WHY MOTHER TERESA SHOULD NOT BE A SAINT

mirror.co.uk ^ | Jan. 13, 2003 | Christopher Hitchens

[Nachum]

In the good old/bad old days, the procedure for making a former human being into a saint was well understood.

There had to be an interval of at least seven years after the death before beatification - the first stage in the process - could even be proposed. (This was to insure against any gusts of popular enthusiasm for a local figure who might later prove to be a phoney.)

There had to be proof of two miracles, attributable to the intercession of the deceased.

And there had to be a hearing, at which the advocatus Diaboli, or Devil's Advocate, would be appointed by the Church to make the strongest possible case against the nominee.

I am not a Roman Catholic and the saint-making procedures of the Vatican are really none of my business. But it strikes me as odd that none of the above rules have been followed in the case of the newly-beatified woman who called herself "Mother" Teresa of Calcutta.

She was first put forward for beatification only four years after her death. Only one miracle has been required of her, and duly found to have been performed.

And, instead of appointing a Devil's Advocate, the Vatican invited me to be a witness for the Evil One, and expected me to do the job pro bono.

Their reason for asking was that I made a documentary called Hell's Angel, and wrote a short book entitled The Missionary Position, in which I reviewed Mother Teresa's career as if she had been an ordinary person.

I discovered that she had taken money from rich dictators like the Duvalier gang in Haiti, had been a friend of poverty rather than a friend of the poor, had never given any account of the huge sums of money donated to her, had railed against birth-control in the most overpopulated city on the planet and had been the spokeswoman for the most extreme dogmas of religious fundamentalism.

Actually, it's boasting to say that I "discovered" any of this. It was all there in plain sight for anyone to notice. But in the age of celebrity, nobody had troubled to ask if such a global reputation was truly earned or was simply the result of brilliant public relations.

"Wait a minute," said a TV host in Washington a few nights ago, when I debated all this with Mr John Donahue of the Catholic Defence League. "She built hospitals." No, sir, you wait a minute.

Mother Teresa was given, to our certain knowledge, many tens of millions of pounds. But she never built any hospitals. She claimed to have built almost 150 convents, for nuns joining her own order, in several countries. Was this where ordinary donors thought their money was going?

Furthermore, she received some of this money from the Duvaliers, and from Mr Charles Keating of the notorious Lincoln Savings and Loan of California, and both these sources had acquired the money by - how shall I put it? - borrowing money from the poor and failing to give it back.

How could this possibly be true? Doesn't everyone know that she spent her time kissing the sores of lepers and healing the sick? Ah, but what everyone knows isn't always true. You were more likely to run into Mother Teresa being photographed with Nancy Reagan, or posing with Princess Diana, or in the first-class cabin of Air India (where she had a permanent reservation).

You could see her in Ireland, campaigning against a law which would permit civil divorce and remarriage (though she publicly defended Princess Diana's right to be divorced).

You could encounter her on the podium in Stockholm, accepting yet another huge cheque and telling the Nobel audience that the greatest threat to world peace was... abortion. (Since she added that contraception was morally as bad as abortion, she essentially held the view that condoms and coils were a deadly threat to world peace. The Church does not insist on that degree of fundamentalism.)

And when she got sick, she would check herself into the Mayo Clinic or some other temple of American medicine. As one who has visited her primitive "hospice" for the dying in Calcutta, I should call that a wise decision. Nobody would go there except to check out, in one way or another.

"Give a man a reputation as an early riser," said Mark Twain "and that man can sleep till noon." Give a woman a reputation for holiness and compassion and apparently nothing she does can cause her to lose it.

Of Albanian descent and a keen nationalist, she visited the country when it was still a brutal dictatorship and "the world's first atheist state" to pay tribute to its grim Stalinist leader.

She fawned upon her shrewd protector Indira Gandhi at a time when the Indian government was imposing forced sterilisations. Above all, she urged the poor to think of their sufferings as a gift from God.

And she opposed the only thing that has ever been known to cure poverty - the empowerment of women in poor countries by giving them some say in their own reproduction.

