John W. Redelfs wrote:
> Stephen Beecroft wrote:
> >Christopher Hitchens hates "Mother" Teresa.  This is not a secret.
> >Given some of Hitchens' proclivities, I am not necessarily prone to
> >uncritical acceptance of his viewpoint, but the man is very intelligent
> >and, I think, makes a few good points.  (Not that I know enough about
> >the issues to make an informed judgment.)  Given the praise of "Mother"
> >Teresa taking place when I first returned to this list a few weeks back,
> >I thought some might find this piece interesting, even despite its URL:
> >
> >
> >
> >Excerpt:
> >
> >"MT was not a friend of the poor. She was a friend of poverty. She said
> >that suffering was a gift from God. She spent her life opposing the only
> >known cure for poverty, which is the empowerment of women and the
> >emancipation of them from a livestock version of compulsory
> >reproduction. And she was a friend to the worst of the rich, taking
> >misappropriated money from the atrocious Duvalier family in Haiti (whose
> >rule she praised in return) and from Charles Keating of the Lincoln
> >Savings and Loan. Where did that money, and all the other donations, go?
> >The primitive hospice in Calcutta was as run down when she died as it
> >always had been—she preferred California clinics when she got sick
> >herself—and her order always refused to publish any audit. But we have
> >her own claim that she opened 500 convents in more than a hundred
> >countries, all bearing the name of her own order. Excuse me, but this is
> >modesty and humility?
> >
> >"The rich world has a poor conscience, and many people liked to
> >alleviate their own unease by sending money to a woman who seemed like
> >an activist for 'the poorest of the poor.' People do not like to admit
> >that they have been gulled or conned, so a vested interest in the myth
> >was permitted to arise, and a lazy media never bothered to ask any
> >follow-up questions. Many volunteers who went to Calcutta came back
> >abruptly disillusioned by the stern ideology and poverty-loving practice
> >of the 'Missionaries of Charity,' but they had no audience for their
> >story. George Orwell's admonition in his essay on Gandhi—that saints
> >should always be presumed guilty until proved innocent—was drowned in a
> >Niagara of soft-hearted, soft-headed, and uninquiring propaganda."
> Not only that, but according to Christ, almsgiving is to be done 
> anonymously.  Mother Theresa was FAMOUS for her unselfishness.  Just how 
> unselfish can giving be when it brings that kind of fame?  --JWR

Two points: 

1)To my knowledge, Mother Thereas did not publicize her good deeeds, her 
life-long work with the poor.

2. To my knowledge, the Church does publicize its donations to worth 
causes around the world.

Given that, John, S'plain your comments above.  Be sure to cc me on the 
message (Reply to all) if you're seeking further comment from me on the 
subject as I'm reading only at the website from time to time.

Ron Scott

///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///      ///
This email was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE!

Reply via email to