nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

There's a new Saint in town

bnt

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Laika123

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

She cured Monica Besra's tumour overnight, when a beam of light came from a picture of Mother Teresa, and she held a picture of MT over her tumour.

And cured Macilio Haddad Andrino of multiple brain absesses after his wife prayed to MT. She interceded and cured him overnight and he came out of his coma.

These facts are documented and readily available.

Medicine cured 'miracle' woman - not Mother Teresa, say doctors

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/india/1443320/Medicine-cured-miracle-woman-not-Mother-Teresa-say-doctors.html

Matthew 6:9

Gbear

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Its a very in depth and rigorous process. In MT's case, there are 113 witnesses attesting to the miracles, and evidence amounting to 35,000 pages which were then presented to the Congregation for the Causes of Saints.
So very clear cut.

They should probably present them to the Nobel committee as well.

It's not every day you completely tear up the known laws of physics.

Ted111

Would I be wrong in saying that her interventions were neutral at
worse?
Since if she wasn't there her clients were people who were
abandoned vagrants in the gutters of Calcutta. And so either way
were suffering and going to die.
Maybe I've misconstrued the story.

Laika123

It would have been a miracle if she dipped into the millions of $$$'s and bought a little medicine for dying in Calcutta.

At least she'd have had one.

RayM

She's been a saint for barely five minutes and everyone's already judging her. Give her a chance, she could be really good.

The Rape of Lucretia

FTA69 wrote: »

Lol at you attempting to pass off a curative magical beam of light coming out of a picture as an undeniable "fact".

It has been verified beyond doubt. Without these miracles, the Vatican would not have canonised her. They are very strict on that point, and dont hand out Sainthoods willy nilly.

Laika123

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

It has been verified beyond doubt. Without these miracles, the Vatican would not have canonised her. They are very strict on that point, and dont hand out Sainthoods willy nilly.

Ohh Lord, seems they have, who actually gave the the right to decide who gets to be a saint anyway?

Zxclnic

Old thread, but deserves an update, since it's now as official as it gets: Mother Teresa has been canonised as Saint Teresa of Calcutta. The BBC article mentions some of the criticisms down the page, while the Irish Times article is, as expected, more of a hagiography.

This Irish Times article from late last year is no hagiography, it's written by good solid socialist Eamonn McCann, who now an MLA. -
''In October 1994, Mother Teresa sent a message to the UN International Conference on Population and Development in Cairo, pleading for outright rejection of contraception and abortion. Every child is a gift from God. If you have a child you think is unwanted, give that child to me. I will find it a loving home where it will be cherished as a blessing.”

In previous articles Eamonn has referred to the saintly one as the 'Albanian crone', which is fair enough in my book.
Below is a very short piece, but worth a read.

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/eamonn-mccann-mother-teresa-not-such-a-good-role-model-1.2476467

kylith

FTA69 wrote: »

Lol at you attempting to pass off a curative magical beam of light coming out of a picture as an undeniable "fact".

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

It has been verified beyond doubt. Without these miracles, the Vatican would not have canonised her. They are very strict on that point, and dont hand out Sainthoods willy nilly.

Yeah FTA69, would you ever give over. The RCC never proclaims anything without being 100% sure that it's verifiable fact. They'd never, ever make up some balderdash about miracles and people rising from the dead and talking snakes, it all totally happened, 100%. [/Fr. Dougal]

bnt

RayM wrote: »

She's been a saint for barely five minutes and everyone's already judging her. Give her a chance, she could be really good.

Sure! Remind us, what do saints do, given that they are already dead?

N365

Has anyone got any proof of dodgy financial dealings she made? I'm kind struggling with the idea that she siphoned off cash. What would she have spent it on?

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

I'm amazed how something people don't believe in, and are free to ignore, gives rise to such vitriol. Personally, I'd have no faith in her but her being declared a Saint has no impact on my life or my family so if somebody gets some comfort from the notion of praying to her then let them.

dr.bollocko

N365 wrote: »

Has anyone got any proof of dodgy financial dealings she made? I'm kind struggling with the idea that she siphoned off cash. What would she have spent it on?

There were a number of books where her aides were interviewed and alleged numerous misdeeds. Hitchens did one on her as well. But literally attributing miracles to her in the modern world is a bit fecking odd.

jacksie66

This post has been deleted.

Sir Osis of Liver.

N365 wrote: »

Has anyone got any proof of dodgy financial dealings she made? I'm kind struggling with the idea that she siphoned off cash. What would she have spent it on?

Moisturiser?

jacksie66

This post has been deleted.

RayM

bnt wrote: »

Sure! Remind us, what do saints do, given that they are already dead?

I don't know, but I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have given her the job if they didn't think she'd be good at it.

[Deleted User]

bnt wrote: »

Sure! Remind us, what do saints do, given that they are already dead?

Oh dear

jacksie66

This post has been deleted.

mass_debater

N365 wrote: »

Has anyone got any proof of dodgy financial dealings she made? I'm kind struggling with the idea that she siphoned off cash. What would she have spent it on?

A conman called Keating donated $1.25m in stolen life savings to her charity, when asked to return it she said it was God's money. Google it, all the info is there

Barry Badrinath

She made a great impression of a raisin with legs.

