RE: What would Mother Teresa say?

RE: What would Mother Teresa say? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

tazzygirl -> RE: What would Mother Teresa say? (4/20/2012 6:46:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Iamsemisweet Because he researched the hell out of the issue, and includes citations and facts. What he states is not just his unverified opinion, although I am sure his point of view enters into it. quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: I am surprised that the well researched reasoning by Hitchens, who did not accept MT's sainthood at face value, is not good enough Tazzy. However, I would suggest you read his book "The Missionary Position" if you want more proof. I never said I believed she was not what he claimed. I asked for more proof than just one person. And, as a devout atheist, I would prefer more than just his. Im curious, why would I want more proof from the same person who would clearly have ulterior motives for producing such? While many may believe my request is religiously motivated, I am neither a catholic nor a believer in "god", nor am I an atheist. I am, however, someone who would like to see more than just one person's spin on this before deciding if the woman should be condemned. And yet a correction had to be made to his article you posted above. Would think someone who "researched the hell out of the issue" would not have made such a mistake as he did. quote: How about a long well documented book by an Indian from Calcutta? http://www.amazon.com/Mother-Teresa-The-Final-Verdict/dp/8188248002 Another atheist, one whom had his bok loosely turned into a movie by Hitchens. I really dont care either way if she is "knighted" or not. Just seems to me that if that much corruption was going on as claimed, more would have been published about it. Eh, carry on. Didnt think I would get my answers.

dcnovice -> RE: What would Mother Teresa say? (4/20/2012 7:13:52 PM)
quote: What I found most interesting was the description of the religious doubts that MT expressed. I think I had heard that before, but had forgotten. If anything, it makes me more sympathetic to her than I was previously I felt the same way.

dcnovice -> RE: What would Mother Teresa say? (4/20/2012 7:26:33 PM)
nm.

dcnovice -> RE: What would Mother Teresa say? (4/20/2012 7:37:52 PM)
Found this page via the blog to which I linked earlier: http://www.facebook.com/missionariesofcharity It was created by a man who volunteered in one of Mother Teresa's homes and was shocked by what he saw.

tweakabelle -> RE: What would Mother Teresa say? (4/20/2012 7:47:29 PM)
Mt's first last and only loyalty was to the Catholic Church. No doubt MT contributed a lot to the poor and marginalised of India and Calcutta - though it could be added that her approach was to try to minimise the worst effects of a political-economic system she helped maintain From where I sit, it is telling that she chose California when she was sick, and didn't choose the regimen she has established for those poor Indians who had no choice but to accept whatever 'care' she ordained for them. On the issue raided in the OP - whether to side with the Church authorities or with the American nuns who are criticised for focussing too much on social justice and not enough on gay marriage and abortion - there is nothing in the record to indicate that her choice would be any other than to support the Church hierarchy.

dcnovice -> RE: What would Mother Teresa say? (4/20/2012 7:50:26 PM)
This sounds like an interesting book. The author was one of Mother Teresa's nuns for 11 years. Hope Endures: Leaving Mother Teresa, Losing Faith, and Searching for Meaning

LookieNoNookie -> RE: What would Mother Teresa say? (4/20/2012 7:57:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam http://news.yahoo.com/catholic-nuns-group-stunned-vatican-slap-000146265.html I have a feeling that Mother Teresa (who IMO deserves to be a Saint asap) would tell the Vatican where to stick it. Mother Theresa was at best, a doubter. At least...questioning her own.

dcnovice -> RE: What would Mother Teresa say? (4/20/2012 8:14:02 PM)
Now Mother Pascalina on the other hand . . .

tweakabelle -> RE: What would Mother Teresa say? (4/20/2012 8:29:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dcnovice This sounds like an interesting book. The author was one of Mother Teresa's nuns for 11 years. Hope Endures: Leaving Mother Teresa, Losing Faith, and Searching for Meaning Thanks for the find dcnovice. Wiki has this to say on the author, Collette Livermore: "Colette Livermore, a former Missionary of Charity, describes her reasons for leaving the order in her book Hope Endures: Leaving Mother Teresa, Losing Faith, and Searching for Meaning. Livermore found what she called Mother Teresa's "theology of suffering" to be flawed, despite being a good and courageous person. Though Mother Teresa instructed her followers on the importance of spreading the Gospel through actions rather than theological lessons, Livermore could not reconcile this with some of the practices of the organization. Examples she gives include unnecessarily refusing to help the needy when they approached the nuns at the wrong time according to the prescribed schedule, discouraging nuns from seeking medical training to deal with the illnesses they encountered (with the justification that God empowers the weak and ignorant), and imposition of "unjust" punishments, such as being transferred away from friends. Livermore says that the Missionaries of Charity "infantilized" its nuns by prohibiting the reading of secular books and newspapers, and emphasizing obedience over independent thinking and problem-solving" (emphasis added) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mother_Teresa#Criticism I find the discouragement of medical training especially troubling. It would appear that an awful lot of unnecessary pain and suffering occurred in MT's hospice in Calcutta, much of it preventable with modern medicine and drugs. It is one thing to offer up one's own pain and suffering to a higher power for reasons of belief. Forcing others to do the same can be reasonably described as torture or sadism. Where is the compassion in this approach?

