The study:
In my view, the latter complaints suggest an ideological bias on the part of the authors. The study does not quantify the money received, but merely speculate that it must have been significant, nor does it attempt to match it to the expenditures, but again simply speculates that the outflows were insufficient. And “questionable political contacts,” is again an ideological complaint.
Sell your car and your TV. Send the money to a clinic. It can save a life. But you don’t. You’re a monster.
The article is about the study, and mentions that the paper will be published in French. I have not read the source material, though i suspect it is available in English. It may be vague and murky about details, but anyone who takes on mother Teresa and her legacy will be suspected of ideological complaints about Catholicism in general, i suspect.
Oh come on, another lazy bullshit comeback. I do not go around soliciting donations for my hospices to save the dying and then put that money in a bank account and sit on it instead of saving people. That is specifically what she is accused of doing. Of having vast amounts of unspent funds while people were dying at her hospices.
Soliciting donations for an avowed purpose and then not spending it on that purpose would normally be called “fraud”. Also notice in my cite above that indian charities are supposed to publish accounts publicly. MT’s Missionaries of Charity do not do that and get away with it only because they’re famous.
Suuuuure. They are just part of Big Charity. They control everything.
If you’re not careful, they’ll start beaming instructions directly into your mind. You should start tinfoil shielding work now, just to be safe.
I almost posted that link earlier today.
Yeah, that article lacked the specificity that I wanted. Though “Questionable political contacts” probably refers to Duvallier, the rogue who ran Haiti which isn’t exactly an ideological complaint.
Recall that the Serge Larivée and Genevieve Chenard aren’t trying to deny MT’s sainthood though. I think the evidence rises to the point of “There are causes for concern about the practices of Missionaries of Charity”, as well as, “Making MT the avatar of selfless charity is highly dubious.” But the case for vilification isn’t there yet IMHO. Personally, I would hand the controversy over to the Jesuits for a couple of decades, but I’m not the Pope so I don’t make the call.
The Pope is a Jesuit.
Oh sure. I’m saying that they should delay MT’s promotion. The Catholic Church does that all the time. I’m not saying MT isn’t in heaven. I’m saying they should study the matter further.
Anyway I can attest to another MT miracle. Over at Slate, you can read Christopher Hitchens’s article: “Mommie Dearest: Pope Francis will make Mother Teresa—a fanatic, a fundamentalist, and a fraud—a saint.” Hitchens died in 2011. That he could pen this piece in Dec 2015 is a miracle that I ascribe to Mother Teresa. The fanatic, fraudulent Mother Teresa.
As for the opening italicized paragraph, allegedly an editorial note stating the piece was written in 2003, well that’s an obvious forgery.
Sorry Hank, it is a fact that there is vast amounts of unaccounted money that went into the Missionaries of Charity via donations and by estimates of their running costs was simply not spent. Where is that money? Probably in a bank account in the vatican but no one knows, because they have never published accounts.
Sources:
Specifically MT is known to have refused to spend money even when it was available, seeing “thrift” as a virtue in itself. So we have someone flying around the world in a private jet, soliciting donations for her hospices to minister to the destitute and dying, and then refusing to spend that money, where it presumably piles up in the vatican.
Thats fucked up, possibly fraud and certainly evil.
You loveable dope.
Do you understand first that these are not hospitals? They are intended to server the function of caring for the homeless, sick with basic needs, where the alternative was nothing?
Your complaints make the perfect the enemy of the good. Why can’t she run things like a hospital would, you implicitly ask. Why can’t she have trained medical personnel in place of untrained volunteers? Why didn’t she spend every nickel on the care instead of flying around getting more donations?
The answer is that you can have five houses serving 500 clients with untrained volunteers or one house serving 100 clients with trained medical personnel. If you don’t spend some money getting more donations, then you get fewer donations. And if you believe that it can be done better, why aren’t you out there running your own charity, doing it right? You could call it “Brothers of Idiocracy,” and beg people for donations to be used as your dopey understanding thinks best.
Your argument is a classic argument from ignorance: She should have have spent more money! No, she spent what she could. It went to the Vatican’s secret vault! No, it did not – cite? Here are lots of links that say stuff. Those links just say her accounts are not publicly available.
Um… Yeah, well, if the accounts were publicly available, then for sure they’d show problems.
That’s argument ignoratium: “Since we have no proof, it proves I am right.”
If you read the links I sent, the estimates are that less than 7 percent of the money donated to missionaries of charity was spent on her hospices. Thats absurdly low, most charities are above 70 percent. In fact it’s pitworthy levels of low, and its why the fact she is being made a saint shows the hypocrisy and immorality of the RCC.
I read your links.
From the first:
Notice how carefully the words are used, leaving the reader with a string impression that morphine is available across the hall but just not used.
Yet the fact is that India does not permit clinics to possess or use morphine.
Cite, from a piece in the Wall Street Journal:
See how dishonest your source is?
Now, learn another lesson, Dopey: when you cite a source, you don’t simply paste a link. You paste a link and then quote the relevant text that directly supports your claim. I did not see the claim that they use only seven percent of their donations in any of those three links, and you didn’t quote the text that said it.
And try not to use a source that is as obviously interested in deception as one that implies the Missionaries are awful because they get tons of donated morphine and keep it across the hall without using it.
Bricker: Why do you expect coremelt to act any better in this thread than he did in the Saudi chess thread?
Two reasons for my posting here:
(1) A hope, unlikely but worth nourishing, that he will improve if for no other reason than self-defense. He must, I think, see that even if his cause is just he is getting thrashed. Perhaps he will ask himself, “How am I losing when I am obviously right?” and will realize that he needs to tighten up his presentation and logical presentment of his argument. And if that happens, then perhaps he will come to understand he’s actually not right… or perhaps his arguments will then sway me and I will realize I am wrong. But as long as he waves the Idiot Banner, neither can happen.
(2) Even if (1) never materializes, other posters read these exchanges and form opinions. In a way, this is only a Pyrrhic victory for me: I have defeated only a coremelt strawman of an actual opposition, and this proves little about the underlying truth. Still, it’s better than leaving his idiocy unrebutted.
Her career was considerably marred by the misfortune of never being able to get business cards that were spelled correctly, leading to a bitter cynicism and eventual lifelong depression, which probably explains a lot.
Presumably because suicide is a mortal sin, and dying with a mortal sin on your conscience tends to be a disqualifier in terms of the whole “getting into heaven” deal.
They don’t teach that anymore. The church now recognizes that suicide is often related to mental illness, and as such suicide isn’t an automatic ticket to hell.
Man, I was really hoping they were going to make Tyrion Lannaster a saint.:(
If you criticize them as skillfully as you did Catholicism in this thread, I daresay roll eyes smilies are bullish.
FYI, a very large list of sins that will send you straight to HELL! Beware!!