Mother Theresa was...

[viper37]

Much/most of his complaints really just boil down to disagreements with religion and catholicism, damning her for daring to believe in what catholics say they believe in.  What he ignores of course is that she really did take a vow of poverty throughout her entire life.  She was no champagne socialist attending $1000/plate fundraisers to help the poor - she really was in the front lines her entire life.

There is certainly an element of that (and it is a fair complaint in any case), but there is certainly much more to it than just a straight up disagreement with religion in general. There is an element of how you, in practical terms, implement religious views and how they drive behavior that matters.

In this case, her particular religious views resulted in the deaths of a lot of people. She might have been well meaning, in that she felt that their deaths were actually of benefit to them, but it is the case that others with her basic religious views can and have taken a more nuanced approach that avoids the problems with her fundamentalist views that damned thousands? Tens of thousands? Hundreds of thousands? to a life of abject misery, poverty, and death.

Throwing gays guys off buildings is not any more palatable because the people tossing them think they are doing a good thing.

Denying poor people birth control with the inevitable and completely understood results is not more palatable because she believes that a child born into abject poverty who dies at a young age after a short, miserable life from some preventable disease is preferable to that child (and the several others who contributed to the lack of adequate resources) not being conceived to begin with.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Mother Teresa might be the best example of that cliché, ever.

there is no problem with religious fundamentalism, it's all a matter of personal choice and we shouldn't judge people for promoting their fundamentalist views. (yeah, that was sarcasm).

[viper37]

There's a whole wikipedia page of criticism of Mother Theresa, for those interested:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Mother_Teresa

It boils down to:

- Accepting donations from unsauvory sources (Robert Maxwell and Charles Keating are the most often quoted names), as well as enjoying good relations with nasty regimes (Duvalier's Haiti, the Argentinian Junta of the late 70s, the Hoxha regime, Italian post-fascist groups...).

That's a non issue.  Every occidental government has had dealings with nasty regimes.  Charities and churches accept money from everyone, criminals, murderers, psychopaths, everyone, without asking question.  Political parties do the same and try the avoid the rules whenever there are.

- The lack of almost any kind of medical care for her patients, without almost any qualified medical workers attending the sick and dying, with only aspirine being given to them and where hypodermic needles would be just washed and reused, and where people with curable diseases were left to die, all while she would fly to US hospitals when she had medical problems herself.

that is a the biggest problem.

- Not using the donations she received to improve conditions in her establishments but to expand her missionary network, perhaps deceiving her donors and/or mismanaging those funds.

The donors were not deceived.  They were giving to a missionary, a religious figure who promised to help the poor of India.  What better way to help the poor than by having them discover Christ?  All of these criticism against Mother Theresa in India were raised for the Cardinal Léger in Africa.

- Her fundamentalistic/ultra-reactionary religious views (she was a huge opponent of the 2nd Vatican council, as well as any abortion, birth control, divorce...par for the course for a nun, I'd say, but I guess that she was still extreme inside that group). Her view of pain and suffering as a desireable thing in a religious context would also raise eyebrows, I guess.

This is why having religious communities administer charities is a bad idea.  Secularism everywhere.  But to be honest, it's not like these people would have gotten better treatment elsewhere.

- That on her establishments they'd routinely stealth-baptize dying people, which apparently greatly angered the Hindu and Muslim communities in Calcutta and other Indian cities where she operated.

This is what BB was saying: she acted upon her Faith.  For an atheist, it is despicable behavior.  But she wasn't an atheist, she was a missionary, and a missionary's primary duty is to convert people to his/her Faith to save their soul.  Jesuites priests didn't care about the indian communities so long as they converted to Cahtolicism.

I guess that the only really eye opening stuff could be the fact that many people thought that their donations would serve to improve the living conditions of the people she "cared" for, rather than supporting her missionary network and religious fundamentalism.

That's why you shouldn't give money to charities.  Most of them are fraud.  Some have upward of 90% funds used for administration.

but thought that it was ok for poor people to resign themselves to their sorry lot on earth, whose suffering and hardships were seen by her as a positive thing.

that's pretty much what religion teaches you.  My parents learnt the history of all the martyrs of Canada, killed by Faithless Iroquois for attempting to redeem their souls.  These people were looked at as heroes for their suffering.  Poverty was seen as a virtue, seeking enrichment a sin.  We still collectively suffer of this

[viper37]

I guess the simple test is to ask if the world would have been a better place if she had not existed.

If the answer is no, then your answer on the poll falls somewhere between 1 and 2.

If the answer is yes, then your answer on the poll falls somewhere between 3 and 4.

The world would not have been better nor worst without her.  Somebody else would have taken her place somewhere else in the world. 

[Martinus]

Had to vote a living saint. I don't know if Mart included poll answer 1 as a joke, but it is somewhat useless. Being a saint means being a religious fanatic with values different from ordinary folks, and there's also an explicit list of saints (slight simplification).

Wasn't joking - I used the expression in its common (as opposed to a theological) sense.

[Martinus]

Viper is right. If Mother Theresa wasn't a nun, half of this board would support her candidacy for the next POTUS.

[derspiess]

As much as I like to bust on Catholicism I can't really bring myself to badmouth her.  Let the Catholics have their saint.

One thing I will say for her is that she personally rescued Michael Jackson (the British beer writer, not the weirdo) in Calcutta when he was trapped in the middle of the city during some pretty nasty riots.  She drove her big truck up to the building and told him to get in.

[Razgovory]

I guess the simple test is to ask if the world would have been a better place if she had not existed.

If the answer is no, then your answer on the poll falls somewhere between 1 and 2.

If the answer is yes, then your answer on the poll falls somewhere between 3 and 4.

The world would not have been better nor worst without her.  Somebody else would have taken her place somewhere else in the world.

Who?

[Martinus]

 

http://www.clickhole.com/article/7-my-most-prized-t-shirts-no-longer-make-sense-if--4862?utm_campaign=default&utm_medium=ShareTools&utm_source=facebook

[Razgovory]

Well, this is good cautionary tale.  Don't give food the poor if you are religious.  Cause you'll end up being worse then Stalin and Hitler.

[Eddie Teach]

Viper is right. If Mother Theresa wasn't a nun, half of this board would support her candidacy for the next POTUS.

No foreigners.

[The Minsky Moment]

Well, this is good cautionary tale.  Don't give food the poor if you are religious.  Cause you'll end up being worse then Stalin and Hitler.

Let's not exaggerate. Surely no worse than King Zog.

[Ancient Demon]

Seems a bit strange to lay your hat on that. So had she only sought out same care (or no care) as her patients, then she'd be totally okay because she was consistent?

Nope.

[Ancient Demon]

Yep, just another religious hypocrite. Suffering is only good when it happens to other people.

I've never seen anything from her that would indicate that she didn't feel that her own suffering was not good for her.  It seems to that you are reaching the  conclusions you want to reach.

We all reach the conclusions we want to reach.

[Valmy]

Why do you want to come to conclusions about some woman from a poor country born before WW1? I mean no shit she is going to have different priorities than some modern westerner. A little tolerance for people's imperfections and foibles would be nice. Besides your condemnation would be more impactful on people who have not been dead for 20 years.

[Valmy]

Viper is right. If Mother Theresa wasn't a nun, half of this board would support her candidacy for the next POTUS.

Pretty sure nuns are allowed to run for office.