Mother Teresa


#1

Hello everyone,

I stumbled across a general forum on another website where Mother Teresa is being discussed, and I am appalled to see some of the things they’re saying about her. Even though I hate controversy, I have felt it necessary to jump into the discussion and try in some small way to defend Mother Teresa, who has always been a great inspiration to me and many other people I know. I am a Catholic, and also a catechist, and I am getting tired of seeing Catholic-bashing going on, so I am thinking more and more of becoming an apologist!

The allegations seem to be that 1) she mismanaged money, by taking in large donations and then not using the money to help the poor like she said she would, and 2) she took in desperately sick and dying people and didn’t get them medical care which might have saved them or at least eased their pain.

I do not have time to do extensive research on these issues to try to get to the truth. Does anyone here have any insight on these things, or can anyone point me to a resource or two that might help clarify things a bit?

Thanks for any help!

Judy


#2

Hi, Judy, and welcome to the forums!

Those people that are writing these hateful things about MT are simply repeating what they’ve heard from others with axes to grind. They complain because the money wasn’t spent the way “they” would have spent it.

There are several threads that have covered this, and there is some really good information on those threads, often countering the direct charges of:
a) money mis-managing (yeah, shame on her for not buying a private jet so she could fly around the world much easier).
b) with-holding medical care (do these people realize how poor and overpopulated Calcutta is?!?!?
c) Not spreading the Gospel.
d) Spreading the Gospel too-much.


#3

That’s not the charge. The charge is that she did not use the money to give better medical care, but either used it to start new foundations or did not discernibly use it at all (usually it is claimed that she has either “handed it over to the Church” or stockpiled it in Swiss bank accounts).

b) with-holding medical care (do these people realize how poor and overpopulated Calcutta is?!?!?

But millions of dollars could make a difference, and furthermore there are a lot of other charities working in Calcutta. The claim–and I find this part of it convincing, because it suits what she herself said about her charism–is that she tried deliberately to live the lifestyle of the poor whether or not that was the most effective way to help them.

I do not doubt her sincerity, and I have a high regard for her holiness, but she never said she was a secular humanitarian. The main fault I find if the more common and less vitriolic accusations are true is that she allowed people to give her a lot of money thinking they were funding a humanitarian organization that would give people the best medical care possible. It seems pretty clear that if she had wanted to do that, she could have built a state-of-the-art hospital (as Hitchens says–and no, I don’t give much credibility to Hitchens, but double-check with other sources). I respect her very much for what she did, but I would have respected her even more if she had said, “Take the money you want to give to me and give it to Charity X which actually gives people medical care–I am concerned with sharing the sufferings of those who have no other recourse, and it’s incompatible with my charism to accept money beyond the minimum necessary.” I think she saw the inflow of donations as a sign of God’s blessing, and so felt bound to accept them even though she doesn’t seem to have done much with them.

I agree that the charges of proselytizing and of not proselytizing basically cancel each other out!

In Christ,

Edwin


#4

Edwin, I’m not familiar enough with the specifics of these charges (but you know that’s never stopped me before ;)), so I’m drawing from a previous post on this subject.

I hope this clears up some of the complaints. What I have seen in the past that what you and I call “not spending enough on medical care” others call “hoarding money for her own use”. If MT focused on providing Spiritual healing to those that are dying, then you can’t begrudge her methods. If MT told potential donors that she needs money to heal the sick", then that’s a different story.


#5

Mother Teresa is a sign of contradiction:

“Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.” (Matthew 5:11-12)

We should be rejoicing for Mother Teresa’s soul! That people can revile such an obviously great woman is a sure sign of her sanctity!


#6

lol @ shyster mother teresa.

I truly disagree with the heartfelt sympathy people give her in defence of her blatant, and fraudulant lifestyle.

She had a fleet of sports cars, properties in St Tropez, Marbella, and Beverley Hills, as well as a 90ft Yacht moored off Dubai.

Wake up people, not is all as it seems!!


#7

Oh Gee… :shrug:
Proof please


#8

How about you prove me wrong.


#9

You are too funny…You are the one who made the charge…If you are just here to spew this kind of junk…have a good day…:rolleyes:


#10

Ok then, here is a picture of her in St Tropez, note the “trendy” sunglasses. What a fraud.


#11

Got me there. Everyone knows sunglasses = sports cars, properties in St Tropez, Marbella, and Beverley Hills, as well as a 90ft Yacht moored off Dubai.
Silly me. :rolleyes:


#12

HAHAHAH! C’mon people, this is obviously satire!

:rotfl:


#13

But it is kinda funny though…not that wearing sunglasses is wrong in any way…that those do not seem to fit the picture…IE look and the sides of her habit…look at the size of the sunglasses…:wink:


#14

Cross to Bear WHAT PLANET DO YOU COME FROM !!! Where were the boats and the private planes and all of that. I truly belive the devil himself is working overtime in your thinking. Its to bad more of the world cannot dedicate themselves to the poor as much as she did. She herself did not call the world press to her door. The world came to see her works, and as the Christ she served, she is also persicuted and lied about.


#15

The principal use of sunglasses is to protect frail eyes from bright sunlight.

As for those who criticize Mother teresa, the time to listen to their criticism is AFTER they have spent a decade or two living with and washing the sores of the poor and afflicted, and comforting the dying and homeless.


#16

Your naievity is endearing.


#17

Hey Cross, tell you what…if this is all you are planning on doing in this forum…then I suggest you find some where else to “joke around” If there is something you want to discuss, or do not agree with (Catholic teaching) and want to discuss/debate then you are welcome to do so. But just spitting out Jack Chick like cr*p does not cut it here.


#18

Wow Stephen, is thios what all the posters are like on here, untolerant and unwilling to accept anyone elses views unless they agree with thier own?

You seem to be a bit of a bully. How very un-christian of you.


#19

Ok thats me the bully of CA…but again, you made a charge about MT’s lifestyle…just asking for the proof…still waiting. BTW you are the one who is throwing stones…just want the proof of your claims…


#20

I proved it with the picture of her wearing trendy sunglasses.

If you don’t believe me, thats your problem not mine.

Isn’t stephen a Jewish name?


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.