. You are missing the point. Apparently you only see the world in stark black and white terms.

Maybe it comes from reading too many Marvel Comics, I don't know.

I've already pointed out that, given the conditions in India for Lepers, untouchables, etc, living on the streets, offering a roof and a bed is huge net gain for people in that position.

Unlike Hitler, Stalin, et al, she did not set out to kill anyone, exterminate people, etc, so there is no comparison to be made.

I've also pointed out that the greater blame for her failure to do better for the people in her care lies with the Catholic Church hierarchy, which is, or should be, responsible for the behaviour of its agents.

I say should be because it is the behaviour of its agents that reflects back onto the Church.

If this is too hard for you to gasp, and you have to resort to personal remarks (as you usually do when you disagree with someone), I can't help you to understand complexity in your stark black and white, good or bad, but never a blend of both, world.

That's all I have to say to you.

What would you rather do? Be cured but be living in the gutter or die in horrible pains but under a roof?

 

[DBT]

You need to read more carefully. You are missing the point. Apparently you only see the world in stark black and white terms.

Maybe it comes from reading too many Marvel Comics, I don't know.

I've already pointed out that, given the conditions in India for Lepers, untouchables, etc, living on the streets, offering a roof and a bed is huge net gain for people in that position.

Unlike Hitler, Stalin, et al, she did not set out to kill anyone, exterminate people, etc, so there is no comparison to be made.

I've also pointed out that the greater blame for her failure to do better for the people in her care lies with the Catholic Church hierarchy, which is, or should be, responsible for the behaviour of its agents.

I say should be because it is the behaviour of its agents that reflects back onto the Church.

If this is too hard for you to gasp, and you have to resort to personal remarks (as you usually do when you disagree with someone), I can't help you to understand complexity in your stark black and white, good or bad, but never a blend of both, world.

That's all I have to say to you.

What would you rather do? Be cured but be living in the gutter or die in horrible pains but under a roof?

They had no such option. They were living and dying in the gutter. They were not getting help. They were India's Untouchables, left to rot wherever they happened to be.

This does not excuse her attitude toward suffering, not providing the best of medical care, when she could have easily offered more, but that is not only her failing but the organisation to belonged.

She should have been questioned by the church hierarchy early in her career and made to reform both her attitude and her ways.

So in the end she could be described as a well intentioned but misguided religious zealot, an idiot perhaps, but not to be compared with Hitler, Stalin or your average murderer.

 

[RavenSky]

she did not take care of them. She forced them to suffer for the christian god. She didnt heal the those that could be healed.

A sane person could have done a lot of good for that enormous resources she was given.

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..

This thread is about her being made a saint; i.e. 'she was completely and utterly good'. Or to use the dictionary definition: "a person acknowledged as holy or virtuous"

She wasn't. Not by a long shot. That is the point people here are making.

 

[RavenSky]

And you miss the point that I am not defending her incompetence or the way she treated the people under her care or the absurdity of her beliefs, and those of the Church. These are indefensible.

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.

 

[Juma]

What would you rather do? Be cured but be living in the gutter or die in horrible pains but under a roof?

They had no such option.

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

 

[DBT]

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..

This thread is about her being made a saint; i.e. 'she was completely and utterly good'. Or to use the dictionary definition: "a person acknowledged as holy or virtuous"

She wasn't. Not by a long shot. That is the point people here are making.

That wasn't the point I was making. I made no claim that she was a saint, or that she did the best that could have been done in regard to the task she took on. Just that, up to a point, she saw a need to help those who were in need but had little or no help, and provided a degree of aid.

 

[DBT]

And you miss the point that I am not defending her incompetence or the way she treated the people under her care or the absurdity of her beliefs, and those of the Church. These are indefensible.

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.