Zxclnic

N365 wrote: »

Has anyone got any proof of dodgy financial dealings she made? I'm kind struggling with the idea that she siphoned off cash. What would she have spent it on?

I just posted something from The Irish Times a couple of posts above this one, it may not amount to proof positive but it's enough for a starter pack.
I've pasted some of it here as you obviously can't be àrsed to click on it yourself.

Eamonn McCann, The Irish Times 24/12/2015 -
What model of society does the Albanian nun exemplify? Twenty years ago, in January 1996, writing for Hot Press, I phoned the Los Angeles district attorney’s office to check whether there had been progress in persuading Mother Teresa to hand back a million dollars stolen from the poor. Not a lot, assistant district attorney Paul Turley told me.
Front for fraud
The money had been filched from the pockets of pensioners and small savers by the notorious conman, Charles Keating, head of what turned out to be a front for fraud, Lincoln Savings and Loan.
Keating had siphoned $225 million from the accounts of thousands of victims, and had bunged a million of this loot to Mother Teresa. (The closest Irish equivalents of US savings and loan associations are credit unions.)
Four years earlier, in 1992, Turley had appealed to Teresa: “If you contact me, I will put you in direct contact with the rightful owners of the property now in your possession.” Any developments since, I wondered?
“She has ignored us,” Turley told me. “We have honestly given up on this. It is obvious she is determined to keep it.”
Sentenced to 10 years, Keating may have taken comfort from contemplation of the crucifix on the wall of his cell personally blessed by Pope John Paul and delivered by a messenger from Mother Teresa.

Donald Trump

jacksie66 wrote: »

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

It has been verified beyond doubt. Without these miracles, the Vatican would not have canonised her. They are very strict on that point, and dont hand out Sainthoods willy nilly.

Didn't Pope John Paul 2 give out more sainthoods than the previous 2 popes combined? That sounds fairly willy nilly..

You're not really making much of a point there.

JPII was Pope for longer that the two previous incumbents combined.

Donald Trump

mass_debater wrote: »

N365 wrote: »

Has anyone got any proof of dodgy financial dealings she made? I'm kind struggling with the idea that she siphoned off cash. What would she have spent it on?

A conman called Keating donated $1.25m in stolen life savings to her charity, when asked to return it she said it was God's money. Google it, all the info is there

I'm not really sure what that tries to prove.

If she had been actively involved in scamming the money, then spent it on speedboats and mansions for herself then you'd have a point.

But if all she did was accept a donation from a fella who scammed millions (unbeknownst to her at the time) and then when the scam was revealed, didn't take money from her charity and give it to the victims of the scam then that's a slightly less indicting proof.

The Rape of Lucretia

Donald Trump wrote: »

You're not really making much of a point there.

JPII was Pope for longer that the two previous incumbents combined.

Cases are dealt with as they come up. I dont see what a saints per pope ratio has to do with MT.

[Deleted User]

Donald Trump wrote: »

I'm not really sure what that tries to prove.

If she had been actively involved in scamming the money, then spent it on speedboats and mansions for herself then you'd have a point.

But if all she did was accept a donation from a fella who scammed millions (unbeknownst to her at the time) and then when the scam was revealed, didn't take money from her charity and give it to the victims of the scam then that's a slightly less indicting proof.

I seem to remember Christopher Hitchens mentioning that she built quite a few convents for her order on the back of donations to her 'hospital' in Calcutta and her other apparently good works.

Quite nice they were too, by his account.

Ted111

Zxclnic wrote: »

Sentenced to 10 years, Keating may have taken comfort from contemplation of the crucifix on the wall of his cell personally blessed by Pope John Paul and delivered by a messenger from Mother Teresa.[/I]

Ah!
...........could happen to a Saint.

Littlehorny

jacksie66 wrote: »

Didn't Pope John Paul 2 give out more sainthoods than the previous 2 popes combined? That sounds fairly willy nilly..

I think i read that Pope John Paul 2 canonised more people in his time than in the previous hundred years!

Donald Trump

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Donald Trump wrote: »

You're not really making much of a point there.

JPII was Pope for longer that the two previous incumbents combined.

Cases are dealt with as they come up. I dont see what a saints per pope ratio has to do with MT.

I don't see it either. I just responded to their post with some fact. I didn't imply any point of view as I was unsure as to what they were trying to say or imply. If JP-II was the one canonising her, they might have been trying to make some (incorrect) argument that he was cannonising every eejit which devalued it.

I think that people just think of something that sounds bad to them and use it in their "argument" even when it makes no logical sense.

I don't know how many anyone canonised. Just pointing out he served longer than previous two combined

mass_debater

Donald Trump wrote: »

I'm not really sure what that tries to prove.

If she had been actively involved in scamming the money, then spent it on speedboats and mansions for herself then you'd have a point.

But if all she did was accept a donation from a fella who scammed millions (unbeknownst to her at the time) and then when the scam was revealed, didn't take money from her charity and give it to the victims of the scam then that's a slightly less indicting proof.

What did she spends the money on? She collected millions and gave it to the church. The treatment centres she opened didn't treat the sick, they left them in pain and suffering with no painkillers, antibiotics or even sterile gloves. Those being looked after were told they were closer to God because they were suffering and they were made to suffer even further