Mother Teresa - 20 years ago

markodaly wrote: »

With a username like that you are definitely up for a level headed reasonable debate.

There have been numerous well founded criticisms expressed in this thread. Perhaps address them? Eg Charles Keating's and Duvaliers donations. Keating's money was actually other people's money that he defrauded them of. She was asked to return it and ignored the request.

You're sugar-coating an individual who you either know very little about or are knowingly ignoring the bad stuff.

gctest50 wrote: »

It would've been kinder if the Serpent of Calcutta, Agnes Gonxha had gassed them quickly

So you are advocating mass murder. What did I say again about the cool kids and reasonable debate? Come off it.

markodaly wrote: »

So you are advocating mass murder. What did I say again about the cool kids and reasonable debate? Come off it.

Steady on, the Serpent is dead

LordSutch wrote: »

More evil than Hitler according to one poster on here :cool:

Reminds me of the phrase, the greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world *he* didn't exist.

kylith wrote: »

The woman herself said "I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people".

Let's also not forgot that when she herself was suffering, there was no expense spared getting her to the best private hospitals in the world in order to relieve her suffering and save her life.

Suffering was apparently only beautiful when it happened to poor people, not when it happened to Theresa herself.

osarusan wrote: »

It's hard to believe that after so many years, and so much information available about it, that people still seem ignorant of what went on in her 'hospitals' and how the money was used.

The Catholic Church had put everything behind her. She was basically beatified before she died. A living saint, and an icon that the catholic church rallied behind. Living proof of the majesty of Jesus, right here on earth.

So of course it was never going to accept any criticism of MT, and even now the media would be scared to be anything but complimentary of her, such was the regard she was held with in Ireland.

So most people really don't know. You'd have to go looking for the information.

Sleepy wrote: »

markodaly, would you perhaps be a member of the Iona Institute?

I can't think of any other affliction that would cause someone to be so blind to the crimes of another person, simply because that person has been (dubiously) canonised by the Catholic Church.

So, your entire rationale to my position is that I must be some extreme fundamentalist Catholic to believe what I believe, which for the record is that she was flawed and best medical practice was not followed but probably did the best she could or thinks she could at the time. Yes, so controversial isn't it!

If I started calling her Hitler what organisation must I be in then? The IFA?

The very fact that you think I have a affliction of some sort shows you up more then me.

For the record, no. I am not even Catholic as my parents were old COI from Offaly. I have not been in a church apart from funerals or weddings in decades.

markodaly wrote: »

And of course you are an expert in the area.? Reading a wiki article makes people an expert now?

I am not the person pushing a narrative after I spent 5 minutes reading up on something or watching a youtube clip, as if that makes someone an expert on a topic. That is the problem of the net really, people think they know it all, have a definitive answer on a topic after they watched a youtube clip with an obvious lens. There is too much pontificating, the goal of a debate (like this) is not to learn or to listen but to be right, at all costs.

No, you're a person pushing a narrative after how much research? None? Your religion teacher and the local priest said she was great and you believe that unquestioningly?

markodaly wrote: »

Perhaps they would have if there were allowed to as if you actually did your homework, you would have known that the Indian Government forbids the use of Morphine outside large hospitals. Even today a Doctor who is not licensed to administer Morphine can get up to 15 years in Jail if found doing so.

My apologies for not knowing the laws regarding pharmacology in a foreign country off the top of my head. I'm sure that some other painkiller could have been used. Or she could have used the millions she received in funding to open a hospital rather than convents. Of course, then she'd actually have had to put some effort into saving people rather than letting them die.

markodaly wrote: »

You are showing your own closed mind here I am afraid. India is less than .8% christian, yet she is revered there. Muslims and Hindus alike think very highly of her, or is that the Pope telling a billion non christian Indians what to think?

Perhaps you should start asking yourself new questions instead of being fed another set of PR? Oh, I forgot you think yourself a free thinker! ROFL

Revered? Not exactly.

Aroup Chatterjee, a physician born and raised in Calcutta who was an activist in the city's slums for years around 1980 before moving to the UK, said that he "never even saw any nuns in those slums. His research, involving more than 100 interviews with volunteers, nuns and others familiar with the Missionaries of Charity, was described in a 2003 book critical of Teresa. Chatterjee criticized her for promoting a "cult of suffering" and a distorted, negative image of Calcutta, exaggerating work done by her mission and misusing funds and privileges at her disposal. According to him, some of the hygiene problems he had criticized (needle reuse, for example) improved after Teresa's death in 1997.

Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharya, mayor of Kolkata from 2005 to 2010, said that "she had no significant impact on the poor of this city", glorified illness instead of treating it and misrepresented the city: "No doubt there was poverty in Calcutta, but it was never a city of lepers and beggars, as Mother Teresa presented it."

Secretary Giriraj Kishore said that "her first duty was to the Church and social service was incidental", accusing her of favouring Christians and conducting "secret baptisms" of the dying.