Now, so they tell us, a woman in Bengal has recovered from a tumour after praying to Mother Teresa. I have received information from both the family and the physicians that says it was good medical treatment that did the job. Who knows?

I must say that I don't believe in miracles but if they do exist there are deserving cases which don't, in spite of fervent prayers, ever benefit from them.

When Mr Donahue was asked if he believed the statutory second miracle would occur, he said that he thought it would. I said that I thought so, too.

But I have already seen a collective hallucination occur as regards Mother Teresa, though it was produced by the less supernatural methods of modern, uncritical mass media.

Christopher Hitchens is a columnist for Vanity Fair.

[mdmathis6]

I don't think God meant for the true church to be the monstrosity that the Church at Rome has become....that's why we have scripture, to provide a check when we begin to go astray...that's why we had a reformation, so that the truth of what Christ was offering to the world should not be buried behind man-made doctrines and cantations of meaningless mumbo-jumbo. Christ came to destroy the power of sin to put the power of the Spirit within us, any man-made organization that tries to "contain it or organize it" beyond the scope of what the word of God teaches will be swept aside!

[Joshua]

"Do you think all those angels were teaching all those churches different doctrines and different interpretations of His Word?"

Rev 2:14 14 Nevertheless, I have a few things against you: You have people there who hold to the teaching of Balaam, who taught Balak to entice the Israelites to sin by eating food sacrificed to (NIV)

Rev 2:15 15 Likewise you also have those who hold to the teaching of the Nicolaitans. (NIV)

Rev 2:20 20 Nevertheless, I have this against you: You tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess. By her teaching she misleads my servants into sexual immorality and the eating of food sacrificed to idols. (NIV)

Rev 3:17 17 You say, 'I am rich; I have acquired wealth and do not need a thing.' But you do not realize that you are wretched, pitiful, poor, blind and naked. (NIV)

Does it sound to you like they were all teaching the same thing?

That was not the point anyways.If these "churches" were all under the authority of a hierarchy, like the Vatican, only one letter would have to be written. If Jesus were to write to the Catholic church today over the scandals in the priesthood would he send separate letters to all the parishes or one letter to the Vatican?

Paul did the same thing in his letters to the churches. The church at Corinth was different from the Galatian church and the church in Ephesus. They were similar to the denominations that we have today in the protestant church.

Paul preached unity in purpose and spirit, as pointed out by the scriptures you quoted, but there was also problems with interpretations as pointed out by the letters written by Jesus and Paul. Again similar to the Protestant church. We don't find Jesus or Paul demanding these churches to run to Peter and fall under his authority because only he has the truth.

The scriptures you posted all point ot a unity of spirit in a single purpose; to preach the gospel. In no way do any of those scriptures point to a centralized ruling body.

The early Church looks more like the Protestant denominations than the RCC.

Sorry I don't think the length of the road trips were a determining factor in this

[Joshua]

I know that. I only pinged you because the response from AF was directed at you.

[mdmathis6]

I recognize that the books did not begin to come into being officially until about 25 years or so after Christ's ascention, though Paul was very active from about 35 AD thru about Nero's time(64-66 AD), and was writing the letters thru which much of the earlier churches were being organized. The letters were written to churches already established but struggling with doctrinal issues,sin,and sometimes just plain discouragement. Luke, the physician also traveled with Paul, and probably set down Luke and Acts by about the time Paul was in prison, awaiting trial before Nero.
The earlier saints would have used the old Testament as a major source of their doctrines, interpreted to show Christ as fullfilled prophecy and the totality of fullfilled Law. The new paradigm was that men were to love God with all their heart, soul, and mind...and to love their neighbor as themselves...for on those two laws hinged all the laws of the prophets. Christ was that last sacrifice for our sins, to free us from the condemnation of the law, so that we may freely live under the"easy yoke" of grace. This did not mean we were to live immorally, but rather to live moral lives thru faith and hope, not under the fear of the law and of punishment,"Ye have not come to Mt. Sinai, where this is smoke and fire,.....Ye have come to Mt Zion"Hebrews.
We find Grace in God's eyes, not judgment!