Iamsemisweet -> RE: What would Mother Teresa say? (4/20/2012 8:54:27 PM)
OK, Tazzy, you got your nonatheist link. But now I am curious. Why, just because someone is an atheist do you not believe they are a credible source and can't be objective? What's an atheist's, like Hitchens, agenda? I never got the impression he was seeking converts.

tazzygirl -> RE: What would Mother Teresa say? (4/20/2012 10:18:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Iamsemisweet OK, Tazzy, you got your nonatheist link. But now I am curious. Why, just because someone is an atheist do you not believe they are a credible source and can't be objective? What's an atheist's, like Hitchens, agenda? I never got the impression he was seeking converts. When I go to post something, I get more than one source... and look for any possibilities of conflicting information. I do realize not everyone does so. Why is it an issue now that I ask when I have asked on more than one thread, and often times, not on one related to religion? As to the rest, I have withdrawn from the discussion, as you should have noted.

Iamsemisweet -> RE: What would Mother Teresa say? (4/20/2012 11:35:08 PM)
You were given two sources. That wasn't acceptable to you, because they were both atheists. My question is, why do you think they both have the same agenda?

Rule -> RE: What would Mother Theresa say? (4/21/2012 2:52:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen As to sainthood, does a woman who intentionally let people die in agonizing pain deserving of any accolade? In my opinion she was a vulture: a person who enjoys to watch people suffer and die. She got a high from that. Definitely she was not a saint, but rather some kind of emotional vampire.

Rule -> RE: What would Mother Teresa say? (4/21/2012 3:21:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Iamsemisweet Here is an article about it: FORT WORTH - Christopher Hitchens is a rare bird these days. Under Pope John Paul II, the canonization protocol has been greatly streamlined. in a 1983 "apostolic constitution," John Paul II fast-tracked the canonization process. The four-miracle requirement was cut to two. The devil's advocate position - created in 1587 - was abolished. Since then, John Paul has become the most prolific saint-maker in history, having canonized 476 people and beatified more than 1,300. That pope, in my opinion, was one of the most evil persons on the planet. Anyone made a saint by him in my eyes is a suspicious character. And of course he made it a fast track in order to get the protection of the saint status himself as quickly as possible after he died - before anyone might realize the abominations that he himself had perpetrated.

tazzygirl -> RE: What would Mother Teresa say? (4/21/2012 5:58:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Iamsemisweet You were given two sources. That wasn't acceptable to you, because they were both atheists. My question is, why do you think they both have the same agenda? When I go to post something, I get more than one source... and look for any possibilities of conflicting information. I do realize not everyone does so. Why is it an issue now that I ask when I have asked on more than one thread, and often times, not on one related to religion? You will have to show me where I said they had the same agenda. However, take the reverse. If publications had come out stating Hitchens was a fruitcake, and the only sources were religious.... come on Now, why havent you addressed both the correction that you noted had to be made by Hitchens, whom you claim "researched the hell" out of this? So, we have one writer who "researched the hell" out of her, and couldnt post without needing a correction on a point that he should have known about if your statement were true. And we have another who, despite having worked with the woman, as he claimed, required a 10 years to write his own book, published after her death. Now, maybe, when you stop seeing red and calm down, you might actually.. Oh, I dunno... ask my OPINION on the woman instead of assuming I am saying things I have not said?