The person on the street I don't know about, their opinions are rarely recorded online. Perhaps they know as much about what goes on in these homes as people in Ireland did about what went on in Magdalen laundries in the 30's. Which seems likely because the people who go in are cut off from their families.

These quarehawks all end up with some tie to this small backwater of ours.

Terese studied here as a novice.

Hitler's brother worked here.

Just waiting for the big Kim link to be revealed one of these days. It'll be quite the Ireland's Own article.

topper75 wrote: »

These quarehawks all end up with some tie to this small backwater of ours.

Terese studied here as a novice.

Hitler's brother worked here.

Just waiting for the big Kim link to be revealed one of these days. It'll be quite the Ireland's Own article.

And an Irishman, Michael Keogh saved Hitler from being killed

http://www.independent.ie/lifestyle/the-irish-man-who-saved-hitler-26713584.html

Carlow man Michael Keogh from the village of Tullow, saved Hitler from being ripped apart by an ugly mob.

markodaly wrote: »

Em, yes there was!

Did you not read the article or do a quick google? Morphine could not be administered outside of large hospitals. If Mother Teresa or the Sisters of Charity employed a doctor to administer Morphine to the dying in Calcutta they would be breaking Indian law. This is a documented fact. She/They were working within the confines of the law.

Will I need to say this again in a few posts time?

That was the case then. I think there was an amendment to the 'The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Amendment) Bill, 2011' a few years ago to relax this requirement but as MT has been dead 20 years now not sure you can blame her for that.

well if not morphine then something else. Of course she could have opened a hospital to actually, you know, help sick people instead of spending money on opening convents. But she wasnt interested in easing the suffering of the sick only doing "gods work".

kylith wrote: »

No, you're a person pushing a narrative after how much research? None? Your religion teacher and the local priest said she was great and you believe that unquestioningly?

Why are people obsessed in painting me as religious when I clearly stated earlier I was not. I am officially COI but not practising, and we don't have priests.

kylith wrote: »

My apologies for not knowing the laws regarding pharmacology in a foreign country off the top of my head.

Well if you are going to make a grand pronouncement about something, its generally a good idea to get basic facts rights first, don't you think? But apology accepted.

kylith wrote: »

Revered? Not exactly.

Yes, all of which is available on Wik or else where and should be viewed in the entirety of the whole argument. People will always have different views, but as a whole she is very much revered in India by the poor.

To offer some more balanced opinions,

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/sep/04/mother-teresa-admiration-sainthood-dying-kolkata

http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/the-mother-teresa-her-critics-choose-to-ignore/article5058894.ece

Confronted with disease, destitution and death all around her at a time (1948) when there was hardly any health-care service to speak of, she did what was to become her hallmark. Finding a man dying in the street, she took him to a public hospital, which refused to admit him, precisely on the grounds that since he was about to die, they would not waste a hospital bed on a life they said they could not save! It was only when she sat before the hospital in a dharna that they relented. The man died a few hours later. It was at this point that she began her search for a place where she could take those people whom hospitals refused; where she could nurse them — she had some medical training — and they could at least die being comforted and with some dignity.

To bring it forward a bit, there is a massive homeless crisis in this nation, especially my home city, Dublin. How many of those who are criticising Mother Teresa have taken in a Junkie in order to help them?

kylith wrote: »

The person on the street I don't know about,.

Exactly, you don't know, in fact you know much less than you think.

markodaly wrote: »

Her primary focus as far as I am aware was to look after those who hospitals refused as they were already on deaths door. So instead of having them die on the streets and be eaten by stray dogs, she took them in and let them die with a sense of dignity and be with someone in their last moments. How terrible of her.

You do know what a hospice is?

Hospices generally don't tell people to embrace the suffering. As was already pointed out, morphine is not the sole painkiller available. She had the fiscal resources to do so but was actually pretty opposed to reducing suffering. Makes you more godly. Same did not apply to her when she was dying though..

Anyway, care to address all that money she got from Charles Keating? She was asked for it back, never gave it back. It was the savings of others.

Spider Web wrote: »

Took the bible too literally for sure but I don't know that she was "evil". She still went to live in Calcutta to work in some of the toughest conditions possible. What did her detractors do to help the starving and disabled?

I'm not religious at all by the way - much less a defender of the catholic church.

The thing is, nobody here thinks she was perfect and did no wrong. No one has said that. But if your position is anything less than 'She was evil' then your some kind of religious nut.

Personally I think this generation are by far the most cynical. There is always an ulterior motive, nothing is to be trusted, everything that has gone before was ****. Everything is always black as in bad. The glass is half empty.

It is good to question things but eventually you have to come to a point where you have to start doing something other than give out and make grand sweeping statements about things people generally know nothing about.

Like how many of those calling her evil on this thread volunteer their free time? I'd say very very few if none at all. Polls and studies show that this generation volunteer no where near the amount of time that their parents or grandparents did. Similar to donations. This feeds into the cynicism of our age.