Was Hitchens right about Mother Theresa?

  • Thread starter Thread starter alliWantisGod
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

alliWantisGod

Guest
Hello everyone,

I would like to know if anyone else on this site has read Christopher Hitchen’s book, “The God Delusion”. I am currently reading it right now, and am just finishing the first part of the book. Can anybody confirm that what he says is actually true? He gave good sources for some of his explanations and arguments, from doctors at Mother Theresa’s clinic such as Dr. Robert Fox, volunteers such as Mary Loudon, and a nurse named Emily Lewis.

Was mother Theresa actually obsessed with the suffering of the poor because it brings “Glory to God”? Was she actually more obsessed with self satisfaction from the world approving her charitable works than helping the poor? and did lots of people really die because of her because she refused contraception? Now I understand she chose to live with the poor, but with all the money she had, why couldn’t she have just constructed a hospital with proper cleaning and sanitary equipment, and proper medicine?

Apparently there was one time Mother Theresa told a suffering cancer patient that Jesus is kissing him, and the person replied, “Then tell him to please stop kissing me”

Can someone give me good counterevidence to refute Hitchens’ claims, because he sounds quite convincing
 
alliWantisGod said:
Hello everyone,

I would like to know if anyone else on this site has read Christopher Hitchen’s book, “The God Delusion”. I am currently reading it right now, and am just finishing the first part of the book. Can anybody confirm that what he says is actually true? He gave good sources for some of his explanations and arguments, from doctors at Mother Theresa’s clinic such as Dr. Robert Fox, volunteers such as Mary Loudon, and a nurse named Emily Lewis.

Was mother Theresa actually obsessed with the suffering of the poor because it brings “Glory to God”? Was she actually more obsessed with self satisfaction from the world approving her charitable works than helping the poor? and did lots of people really die because of her because she refused contraception? Now I understand she chose to live with the poor, but with all the money she had, why couldn’t she have just constructed a hospital with proper cleaning and sanitary equipment, and proper medicine?

Apparently there was one time Mother Theresa told a suffering cancer patient that Jesus is kissing him, and the person replied, “Then tell him to please stop kissing me”

Can someone give me good counterevidence to refute Hitchens’ claims, because he sounds quite convincing
Click to expand...
People who only present one side always sound convincing. That’s why they don’t present witnesses, if you will, on the other side of the argument.

Thousands of people around the world have worked with St Teresa and her sisters – and many, many, many of them were doctors and nurses and lawyers and people with knowledge and powerful careers. Where are their voices in Hitchens’s book?

If those three people you mentioned represented the majority of those who worked with her, he’d have been able to include dozens of eyewitness accounts of her greedy, sadistic nature. But he doesn’t.

I’m not going to spend hours try to research and refute this author’s agenda. If you really want evidence against Hitchens’s libel, check out the website of the Missionaries of Charity. They haven’t changed their public face since St Teresa’s passing, so it’ll be a good starting place. And then get to know them. Write a letter, go and visit.

Bless you.
 
I’m by no means an expert on this, but I just wanted to give a couple of thoughts I have:
Now I understand she chose to live with the poor, but with all the money she had, why couldn’t she have just constructed a hospital with proper cleaning and sanitary equipment, and proper medicine?
Click to expand...
This argument sounds to me like Hitchens is just looking for something to complain about. “Oh, you’ve chosen to run a hospice and care for people at the end of their lives? Well, you should be running a hospital instead.” This could just as easily be, “Oh, you’re running a soup kitchen for the homeless? Well, you should be running a rehab centre instead, don’t you understand that’s a much better way to help out?”

Simply put - people in extreme poverty have many different needs. They need hospital care, homes, employment opportunities, food, clothing, and hospice care at the end of their lives. That’s the job of several organisations, not one. Mother Teresa chose to run a hospice. It wasn’t her job to serve EVERY need of the poor, just in the area she thought most suited her abilities. It’s pointless to complain that she chose to give the “wrong” kind of help. Perhaps Hitchens should have instead asked, why didn’t an atheist organisation start up a hospital?
Apparently there was one time Mother Theresa told a suffering cancer patient that Jesus is kissing him, and the person replied, “Then tell him to please stop kissing me”
Click to expand...
That’s not an argument against Mother Teresa. That’s a story that she gave herself at (I think!) this talk for the National Prayer Breakfast:

youtube.com/watch?v=OXn-wf5ylgo

(it’s somewhere in there, but I’m afraid I can’t remember where)

And it’s obvious - it’s a joke. The person was making a joke, not an angry complaint against Jesus. For me, this is just another example of the favourite atheist technique of taking things out of context.

I hope this helps, but as I said, it’s not much, just some thoughts I had.
 
Was Hitchens right about Mother Theresa?

No. He was wrong about a lot of things.
 
Its much easier to point fingers and cut down the tall poppy.
So much harder to roll your sleeves up and find somewhere for dying where those dying have been dying on the streets.

