The case against Mother Theresa

Mother Teresa was a nun and not a nurse. The Sisters Of Charity were nuns and their vocation was to help the dying poor. They could not administer drugs for pain as they were not doctors. If the person dying could go to the hospital they would but the people that she took in were the destitute. They were left to die on the sidewalks. The sisters bathed them and fed them and took them off the street and out of the hot sun.

Susan Conroy said that the best part was spending time helping them pass over. I understand this type of charity or mercy. She said they just wanted someone to hold their hand, hug or feed them. They wanted to connect with someone that cared as they passed on. Some of these poor souls never had love.

I took care of a dear man in his late 80’s. He had no one left in his life. His wife died of Alzheimer’s years before and they had no children. Even though I worked for him I soon felt like a daughter. As he got sicker I would puree his food and then he told me to make him one more meal. I made him turkey soup and pureed it. He said it was the best soup he ever had, which I doubted then. He never ate again and got so frail he went into the hospital. I remember getting the call that he wanted to see me. I went into his room and held his hand. I knew that death was close because he had the death mask on. I told him a story he liked about my grandmother and how she described dying. He must have passed on while I was telling the story. I was sad but happy that I was there to hold his hand.

I think this is what The Sisters of Charity were about. They couldn’t cure these people, just care for them and love them so they didn’t have to die alone in the gutter.

Another misconception is that the money was not used properly and the little money they had went to run everything, feed everyone and right back into the charity. Again citing Susan Conroy and her presentation, the slide show showed a very modest but clean building. The day started with an hour of prayer and they worked until they went to bed.

Mother Teresa may never become a saint for her works but I deeply respect her as a woman of faith and dignity. As a young nun she had a dream, she made it happen and because of her dream many poor souls got to die with more love then they ever knew in their entire lives. She is a hero to me.

  1. They weren’t doctors, but even if they needed doctors to administer pain meds, which I highly doubt, they could afford to hire them.

  2. “The little money they had”? You have got to be kidding me. The organization made millions, maybe hundreds of millions, of dollars. You tell me where that money went, because it didn’t go to 1.

  3. Fuck love. Seriously. I can love the world, but if I do nothing else I’m a shitty human being.

You don’t show someone youlove them by allowing them to suffer when you have the capacity to stop it. If one of your children was suffering in agonizng pain from something like bone cancer, would you give them painkilers if you could, or would you decide it was better for them spiritually to suffer. Woukd you be able to look in your child’s faceand tell her that their pain was just “Jesus kissing them?”

If you love someone, you give them dope, you don’t just pray at them and fetishize their suffering.

FYI to everyone in the thread:

Her name was TERESA. No ‘h.’ Teresa, not Theresa.

carry on.

It is not possible to love and not do something to help, no matter how small the contribution. You haven’t shown proof of anything here. Do you have the accounting books. Are you talking about Mother Teresa or the organization build in her name. There are literally hundreds of books written about her, and you think one that is critical means anything. Show some proof, cite.

I have seen it spelled both ways for years. What difference, as long as you know who is being addressed.

Whose word are you taking for this, show some proof. How do you know this for sure, were you there?

You’ve seen it often spelled WRONG.

The difference is that there is a right way and wrong way, and it’s just as easy to get it right.

Thank you for a reasoned post that really explains what Mother Teresa was about. I did volunteer work for a Hospice several years. Holding a hand, just being there was very important to the dying and their family. The detractors posting here don’t know anything about that kind of giving. Forgive them for they know not what they are doing. Thanks again.

Was I there? Are you kidding me with that horseshit?

It’s not a secret. She freely admitted to all of this. The cites are already plentiful in this thread.

You’re talking about things that have nothing to do with the topic. No one is attacking hospices. Yes holding hands is nice. But it’s nicer if you do it after you dope them up. You don’t just let them twist and scream because you think it’s good for them. I would contend that MT’s hospices were barely worthy of the name since they withheld the most vital aspect.

I suppose if one sees everything as either black or white that would be important to them. I believe as long as I can understand the communication, there is no need to question it. I don’t see a black or white world.

She freely admitted to what? Show me where and who said she did.

She freely admitted to withholding pain treatment because she thought suffering was spiritually important. The thread is already full of cites.

You seem to know all about “her” hospices, she didn’t own anything, she took a vow of poverty. How do you know she had the final authority to do anything. To give any medicine. I can see you know nothing about Hospices, most are too sick to even be conscious. Some can’t take pain killers because even a small amount would kill them. It was a good day when I could actually talk to a patient. Go out there and test some reality.

You’re actually trying to suggest that the Church refused to lt her administer painkillers? That’s hilarious. I can tell you know nothing about the Catholic Church.

Her’s a cite for you:

“India has no reason to be grateful to Mother Teresa”

Good then show me the cities and who said them. How do you know she was authorized to give medicines to anyone. And if she did make such a statement does that immediately cancel all the good work she done with the poor. She build schools, she got them pay for collecting trash, she got the men to quit beating their wives. Many other things. She used to sit on Hospital steps with a very sick person holding a sign that said something like “this person needs help and they won’t let him in the hospital” until they took the person inside and did something for them. Wake up, there is a real world out there with real people in it.

Her vow of poverty was a joke, by the way. She spent most of her time outside India, flying in private jets, and living in luxury accomodations.

Your quote is by Sanal Edamaruku, one person, a rationalist, euphemism for atheism, a person with an agenda. Just BS

This is too silly a question to require an answer.

Yes.

She advocated making it illegal for women to be able to leave abusive husbands.