Accusations against Saint Teresa?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Mike_from_NJ said:
With quotes from Mother Teresa like "I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people,” and the fact that her hospice has been compared to the camp at Bergen-Belsen, is it fair to suggest she may be less interested in the alleviation of suffering than other charities? It’s solely my opinion, but I’d say yes.
Click to expand...
To criticize her for talking about sharing in the passion of Christ is to fail to understand Christian theology. The people who fault her for such a statement don’t understand these deeper concepts and more important, don’t want to. It’s like a kindergartener critiquing a NASA scientist’s decisions.

To compare her hospice to Belgen-Bersen is beyond foolish, ignorant, and disingenuous.
  1. She didn’t raid people’s homes and drag them to her hospice; she picked up the neglected and abandoned and brought them someplace better than a gutter and did what she could for them.
  2. She attempted to help them there as best she could in their last days or hours, to give them whatever warmth, shelter, food, and human love she could–a huge step above dying in a gutter
  3. She was working with what she had
    4 Honesty, the slums she worked in could have been compared to Bergen-Belsen, the conditions were so bad. So it’s ridiculous to blame the hospice for not being a 5 star spa.
My biggest problem with such statements is that invariably, they come from people who, themselves, have done less than a thousandth of a percent of what Mother Teresa did to help the poor. I myself haven’t done anywhere near what she did–therefore I would be condemning myself far more, if I condemned her.
As I mentioned at the start, h r charity has done good work; but I think the claims that based on the outpouring of money it received it could have done far more is valid. And just because there are detractors doesn’t mean one shouldn’t attempt to refute or validate these claims. There are great many things in this world that are hated and rightfully so.
Click to expand...
See above but I repeat because it’s such a serious point: NOBODY is in a position to find fault with her unless they have done at least as much, personally, to help other people. If they condemn her and have done less for others than she did, then they condemn themselves far more.

Nearly every single person in the western world could be doing far more, themselves, to help others.
 
Infants were never Baptised without the parents consent. This was a false accusation.

She may have Baptized orphaned infants who were in her hospice, who were dying, but really, what harm was there in that ?
 
On World Day of the Sick last year, my husband was in the CVICU after having what is essentially a mechanical heart implanted in an attempt to keep him alive until a heart transplant. He had been in hospital for many weeks.

That day, the chaplain along with the hospital president and some others in upper management came into our room. They were in the company of 3 Missionaries of Charity. I have been around some of these sisters at various Diocese events, but never so up close and personal. They were visiting the hospital that day and wanted to visit the “sickest” person in the hospital. My husband was the most medically fragile person there.

The spirit of peace that surrounded these ladies was palpable. They wanted to pray a rosary with us, they led us in singing and they prayed for my husband. They gave us each a small medal, I asked to take a photo and they humbly refused. They said “remember this in your heart”.

Mother Teresa’s legacy is in these lovely, humble, brave women.
 
‘The saints of God and all devout friends of Christ did not look to what pleases the body nor to the things that are popular from time to time. Their whole hope and aim centered on the everlasting good. Their whole desire pointed upward to the lasting and invisible realm, lest the love of what is visible drag them down to lower things.’ - The Imitation of Christ
 
Poet said:
To criticize her for talking about sharing in the passion of Christ is to fail to understand Christian theology. The people who fault her for such a statement don’t understand these deeper concepts and more important, don’t want to. It’s like a kindergartener critiquing a NASA scientist’s decisions.
Click to expand...
Seeing great strength in those who suffer and fighting diligently to alleviate suffering are not mutually exclusive.
To compare her hospice to Belgen-Bersen is beyond foolish, ignorant, and disingenuous.
Click to expand...
That comparison came from a nurse who worked for a time with the Missionaries of Charity.

And you are correct that those that she helped were not forced to stay with her. The question is if other charities in the area have done or will do a better job with the people that come to their door. You say she did the best with what she had, but I strongly disagree. She had so many donations that could have gone to the care of the sick and poor but weren’t. I have to find the link, but there was a story I read where one of the locations of MoC had been given washing machines; yet they remained unopened and unused and Mother Teresa insisted that washing had to be done by hand, despite how much time that would save allowing more time with the suffering. This falls in line with this article where she was able to purchase a building in New York City for 1 dollar, but when told she would need to have an elevator installed by law she declined (seeing an elevator as a sign of wealth).

By the way, no one said anything about a hospice having to be a “5 star spa”, but it’s reasonable for a hospice to bring comfort, achieve a certain physical cleanliness, provide a semblance of dignity in one’s dying days, and lessen suffering. The last one especially seems to be a sticking point with someone who sees much power in suffering.
My biggest problem with such statements is that invariably, they come from people who, themselves, have done less than a thousandth of a percent of what Mother Teresa did to help the poor.
Click to expand...
That is not correct. Some of the harshest criticisms have come from people who have worked under Mother Teresa, are on the front lines of helping the poor , or are the poor themselves (see the link in the OP).
 
Last edited:
See above but I repeat because it’s such a serious point: NOBODY is in a position to find fault with her unless they have done at least as much, personally, to help other people. If they condemn her and have done less for others than she did, then they condemn themselves far more.
Click to expand...
The issue isn’t so much whether Mother Teresa helped people, because as I said originally she did, but whether A) she did enough with what she was given compared to other charities, and B) whether there were negative things that went along with the good that was done.