[Conservative til I die]

Some sources say I am right and some say I am wrong. It all depends on your point of view and what you were taught when you were growing up.

Buth their is objective fact and objective truthg. Either the Catholic Church has history on it's side.

[Conservative til I die]

Some sources say I am right and some say I am wrong. It all depends on your point of view and what you were taught when you were growing up.

Buth their is objective fact and objective truthg. Either the Catholic Church has history on it's side.

sorry, forgot to finish with "or it doesn't."

[Joshua]

"Buth their is objective fact and objective truthg. Either the Catholic Church has history on it's side. sorry, forgot to finish with "or it doesn't." "

The Pharisees had history on their side. They sat in the seat of Moses. How far did that get them?

Heresy doesn't grow true with age..

[jjm2111]

All the Catholic vs. Protestant bullshite on these boards notwithstanding, I bet we can all agree that Hitchens either needs more of, or less (depending on your point of view) of the sauce he swallows in such quantities with reckless abandon.

[ACAC]

I agree that either one side it totally right and one side is totally wrong in this argument. There is no in between. We just disagree about who that is.

[mdmathis6]

Christ used two terms in his talk with Peter, he called Peter, the greek equivalent of a pebble, he used the term rock or boulder when refering to the foundation by which he would build his church. There has been much disagreement whether Christ was refering to Peter or himself when speaking of "building his church". Daniel speaks of a great stone, uncut by human hands, that falls out of the sky and crushes the great image that symbolizes all the great empires of history, then becomes a great mountain that fills the whole Earth. I sincerely doubt this is talking about Peter, and the supposed Apostolic succession that was supposed to spring from him. Peter was one of the founders of the Early church, a corner stone, a crafter of the Early doctrines by which the new Christians and the great churches of the major cities of the Roman empire were to model themselves after. I don't believe that the present monstrosity that exists in Rome, which will not bring its immoral priests to heel, is what God intended for his people.(It was certainly not what Peter would have accepted) Pastors and priests of all doctrinal back-grounds, Catholic and Protestant, should not be pasturing them-selves on their sheep!

[american colleen]

The early Church looks more like the Protestant denominations than the RCC.

That's a convenient mindset for you to have. But it is not based on fact. You need to read early Christian history - like the Church fathers or maybe in a less religious vein, Paul Johnson's "History of Christianity" -- the biggest struggle in the early Church (and yes, of course there were many churches, just like today's many parishes all over the world - because not everyone lived in the exact same area!) was combatting heresy and keeping all as one mind, like He himself begged. You conveniently ignored my biblical quotes in post #50 - you know, the ones from Christ Himself and also from St. Paul almost begging that we remain One?

The earliest Churches believed and taught the Real Presence. All of them. And continued to do so up until the Reformation when some of the new churches that sprung up (Protestant) taught the Real Presence and some disregarded it. That is central.

[american colleen]

Nice post, but I don't believe Christ meant for us to be less than "that all may be One."

The Catholic Church is indeed large... it has 2,000 years of history behind it. Do you think it is a mark of Truth that there are more than 20,000 different denominations of Protestantism? All with very different beliefs? And I know that people say doctrine isn't important (not the Catholics) but where does the Bible teach that? In fact, St. Paul wrote many letters correcting the errors of believers... so he must have thought "being of One mind" was important as well. You can see my post #50 for biblical quotes supporting this.

[mdmathis6]

Don't forget the split between Eastern Orthodox and the Roman Church some 1600 years ago, they obviously had some difficulties with the way the "main church" was going.