There are breathers and there are doers 🙂

I just watched the movie of her life , The Messenger.
 
alliWantisGod said:
Hello everyone,

I would like to know if anyone else on this site has read Christopher Hitchen’s book, “The God Delusion”. I am currently reading it right now, and am just finishing the first part of the book. Can anybody confirm that what he says is actually true? He gave good sources for some of his explanations and arguments, from doctors at Mother Theresa’s clinic such as Dr. Robert Fox, volunteers such as Mary Loudon, and a nurse named Emily Lewis.

Was mother Theresa actually obsessed with the suffering of the poor because it brings “Glory to God”? Was she actually more obsessed with self satisfaction from the world approving her charitable works than helping the poor? and did lots of people really die because of her because she refused contraception? Now I understand she chose to live with the poor, but with all the money she had, why couldn’t she have just constructed a hospital with proper cleaning and sanitary equipment, and proper medicine?

Apparently there was one time Mother Theresa told a suffering cancer patient that Jesus is kissing him, and the person replied, “Then tell him to please stop kissing me”

Can someone give me good counterevidence to refute Hitchens’ claims, because he sounds quite convincing
Click to expand...
I am not aware of any book called ‘The God Delusion’ by Christopher Hitchens, I do know of one written by Richard Dawkins. (Who one might add is a biologist, not an expert on religion or philosophy or half of which he talks about in that book)

Nevertheless, in Richard Dawkins book ‘The God Delusion’ there is a chapter in there that talks about abortion and a quote attributed to Mother Teresa saying "I feel that the greatest destroyer of peace today is abortion" and then Dawkins talks about how crazy that apparently is and then tries to liken the human being to simply another animal and that we don’t feel guilty when we eat a burger.

The full quote of what Mother Teresa said goes like this -
“I feel the greatest destroyer of peace today is Abortion, because it is a war against the child… A direct killing of the innocent child, Murder by the mother herself… And if we can accept that a mother can kill even her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another?"

So we already know he is presenting a dishonest view. I would not recommend reading his book.

For example, if I claim to be a scientist and I tell you that the odds of this world coming into being is not fortunate at all, e.g. 1 in 5, so it’s extremely plausible that it came about purely by blind chance, how would you know what method I used to calculate those odds and whether they were true or not? You would have to have faith that I know what I am talking about.

It’s the same here with quotes from Mother Teresa and whatever else, which is why I would very much caution against some of those books unless you can verify the claims he makes and then hear the opposite side.

Proverbs 18:17
17 He who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him.

It would be one thing if Richard Dawkins knew what he was talking about and fairly represented Christianity and just disagreed with it, that would be fine, but he doesn’t do that, not even close.

I hope this has helped

God Bless You

Thank you for reading
Josh
 
Richard Dawkins wrote The God Delusion, not Christopher Hitchens. Christopher Hitchens wrote God is Not Great, a similar book (he decapitalized God on the cover as intentional blasphemy). So I’m not sure who you’re reading. But it doesn’t matter, because they’re both garbage. So stop reading them and read one of the many responses that have been written for those books, as well as other general apologetics books aimed at atheism. I don’t have links, but you can find them at Ignatius Press and etc.

Additionally, St. Teresa of Calcutta’s title, works, and legacy speak for themselves. The Church would not confer sainthood upon a fraud. The Church in general is against contraception.
 
sugarmouse said:
I’m by no means an expert on this, but I just wanted to give a couple of thoughts I have:

This argument sounds to me like Hitchens is just looking for something to complain about. “Oh, you’ve chosen to run a hospice and care for people at the end of their lives? Well, you should be running a hospital instead.” This could just as easily be, “Oh, you’re running a soup kitchen for the homeless? Well, you should be running a rehab centre instead, don’t you understand that’s a much better way to help out?”

Simply put - people in extreme poverty have many different needs. They need hospital care, homes, employment opportunities, food, clothing, and hospice care at the end of their lives. That’s the job of several organisations, not one. Mother Teresa chose to run a hospice. It wasn’t her job to serve EVERY need of the poor, just in the area she thought most suited her abilities. It’s pointless to complain that she chose to give the “wrong” kind of help. Perhaps Hitchens should have instead asked, why didn’t an atheist organisation start up a hospital?

That’s not an argument against Mother Teresa. That’s a story that she gave herself at (I think!) this talk for the National Prayer Breakfast:

youtube.com/watch?v=OXn-wf5ylgo

(it’s somewhere in there, but I’m afraid I can’t remember where)

And it’s obvious - it’s a joke. The person was making a joke, not an angry complaint against Jesus. For me, this is just another example of the favourite atheist technique of taking things out of context.

I hope this helps, but as I said, it’s not much, just some thoughts I had.
Click to expand...
Great thoughts!
 
Very interesting topic, thanks.
My take about Mother Theresa–she didn’t care what people thought and said about her. She cared about the poorest of the poor who didn’t know where she was coming from, but they knew she was there WITH them… giving comfort.
 