Starting with A, there are several sites out there specifically to rate and compare charities as well as cite any concerns of that charity. These concerns can be anything from having a low percentage of the monies collected go to those who need it, to organizational mismanagement, to focusing on less important aspects of the cause. Take a charity like Susan G. Komen Foundation. A significant percentage of its funds go to “raising awareness” as opposed to either funding research or using to help those who are afflicted. They have helped people, but there are those (myself included) who get angry at the amount of money they receive compared with the amount of help they provide. People should have all the facts if they want to support the poor in areas where the MoC serve and decide for themselves if their charity dollars might be better spent with another charity who does more and.or makes the money go farther (see the link in the OP).

Now with B, we’ll go to Susan G, Komen again. The group has sued other charities demanding that they not use the word “cure” or use the color pink in their charitable works. Another example would be charities that support pro-life or pro-choice causes. There are people on both sides of the debate who’d want to know if their funds support or fight abortion. In the same way, a donor might look at the good works the MoC have done but be concerned that it supported multiple dictators (inclding one from Haiti, which compares to India in the squalor its poor live in), took money that didn’t belong to them, ran a hospice that seemed to run counter to what a hospice is to do, and ignored the religious autonomy of those it served.

Speaking of that third item about the money that wasn’t theirs, you may wish to read this article where it was explained to Mother Teresa that the funds she got from Charles Keating were stolen from other people, including a poor carpenter who didn’t speak English and lost his life savings to the affair. She never responded and never returned the money.
 
TheLittleLady said:
I’ve never known a parish, Diocese, charity who does an investigation into the funds they receive.
Click to expand...
I would agree that as donations come in they are not investigating each one to see if it is reputable. I’ve seen where a few charities will not cash donations from certain people or groups on principle. For example, this article lists several rebuffs of atheist help by a few charities.

The important thing to note is this case is not about rejecting Charles Keating’s donation when it was received, but when it’s explained the money wasn’t his to give (and that it came from multiple sources, some of whom could hardly afford to lose the money) that it’s only right to return that money.

If a charity received money from Bernie Madoff, it should have been returned when this was realized so that it could go back to the people that were swindled. It’s no different than a stolen bike given as a gift has to be returned to its owner, or a painting from an art theft is returned by whatever collector or museum has it when it’s discovered it was stolen.
 
I don’t know this Mr Keating from the man in the moon. I would imagine that the Missionaries of Charity are not keyed into celebrity or politics or world news either, to then begin an investigation into the alleged misgained funds, I’d imagine that money was gone to assist the needy and not in some sort of holding account pending investigation.
 
I linked to this article upthread, and I’ve linked to it again.

For copyright reasons I won’t copy and paste the whole part about Mother Teresa and Charles Keating, but here are a few key points:
  1. He gave her donations totaling one million dollars.
  2. He allowed her the use of his private plane, so clearly he wasn’t some stranger dropping a check off in a donation box somewhere.
  3. To thank him she gave him a personal crucifix.
  4. During the trial Mother Teresa wrote to Judge Ito (yes, that Judge Ito) and asking for leniency. This clearly shows that not only was she aware of the crimes that he was accused of committing, but that he was on trial at the time for them.
  5. {EDITED} After seeing that letter and after Keating was convicted Paul Turley, the deputy DA for Los Angeles, wrote a reply explaining that Charles Keating defrauded 17 different individuals, some of whom could not afford to lose these funds.
The excuse that Mother Teresa was not aware of what was going on with the million dollars she did not return simply does not fly.
 
Last edited:
There is too much evidence against those accusation, more like this is just another attempt to discredit a holy person.
 
Mother Teresa is a saint in heaven with God. She is not bothered by or concerned with any attempts to discredit her on earth. I daresay she wasn’t bothered by or concerned with such attempts when she was alive, either. I believe she said something to the effect of, no matter what anyone says about you, just smile and do your work.

If people want to be hateful and reject the help and example of a great saint, they’re free to do so, and no doubt a lot of them will because Satan will try his hardest to influence them down the haters’ path. Haters gonna hate. It’s their own loss and not my problem.
 
Last edited:
So, the underlying issue seems to be, that people gave millions of dollars to Mother Theresa, but she didn’t use it for what the donors thought she would (medical supplies, poor relief).
Accurate, or not? Is there evidence for / against the accusations?
 
Last edited:
I have to say, you are by far the most civil critic I’ve come across. I wish there were more rebuttals to your assertions rather than just words of dismissal. I don’t think I believe that the accusations are just completely made up. I also still hold out hope that there is another side to the story in the case of each accusation.

I hate to see people say that the whole effort was just some sinister moneymaking scheme for the Vatican. I think it would be fairer to say that some human beings made poor decisions with the money they received, that perhaps never wanted to handle money as part of their jobs. I hope that those who hate and curse Saint Teresa under false pretenses see the light some day. I thought I might come to understand what has been blown out of proportion or what context has been twisted to enlighten those suffering from misinformation, but it seems too many already feel defeated by misinformation and would rather dismiss it.
 
She may not care about her reputation, but as a saint she must care about the truth and all souls that are lead astray. I really don’t understand why the majority of answers on a q&a forum have become, “don’t worry about it”.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top