Plus, one could look at Judaism and say that it had 3500 years of tradition behind it, there-fore all Christian religions(including Catholicism) are there-fore of suspect heritage. Time does not ensure maturity or purity. New wine does not get poured into old wine sacks. Christ declared himself, as the temple that would be torn down in three days then rebuilt, signifying his coming death and resurrection. It is the Spirit of God, blowing as it wills, that empowers his people to spread the Word of God declaring Salvation to the lost and Healing to the nations. If he could raise up stones to be sons of Abraham, he can raise up new denominations to spread his truth when the old instituions have lost their savor and have allowed their priests to savage their flocks, financially and sexually. The REAL CHURCH is spread trans- temporally across time and space, existing from Adam thru Seth, thru Noah, thru Abraham,thru David, thru Christ and all those whose Faith in God was imputed to them as Righteousness, to those who put their trust in the Lamb, right down to the 6 year old girl who was my daughter, who trusted in Jesus her Saviour("Jesus came into my I AM place", she stated after-ward!) It not about buildings, or pretended apostolic successions,or denominations Protestant or Catholic! It is about a whole company of believers, past, present, future...a whole host of "living stones" as we are called, that form his TRUE CHURCH; Spirit empowered so that even the Gates Of Hell shall not prevail against us. It is about GOD IN FLESH, who shall one day rule all nations with a Rod of Iron, even now does he do so! The Catholic church has lost its first love, concerning itself with trappings of religion, and forms, and strange ideas about Mary's deification and for-ever virginhood, and the elevation of certain persons as venerated Saints. It has lost its moral purity by refusing to deal with its sexually corrupt priests and feminist nuns. The mainline Protestant churches have refused to deal with the immoral sin in their midsts as well. Newer, more evangelical churches are being Spirit nurtured to continue spreading the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and many who thirst for God are leaving the older protestant and Catholic(many messianic Jews have also left Judaism as well)churches for these newer churches(some large, some small.

Christ is not the for-ever dying God that we often see on wooden crucifixes in our churches,(I'm not criticising the symbol) but our risen ever lasting Lord(I would love to see images of the empty tomb with the crucifix translucently super-imposed!)....This is the truth that the world is in dying need of, and this is the truth that Satan is constantly trying to bury, he does so best by using the trappings..and "trap" of religion.

I wonder if Christ would look at many of our local Protestant and Catholic bodies, and say to us what he said to the Jewish temple fathers..."you have taken away the keys of knowledge so that those who listen to you are thrice more damned than your-selves!"

[mdmathis6]

Don't forget the split between Eastern Orthodox and the Roman Church some 1600 years ago, they obviously had some difficulties with the way the "main church" was going.

Plus, one could look at Judaism and say that it had 3500 years of tradition behind it, there-fore all Christian religions(including Catholicism) are there-fore of suspect heritage. Time does not ensure maturity or purity. NEW WINE DOES NOT GET POURED INTO OLD WINE SACKS . Christ declared himself "the temple" that would be torn down in three days then rebuilt, signifying his coming death and resurrection.
It is the Spirit of God, blowing as it wills, that empowers his people to spread the Word of God declaring Salvation to the lost and Healing to the nations. If he could raise up stones to be sons of Abraham, he can raise up new denominations to spread his truth when the old institutions have lost their savor and have allowed their priests to savage their flocks, financially and sexually.

The REAL CHURCH is spread trans- temporally across time and space, existing from Adam thru Seth, thru Noah, thru Abraham,thru David, thru Christ and all those whose Faith in God was imputed to them as Righteousness, to those who put their trust in the Lamb, right down to the 6 year old girl who was my daughter, who trusted in Jesus her Saviour("Jesus came into my I AM place", she stated after-ward!)

It is not about buildings, or pretended apostolic successions,or denominations Protestant or Catholic! It is about a whole company of believers, past, present, future...a whole host of "living stones" as we are called, that form his TRUE CHURCH; Spirit empowered so that even the Gates Of Hell shall not prevail against us. It is about GOD IN FLESH, who shall one day rule all nations with a Rod of Iron, even now does he do so!

The Catholic church has lost its first love, concerning itself with trappings of religion, and forms, and strange ideas about Mary's deification, sinlessness and for-ever virginhood, and the elevation of certain persons as venerated Saints. It has lost its moral purity by refusing to deal with its sexually corrupt priests and feminist nuns. The mainline Protestant churches have refused to deal with the immoral sin in their midsts, seeking to allow active Homosexuals and Feminists into leadership, and seeking to change age old doctrines; as it were, to change the ancient times and seasons(such is the spirit of Anti-christ). Newer, more evangelical churches are being Spirit nurtured to continue spreading the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and many who thirst for God are leaving the older protestant and Catholic(many messianic Jews have also left Judaism as well)churches for these newer churches(some large, some small.