I read Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins as an agnostic and even at the time, I thought their books were unconvincing and incoherently written. If, as your member name indicates, all you want is God, then I would kindly suggest books that are going to bring you closer to Him, ones that feed your soul. “Whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is of good repute, if there is any excellence and if anything worthy of praise, dwell on these things.” Things like The Life of Christ by Fulton Sheen, The Case for Jesus by Brent Pitre, the ‘Catholicism’ and 'Mystery of God’s series by Bishop Robert Barron.

However, here are some links that might help to answer your question:

firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2013/04/mother-teresa-and-her-critics

dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/indianews/article-2289203/Mother-Teresas-followers-dismiss-critical-documentary-questioning-saintly-image.html

catholicleague.org/donohue-hitchens-debate-mother-teresa/

m.youtube.com/watch?v=p5xkIWUT3CM

m.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-I15pSP9YE

Ultimately, if you have a sound, fundamental understanding of who Christ is and what His mission is, you won’t be swayed by the arguments put forth by Hitchens and his ilk. I again point you towards Bishop Sheen’s Life of Christ book, especially the parts where he writes of unbelievers’ desire that Jesus be the Ultimate Social Worker. The same criticism is thrown at Mother Teresa, who closely followed Christ’s footsteps.
 
Casilda said:
Was Hitchens right about Mother Theresa?

No. He was wrong about a lot of things.
Click to expand...
I’m glad you already chimed in with that response because I was about to say something along those lines
 
sorry in many ways to be a dissenting voice but there is foundation for some of the criticisms.

Which comes from within the Order.

One salient point is that the money raised to help the poor was not used for that but is in the Vatican bank,

I posted all this months back also,

It was not just three speaking out. Far from it

She was obsessed with poverty. Some nuns get that way, We each and all have the right to inflcit extreme poverty on ourselves but not on those we profess to care for,

There was never any need for the dying to die as they did. No pain relief, poor conditions, She had the money to build a modern hospital several times over … same with schools and child care,

I have family who work where her Sisters are to this day,

What these writers say about her spriritually is ofetn off but re the other aspects?

And they matter too.
 
By itself, suffering is a bad consequence of Adam and Eve’ s sin. It was not designed or created by God. In general, Christian doctors and attempt to reduce suffering, but not to the point where “reducing suffering” means killing people or making them perpetually unconscious. Sometimes they cannot ethically give painkillers, because they will cause bleeding, vomiting, etc.

Caregivers in poor areas with limited resources have to use other methods than drugs to reduce suffering. They face hard choices. Do you hire a doctor or nurse, and therefore lose money for food and beds for many others needing help? Do you buy drugs instead of food?

In India and other places around the world, there used to be huge charity hospitals run by whole religious orders of monks and nuns. Those have largely been stamped out, by governments and by Sixties silliness. It was nit Mother Tersa’ s fault that her partner organizations disappeared, while her tight-focused group grew.

If Hitchens really was offended by Mother Teresa, he would have funded missionary doctors and nurses and told his readers to contribute. Did he do so? Did he support even the secular charities doing this?

When Christians suffer, they can join their suffering to Christ’s (as St.Paul did). This gives glory to God. Having the attitude that suffering is shared with Christ and can be used as a gift - that gives glory to God. When Christians help other people, that also gives glory to God. It is possible to change evil things into good in this way.

In India, many faiths share the idea that endurance of suffering builds character. Giving poor, dying people a heroic ideal, and treating them like they are brave and valuable and beloved, seems to help in a situation where there is little that medicine can do. (But that is just my understanding of the situation; I don’t know much about it.)

Suffering by itself does not give glory to God. If Hitchens misunderstood that, he misunderstood a lot.
 
alliWantisGod said:
Hello everyone,

I would like to know if anyone else on this site has read Christopher Hitchen’s book, “The God Delusion”. I am currently reading it right now, and am just finishing the first part of the book. Can anybody confirm that what he says is actually true? He gave good sources for some of his explanations and arguments, from doctors at Mother Theresa’s clinic such as Dr. Robert Fox, volunteers such as Mary Loudon, and a nurse named Emily Lewis.

Was mother Theresa actually obsessed with the suffering of the poor because it brings “Glory to God”? Was she actually more obsessed with self satisfaction from the world approving her charitable works than helping the poor? and did lots of people really die because of her because she refused contraception? Now I understand she chose to live with the poor, but with all the money she had, why couldn’t she have just constructed a hospital with proper cleaning and sanitary equipment, and proper medicine?

Apparently there was one time Mother Theresa told a suffering cancer patient that Jesus is kissing him, and the person replied, “Then tell him to please stop kissing me”

Can someone give me good counterevidence to refute Hitchens’ claims, because he sounds quite convincing
Click to expand...
Dawkins and Hitchens have an agenda. To put religion, especially Christianity in a bad light. Simple as that.

Keep this mind when you read their books.
 
Oh oops I made an error. I mixed up the God delusion with Dawkins. I meant to say the missionary position
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top