kalikshama -> RE: What would Mother Teresa say? (4/21/2012 6:50:13 AM)
Females, fall in line! (Or come to the Unitarians, who will be happy to have you, and ordain you as well.) http://news.yahoo.com/catholic-nuns-group-stunned-vatican-slap-000146265.html A prominent U.S. Catholic nuns' group said on Thursday it was "stunned" that the Vatican reprimanded it for spending too much time on poverty and social justice concerns and not enough on abortion and gay marriage. In a stinging report on Wednesday, the Vatican said the Leadership Conference of Women Religious had been "silent on the right to life" and had failed to make the "Biblical view of family life and human sexuality" a central plank in its agenda. It also reprimanded American nuns for expressing positions on political issues that differed, at times, from views held by American bishops. Public disagreement with the bishops - "who are the church's authentic teachers of faith and morals" - is unacceptable, the report said. The Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith issued a "doctrinal assessment" saying the Holy See was compelled to intervene with the Leadership Conference of Women Religious to correct "serious doctrinal problems." The nuns' group said in a statement on its website, "The presidency of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious was stunned by the conclusions of the doctrinal assessment." It added the group may give a lengthier response at a later date. The conference said it represented 80 percent of America's 57,000 Catholic nuns. It is influential both in the United States and globally. Academics who study the church said the Vatican's move was predictable given Pope Benedict's conservative views and efforts by Rome to quell internal dissent and curtail autonomy within its ranks. "This is more an expression of the Church feeling under siege by trends it cannot control within the Church, much less within the broader society," University of Notre Dame historian Scott Appleby said. That includes a steady drumbeat of calls to ordain women as priests, which the pope has reasserted was an impossibility. The Vatican named Seattle Archbishop Peter Sartain and two other U.S. bishops to undertake the reforms of the conference's statutes, programs and its application of liturgical texts, a process it said could take up to five years.

kalikshama -> RE: What would Mother Teresa say? (4/21/2012 7:41:30 AM)
[image]http://cdn.front.moveon.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/JC1-480x472.jpg[/image]

Iamsemisweet -> RE: What would Mother Teresa say? (4/21/2012 8:01:47 AM)
Your concern about the correction hardly proves your argument. It is possible to make a mistake. He did the right thing by correcting it, but because he did, now you don't consider him credible? As for the other writer's delay, who knows? It takes a lot of courage to speak out against someone who the church's publicity machine packaged as a living saint. quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: ORIGINAL: Iamsemisweet You were given two sources. That wasn't acceptable to you, because they were both atheists. My question is, why do you think they both have the same agenda? When I go to post something, I get more than one source... and look for any possibilities of conflicting information. I do realize not everyone does so. Why is it an issue now that I ask when I have asked on more than one thread, and often times, not on one related to religion? You will have to show me where I said they had the same agenda. However, take the reverse. If publications had come out stating Hitchens was a fruitcake, and the only sources were religious.... come on Now, why havent you addressed both the correction that you noted had to be made by Hitchens, whom you claim "researched the hell" out of this? So, we have one writer who "researched the hell" out of her, and couldnt post without needing a correction on a point that he should have known about if your statement were true. And we have another who, despite having worked with the woman, as he claimed, required a 10 years to write his own book, published after her death. Now, maybe, when you stop seeing red and calm down, you might actually.. Oh, I dunno... ask my OPINION on the woman instead of assuming I am saying things I have not said?

tazzygirl -> RE: What would Mother Teresa say? (4/21/2012 10:39:43 AM)
quote: Your concern about the correction hardly proves your argument. It is possible to make a mistake. He did the right thing by correcting it, but because he did, now you don't consider him credible? As for the other writer's delay, who knows? It takes a lot of courage to speak out against someone who the church's publicity machine packaged as a living saint. Again, no one said he wasnt credible. You really are reading a lot into my posts that simply are not there. 24 hours later a correction was made, which means someone else caught the error, fact checked it, then contacted him or the publisher. The correction may, or may not, have been done by the writer. Honestly, cant you find a better bitch than this? I do not like people who think so hard to one side they cannot see the other.

dcnovice -> RE: What would Mother Teresa say? (4/21/2012 11:28:09 AM)
FR As I said earlier, I don't have a strong opinion on Mother Teresa's saintliness or sins. As an editor, though, I'm always intrigued by discussions on the merits of sources. I've read a lot of Christopher Hitchens's articles over the years and enjoyed them, though I disagreed with him on the Iraq war (which he favored). Haven't tried his books. He did rather enjoy feasting on sacred hamburgers, so I understand the reluctance to take him as a sole source on Mother Teresa. The need for a correction to the Slate article is unfortunate, but mistakes happen--to writers along with everyone else. I've made my own errors in print, so I understand how, despite one's best efforts, it can happen. I'm not sure I'd take a single correction in a single article as invalidating Hitchens's entire work on the subject. I don't know Chatterjee or his book. I'm not sure of the relevance of his taking ten years to produce it. Research and writing are slow work, and I don't know if he was working on the book full-time or in addition to a day job. It can also take years to find a publisher. Waiting till after the subject's death is not uncommon for a biographical work. It's hard to get a complete perspective while someone is still alive. And, of course, it wasn't till after Teresa's death that the process for sainthood began; I don't know if that was a spur for either the author or the publisher. In my own experience, repeatedly finding fault with sources on a given subject often means I'm trying to shield myself from something I don't want to hear. I can't read minds, obviously, so I don't know if that's what we've seen in this thread. But the possibility did occur to me.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875