Mother Teresa an evil person?

  • Thread starter Thread starter unitive_mystic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
U

unitive_mystic

Guest
So there is alot of controversy on Mother Teresa being an evil person. It’s like there is a bunch of people that think Mother Teresa is a very Holy person then there are people that think she is a terrible person.

The points these people have are very interesting. Here are a few.

She reused syringes and needles under the pretext of saving funds while millions of dollars from donations were being used to propagate Christianity.

The house of the dying she set up didn’t even offer palliative care to the terminally ill and were forced to die in extreme pain.

She would baptize people before they died instead of trying to keep them alive

When she got sick she went to western hospitals which made her look like a hypocrite.
 
I have two excellent movies - based on her life.
In fact, I was Facebook friends with Olivia Hussey -
Imagine ! She also played Mary in “ Jesus of Nazareth too !

There’s a fantastic book by Susan Conroy -
“ Mother Teresa’s lessons of love & Secrets of Sancity”
Read it twice. Emailed her too - a few times -
It’s about Susan, by herself, as a college gal…
going over to India - meeting - and helping Mother Teresa.
She probably has plenty of YouTube videos -
A class act - and sexy too 😛
 
I’ve heard some of these accusations, from an atheist friend who was determined to convince me she was evil. He had some similar things to say about Mahatma Ghandi, at the same time.
I didn’t believe him then and I don’t believe him now.
Or wouldn’t if he was still saying it.
He’s not saying it because now ✝️😁he’s a Christian 😁✝️ and I rejoice with great rejoicing. 😁
 
I’ll be honest. I struggle with Saint Mother Theresa’s flaws because I have read these kinds of claims in different sources. However, I think that her greatest act was to act and do good where most others (everyone?) felt overwhelmed and didn’t do anything.
 
I think that we forget many things about having to live in the times that you live in.

While we think of Mother Teresa as a contemporary because the majority of us were alive to remember her, given the conditions she lived in she really wasn’t.

She reused needles because that was all she had. She didn’t use the millions of dollars to build churches, buy gold chalices and “propagate Christianity” she bought books for school children, paid nurses and bought very basic facilities and supplies.

She took in dying people off the cold, dirty streets. There wasn’t enough money to offer much or sometimes any painkiller. But they were warm, dry and safe…it’s comparative. A terrible death to someone who lived in the 1st world, but to those who died in her care it was beyond what they could of hoped

Again–keep them alive? She had so little. It wasn’t NYC. It was slums of a 3rd world country.

She did seek western medicine. She sought to bring it to the people. She couldn’t provide it to everyone. As she aged she also didn’t have much of a choice as others cared for her.
 
Unmasking Mother Teresa’s Critics was a book that sort of demonstrates the ridiculous claims made against her.

The world hated Christ, too.

She is a canonized saint.
 
One of the parish staff members at my parish knew Mother Teresa. She was a member of Mother Teresa’s Religious Order when she was younger (took temporary vows, but never took her permanent vows). This staff member has told us many wonderful stories of Mother, and many that are very human, sweet, and sometimes funny.

Mother Teresa was a very holy person and Saint. They hate her because she was pro-life and gave a beautiful pro-life speech in front of (and humiliating) Hillary Clinton.
  1. regarding donations - donations are often donated for a specific purpose. If someone donated funds for Mother’s travel, then it would be wrong of her to use it for other purposes. Same thing would be if Mother used money donated for the poor to pay for travel.
  2. The idea that she didn’t offer palliative care to the terminally ill is simply slander. It is part of Catholic bio-ethics to provide palliative care. I’ve heard, first hand, stories from multiple people who worked directly with Mother and worked with the poor in Calcutta. The idea that there was no palliative care is slanderous.
  3. “She would baptize people before they died instead of trying to keep them alive” LOL This one is rich. Mother was not a doctor or nurse. She was a nun. It was the job of the doctors and nurses to keep them alive. It was the nuns’ job (unless they too were a nurse) to take care for them (physically and spiritually). The sisters would change adult diapers, change bed pans, etc. And also pray with the people, sit and read books to them, hold their hands, etc.
  4. “When she got sick she went to western hospitals which made her look like a hypocrite” How? How does this make her a hypocrite? Where did Mother ever say “they must stay in Calcutta for care because that’s the best thing for them”? She didn’t. Mother wasn’t just responsible for taking care of the poor. Mother was the leader of a worldwide Religious Order. She needed to take care of herself for not just the poor, but to keep her order running. Because of her significance, her sisters, priests/bishops, and laity were willing to pay to make sure she received the care needed to continue taking care of the poor and her sisters. Plus, religious orders (like companies) often have group insurance plans - I’m sure Mother was covered.
  • BTW - calling her a hypocrite would like calling middle class and rich people who volunteer to help the poor hypocrites because they don’t give up access to their health care to receive care in a public clinic. It’s a poor excuse used by people who don’t personally help the poor.
St. Mother Teresa of Calcutta, Pray for us.

