Current Events
The Trouble With Mother Teresa
MICHAEL COREN
My first job in journalism was at the ‘New Statesman’ magazine in Britain in the early 1980s. I was new and shiny and one of the first people I met was a man who was not new and shone in an entirely different way.
Christopher Hitchens – he didn’t like “Chris” – was as generous as he was gifted. But he didn’t suffer fools or frauds.
One of the most famous of the latter was, in his opinion, a woman who is about to be acknowledged as a saint by the Roman Catholic Church: Mother Teresa, born in Albania as Anjezë Gonxhe Bojaxhiu, and someone whom to many embodies the best in Christianity.
Hitchens disagreed, wrote a book about her called ‘The Missionary Position’ and insisted that she was a force for evil rather than good.
I would not be as bold, and could not be as brilliant, as the exquisite Hitch but Good God – and I do believe Him to be good and great – he had a point. Hitchens’ argument, among others, was that Mother Teresa provided sub-standard medical care, took money from dictators and criminals and often cozied up to them, pushed her faith on the vulnerable and sick and encouraged western Catholic journalists to paint her as divine.
There are indeed many unanswered questions about the level of aid the poor of Calcutta actually received and it’s beyond dispute that Teresa was heavily funded by brutes such as Jean-Claude Duvalier of Haiti, who stole a fortune from his own people while they lived in poverty.
Not only did she take the man’s cash, she lionized him as a great leader. She also praised the repugnant Albanian despot Enver Hoxha and laid flowers at his grave and welcomed donations from British publisher and criminal Robert Maxwell.
The case of the anti-pornography zealot and businessman Charles Keating is particularly disturbing. He gave millions of dollars to Teresa and the use of his private jet when she visited the United States. Although he was sent to prison for more than four years for fraud, and thousands of people were hurt by what he did, Teresa refused to refund any of the money he had donated.
There are also ideological and systemic problems.
She campaigned against contraceptive use in a country ravaged by over-population and it almost goes without saying that she vehemently opposed abortion rights. Her motivation was conservative Catholic rather than progressively human.
“I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ,” she said. “I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people.”
That is not how the poor feel as they watch their babies die in their arms.
It’s important to emphasize that there are countless Catholic and other Christian groups performing outstanding work in India and elsewhere who do not adopt Teresa’s reactionary views and dubious ways, and do not have or want the public relations machine that she enjoyed. Some of the most successful social programs in India are funded internationally by western governments who also urge family planning, LGBTQ equality and divorce rights, all opposed not only by the new saint but by her church. More than this, the bulk of the good and selfless work being performed in India is by some of the locals, not white Christians.
The ceremony announcing to the world that Mother Teresa can be prayed to and revered will take place in a Vatican in possession of wealth through paintings, manuscripts, statues and investments that is beyond comprehension, and in spite of a few utterly cosmetic changes by Pope Francis there is no indication that this will ever change.
The glaring juxtaposition between what the tiny Albanian woman was at least supposed to represent and the Roman reality is, frankly, scandalous.
It was another Catholic, the Brazilian archbishop Dom Helder Camara, who said, “When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist.”
But he and his liberation theology were not popular with a Papacy that embraced a woman who refused to ask the right questions, apologized for the culprits and ignored the causes.
[Courtesy: The Toronto Star. Edited for sikhchic.com]
September 1, 2016
Conversation about this article
1: GJ Singh (Scottsdale. Arizona, USA), September 02, 2016, 4:41 PM.
When it rains it pours! Another in depth article on the failings of Mother Teresa. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-37241762
2: Sangat Singh (Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia), September 03, 2016, 6:04 PM.
Mother Teresa was the invention of Western Catholic journalists -- led by no other than Malcolm Muggeridge - who elevated her to false divinity. The final say comes from the Pope with seemingly god-like powers within his flock. Mother Teresa was an institutional saint who did not mind getting donations from questionable people. Reminds me of Clarence Darrow, the famous American attorney, who defended the downtrodden and damned clients. Once, two louts caught for stealing sought his help. Said Darrow :“How are you going to pay for my services?” They replied: “Oh, that is not a problem.Wwe will break into some house tonight and will have enough to pay for your professional service in the morning.” To this Darrow replied: “Sorry, I cannot accept freshly stolen money.” Now let’s talk about a real saint, Bhagat Puran Singh, who deserved a Nobel Prize more than anyone else. It was unfortunate that we did not know much about such an apostle of humanity. He was the fountain of inspiration in this dreary world. To know more about him, may I urge you to watch two excellent documentaries: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PaAUmNKc50
3: Dr K N Singh (Johor Baru, Malaysia), September 04, 2016, 6:49 PM.
Insightful article. I do agree that missionary zeal knows no bounds and conversion seems to be the key in both the Christian and Muslim agendas. Mother Theresa converted by filling bellies and the Muslims convert by the sword. My thoughts go back to karam and that we have to live with our thoughts and beliefs. I am sure Bhagat Puran Singh did not want credit. He did what was right and that was his reward. Back to Winston raising his hat to a woman not because she was a prostitute but because he was Churchill.
4: Sangat Singh (Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia), September 04, 2016, 6:51 PM.
Noted writer Khushwant Singh had this to say about Bhagat Puran Singh: "Bhagat Puran Singh was no ordinary mortal but undoubtedly the most loved and revered man in the world. I once described him as the bearded Mother Teresa of Punjab. Mother Teresa had the backing of the powerful Roman Catholic Church, the English press and innumerable foundations to give her money. Bhagat ji Had nothing except his single-minded dedication to serve the poor and the needy. And yet he was able to help thousands of lepers, mentally and physically handicapped and the dying. His name will be written in letters of gold in the history of the world".
5: Ajit Singh Batra (Pennsville, New Jersey, USA), September 04, 2016, 9:43 PM.
Mother Teresa and Bhagat Puran Singh were both God-conscious persons. Love, service and divine wisdom was integrated in them. While Mother Teresa's devotion was based on Christianity, Bhagat ji's devotion was rooted in his deep reverence for Sikhism. Both believed that God is present in the innermost being of all, and therefore, worship and service of God becomes the worship and service of humanity. There is so much suffering and disease in this world that it is not possible for a person of God to keep aloof and indifferent.
6: Sartaj Singh Dhillon (New York, USA), September 10, 2016, 6:05 PM.
Have we nothing better to do or more productive than criticize a woman who has long passed? Second, regarding 'false divinity', keep in mind that Malcolm Muggeridge was a staunch atheist, skeptic, cynic and openly admitted to struggling with drinking, smoking, overeating, and promiscuity. It was when he was on assignment in Calcutta, making a documentary for the BBC on the Sisters for Charity that, not through preaching or forced conversion, rather, by observing Mother Teresa in action, and how she cared for sick children and the elderly and by being in her presence that ultimately changed his life. I believe he was in his 70's at the time - and turned from a known atheist to accepting Christianity; surely, there must be something remotely 'divine' in that kind of transformation of consciousness of an admittedly rigid personality. Third - what is wrong with introducing someone to Christ? Fourth - would you expect an orphanage in India, constrained by resources, to conduct diligence on the source of donations it receives to determine 'legitimacy' of its funding? Imagine trying to adopt such measures in our Gurdwaras! Publicly listed banks accountable to shareholders with robust risk and compliance departments routinely get this wrong each day. Let's be somewhat practical folks. Fifth - rather than sharing the supposed failings of Mother Teresa, I'm sure most readers would be far more interested in learning about the lives she actually did change. Lastly and perhaps most importantly - we must tread carefully - debating over who is and who isn't a 'saint' is a sign of weakness of the soul, according to Guru Granth Sahib.