Christ is not the for-ever dying God that we often see on wooden crucifixes in our churches,(I'm not criticising the symbol) but our risen ever lasting Lord(I would love to see images of the empty tomb with the crucifix translucently super-imposed!)....This is the truth that the world is in dying need of, and this is the truth that Satan is constantly trying to bury, (he does so best by using the trappings..and "trap" of religion) that is...Our Saviour is RISEN, he is ALIVE!.

I wonder if Christ would look at many of our local Protestant and Catholic bodies, and say to us what he said to the Jewish temple fathers..."you have taken away the keys of knowledge so that those who listen to you are thrice more damned than your-selves!"

[american colleen]

Don't forget the split between Eastern Orthodox and the Roman Church some 1600 years ago, they obviously had some difficulties with the way the "main church" was going.

That would be about 900 years ago. Although there are many small reasons why the Church split, the big one was over the "filioque" which led to some of the Eastern Churches rejection of the office of Peter and its meaning as understood for 1100 years. Also the Eastern Churches were the ones were most of the heresy was spread due to their being much more nationalistic than the Western Churches. FYI, both churches have essencially the same doctrines and dogma, particularly the belief in the Real Presence which does unite us.

I always look at Catholicism as the maturation of Judaism. A logical fulfilment of Judaism, if you will.

Newer, more evangelical churches are being Spirit nurtured to continue spreading the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and many who thirst for God are leaving the older protestant and Catholic(many messianic Jews have also left Judaism as well)churches for these newer churches(some large, some small.

I'll just take few words of the last paragraph of your post here as it seems to sum up the idea of the entire paragraph.
First off, error has been man's curse since the beginning of creation, however, He did hand the keys to Peter and promised to be with us until the end... hence, the 2,000 years of continuing Catholicism.

You seem to be saying that people are searching for purity in their choice of where they decide to worship. That is impossible, given that men are involved. When you (as a non-Catholic) disagree with the preacher in your church, you seek out another more in line with what you believe is truth. Thus you have purity in line with your standards until you decide otherwise and move on.

Of course belief in Him is not about buildings or institutions, but that is the best our hands can offer him utilizing the gifts he has given us. Are you suggesting that we worship him individually in our own yards? Certainly that is fine, but he did establish one Church and the earliest Christians gathered together in buildings. Read early Church history to find out what the was the central thing they did together - they received the Eucharist because they believed His words when He said "This is my body." They believed in the real presence.

You seem to judge Catholicism and the different Protestant denominations according to men and not what they teach. That is your mistake. Do you believe in the use of birth control? Every single Christian church, Catholic and Protestant, rejected birth control until 1930. Only the Catholic Church has continued the belief that it is wrong. Were all those churches wrong until 1930 when they suddenly found the truth that it is OK to thwart God's will and limit the number of children to suit their wants?

One other thing: you say "New wine does not get poured into old wine sacks." -- when you understand this fully, you will understand the Virgin Mary and her place as "Theotokos" as found in Catholicism.

[Texas Eagle]

THe part where Jesus called Peter the rock and said He would build His Church upon Him and empowered him to bind and loose in Heaven and Earth. Our Church didn't die with Jesus

When did Jesus tell Peter to have His followers pray to Mary?

[Texas Eagle]

"Where in the Bible does it enumerate all the hoops one must jump through to become a Saint? "

John 3:16

Amen, bro....."Response Of The Year" as far as I'm concerned

[RnMomof7]

Where in the Bible does it enumerate all the hoops one must jump through to become a Saint? "


Repent and believe ...

[saint]

Where in the Bible does it enumerate all the hoops one must jump through to become a Saint? "

Repent and believe ...

Amen!

[Conservative til I die]

"Where in the Bible does it enumerate all the hoops one must jump through to become a Saint? " John 3:16

Amen, bro....."Response Of The Year" as far as I'm concerned

Nah, dude. My 'where in the bible does it mention sola scriptura' response was worlds better.