h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Entry: Mother Teresa - Saint-in-Waiting - A893333
Author: Jimster - U292

Pulled from the Flea Market and based on Crystal Butterfly's previous PR attempt with her blessing.

Feel free to ... actually, don't. Be nice and tell me it's fine as it is

Jimster

Looks fine to me ... except ....

OK there is one bit that jars a little and that's where Mother Theresa is referred to simply as 'Theresa' at one point.

I also understand that Mother Theresa has also been referred to as a contemplative, which makes the nature of her calling all the more remarkable.

I heard a lovely story about her a couple of days ago on an audio tape (there's a series on her called 'Thirsting for God'), where an American - can't remember his name - travelled 14,000 miles to see her, not having received a letter telling him not to come, because she was in Japan. As it turned out, she did not go to Japan, as she was ill. A priest (Father Angelo) was talking to her asking for an addiction specialist as he had an addict to deal with. She simply replied 'God will provide'. The American *was* such a specialist and interrupted the conversation to say so, at which Mother Theresa smiled and said 'See, God has provided!'.

At the time, I just did it because I wasn't sure whetehr she was 'mother' or 'Sister' Teresa at that point so I kept it vague. Do you think it's very distracting?

Love the story by the way.

I was wondering how you'd handle the controversy about her work, but I think youve done it well. It certainly warranted a mention, but should not have been allowed to overpower the entry. Well done!

Otto

Hi Jimster!

I think that just calling her 'Theresa' seems disrespectful. I'm sure there was a point where she changed over from being Sister Theresa to Mother Theresa, but my feeling is that as we now know her as Mother, there's no harm in calling her 'Mother' throughout.

My 2p!

I should point out (as you didn't) that there is considerable dispute over how she should be regarded.

there is quite a bit of evidence showing that the young girls in her care were treated little better than slaves, and beaten severely if they did not do exactly what they were told.

here is a link that gives more information

http://www.sarahlawrence.org/Articles/MotherTeresa.html

The link doesn't say that girls were beaten severely on my reading. The controversy that there is over her stance about contraception, abortion and the like, which I would also have been uncomfortable with. I imagine that she would have held the view that the best way not to bring a child into the world would be not to have sex as according to the Catholic church, sex is for procreation purposes only (correct me if I am wrong, any Catholics out there).

Again, as I understand it, she viewed everyone that she came in contact with as aspects of the divine, so she treated them as she would her Lord.

"What you do for the least of these, you do for me," as Jesus said.

I haven't really made comments either way about how she should be regarded - I feel that would make the entry a lot more unbalanced. I prefer the 'she did stuff, and this is what happened after' approach.

I haven't come across much evidence to support the idea that her supporters were slaves. As there are many hundreds of volunteers who come to the mission every year that doesn't really support Sarah Lawrence's theories. I hope you'll forgive me for not having too much faith in the extent of Ms Lawrence's research. She seems to have formed her opinions basd on her existing 'rationalist' biases rather than reviewing the *facts*. Additionally, heading her article 'Why Mother Teresa was Evil' smacks just a little of sensationalism, to be honest; it reminds me of the hilarious 'Bert is Evil' thing on the internet

Mother Teresa would appear to have lived her live according to the laws presented to her by the Pope and the Catholic church. I don't feel it appropriate to attack *her* for those laws, which is why I've only mentioned them as an aside.




I take ZSF's point about being disrespectful, but also there's the thing about accuracy - she would have been 'Sister Teresa' for much of the time that this entry examines. What I've done is added 'Sister' where necessary, and then inserted a note that she would eventually become 'Mother', which I hope covers all the bases.

I love the poem at the end!

Crystal Butterfly found that for her original entry. I hope she comes back to the site soon to see how this is progressing.

There are other points of controversy that are more specific to Mother Theresa and not generalizable to the Catholic Church as a whole that may be worth mentioning:

1) Her views and practices on the use of pain medication in end-of-life care upset many in the hospice and palliative care arena. The Catholic Church, on the other hand, tends to be a big supporter of hospice and palliative care.