God Bless.
 
Last edited:
Among people who hate the Catholic church yes. Among people who knew her and know better, no controversy. Be careful what you read and accept as truth.

All of what you have stated as fact si FALSE.
 
unitive_mystic said:
She reused syringes and needles under the pretext of saving funds while millions of dollars from donations were being used to propagate Christianity.
Click to expand...
I would be the Sisters stretched a dollar further than any government social service.
 
phil19034 said:
One of the parish staff members at my parish knew Mother Teresa. She was a member of Mother Teresa’s Religious Order when she was younger (took temporary vows, but never took her permanent vows). This staff member has told us many wonderful stories of Mother, and many that are very human, sweet, and sometimes funny.

Mother Teresa was a very holy person and Saint. They hate her because she was pro-life and gave a beautiful pro-life speech in front of (and humiliating) Hillary Clinton.
  1. regarding donations - donations are often donated for a specific purpose. If someone donated funds for Mother’s travel, then it would be wrong of her to use it for other purposes. Same thing would be if Mother used money donated for the poor to pay for travel.
Click to expand...
But don’t you think that most of the donations that came in would have been to care for the poor and sick?
Was there any kind of accountability system for donations and payments for this reason?
 
The woman is a SaInt.
Can people not just respect and understand the process that goes into that?
She was above board in every regard. Ask someone who actually knew her.
People love to find flaws where there aren’t any.
 
When I hear about the vitriol people hurl at Mother Teresa, I cannot help but think these people are convinced that it is impossible to become a saint: they are just the stuff of goofy Christian legends. Holy people like Mother Teresa in modern times are too inconvenient and must be torn down.
 
Loud-living-dogma said:
But don’t you think that most of the donations that came in would have been to care for the poor and sick?

Was there any kind of accountability system for donations and payments for this reason?
Click to expand...
And what would make you think that money that was dedicated to care for the poor and sick were not allocated towards the poor and sick?
 
It’s all a hatchet job, motivated by anti-Catholcism, propagated mainly by Hitchen’s book. They had to scrape deep, reinterpreting or exaggerating minor actions, to find anything at all. If she’s evil then the rest of us don’t have a chance in heaven or hell.
 
Last edited:
This is probably why it is important for us to try to be saints. I know we can!
 
Honestly, what a miserable view of life one must have to believe no one can hope to achieve that level of virtue.
 
redbetta said:
When I hear about the vitriol people hurl at Mother Teresa, I cannot help but think these people are convinced that it is impossible to become a saint: they are just the stuff of goofy Christian legends. Holy people like Mother Teresa in modern times are too inconvenient and must be torn down.
Click to expand...
I don’t think it’s as simple as that. It’s a lot of Monday morning quarterback behavior. We hear no doubt true stories of people dying in pain or being baptized and dying when they could of been saved. We are rightfully enraged.

However, we fail to realize that she was doing better than her best for these people. In America ER’s cannot refuse treatment and most people will buy Tylenol for someone who stands outside of a store and begs for it. Calcutta is not like this. There is no pharmacy full of pain meds. There are no antibiotics by the dozens to treat strep throat. There are no free flu shots.

The issue is that people blame Mother Theresa for these ills when in reality they should be looking at themselves. She simply brought the utter poverty into the light. She was not to blame. Nor is she to blame for the truly tragic choices she had to make.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top