2) The fact that she wasn't willing to share details on exactly how donated money was spent bothered some people as well. While it's pretty clear she wasn't running a scam, it is common practice for non-profit organizations to share their budgets, etc., with their donors.


Mikey

I feel that I have been overly criticised for supplying a bad example, so here are some others.

http://www.foody.org/freethoughtradio/show09.html covers things like her willingness to accept money from anyone, even though after she knew it was stolen.

http://website.lineone.net/~bajuu/chatlet.htm gives details of some of the inconsistancies (especialy about scale) in the claims surrounding her.

http://www.abc.net.au/foreign/stories/s269705.htm gives the general impression of the levels of care involved with the charity.

http://www.thehappyheretic.com/3-98.htm gives some information about what she claimed to do, but didn't.

http://abilitymagazine.com/teresa_story.html presents information about her that is more possitive.

no doubt some of these will be thought to be less than perfect sources, but it does cast doubt about her credibility as a potential saint.

Oops, sorry xyroth - I didn't mean to make you feel overly criticised, rather I was dismissive of Sarah Lawrence herself. Apologies.

no problem. I was rather short on sleep, and was a bit over sensitive anyway.

So, Jimster, are you thinking about adding in any of this other info to the entry? Personally, I think it would be worthwhile -- I think it helps to illustrate that Mother Theresa was more of a complex person and less of a stereotypical saint.


Mikey

I wasn't really thinking of adding more negative stuff simply because I don't have that much info on the positive stuff she did either to balance it out. As the entry mentions, there's a document out there with thousands of pages eulogising her deeds, but probably an equal number stating how bad she was. I'm happy with the line about her controversies, but maybe I could link to one of the pages Xyroth has cited. I need to check out their content though...

Okeedokee, I've popped in a 'Further Reading' section which links to two of Xyroth's links (cheers mate!) and a link into the BBCi Search Engine which I think covers a lot of the issues with Mother T during and after her life.

So, is this finished, do ya think? Might I be able to drop some really unsubtle hints of a Scouting variety?

I think you were right to put in the links, Jimster. It shows balance. I might have put it a bit more strongly that 'pros and cons of being a high-profile nun' and said something like 'Here's what her admirers and detracters say about her', or something of that ilk.

Personally, I have little doubt that she was doing the very best that she could and there are always alternative ways of looking at things. Sometimes what is seen as bad is recognised to be good when looked at with fresh (future) eyes and vice versa. History tends to change its judgements.

What was it the Bible says - 'judge not that ye be not judged'? And who are we to judge?

You can't look to me to pick it, though - empty hands at the moment. I'm sure a discriminating scout will snap it up soon enough.

Jimster wrote: "I wasn't really thinking of adding more negative stuff simply because I don't have that much info on the positive stuff she did either to balance it out."

I don't really agree with that -- your whole entry is essentially about the positive stuff, and really glosses over the negative. As a result, I don't think it's as well-balanced as it could be.


Mikey

Hmm... I mention only one of the miracles that have been attributed to her, but also provide a link to a detailed argument that disputes the evidence; I mention one (probably apocryphal) story of how money came to her, but also mention that there were controversies over her fundraising; I mention that she cared for the poor, but also mention how her doctrines, as given to her by the Catholic Church, might not have been the best thing for the people she was trying to help.

That feels fairly balanced to me, especially since I've left out so much positive stuff in case it became too over-grandising. Strange that no-one's come back to pull me up about leaving out more of her positive actions though...

The rest of the entry is just reporting a few key points in her life. I do feel that the further reading links provide enough negative reportage if people want to go looking for it.

For me (and I'm sure for Crystal, who wrote the original entry) this isn't about muck-raking, it's about representing a historical figure in the way she's generally perceived by history - a nice nun, on the whole. That I've included additional links to negative press after the posting Mikey's quoting is a bonus, really.

...

Damn, we don't have a nun smiley