Do we prevent somebody being hurt by superstition or faith by rejecting and challenging those things? 

Is it mistaken to support organised religion in membership or donations?

If people do good because they are human, not because God prompts them then is it right to risk giving God any credit when they alone own their good?

 


HOPE ENDURES - A BOOK THAT EXPOSES MOTHER TERESA

EX NUN COLLETTE LIVERMORE TELLS US THE TRUTH

Mother Teresa of Calcutta now a saint is the person most people think about when they hear of charity and altruism.  Christian mythmakers set to work for creating that image. But it is an illusion.  Mother played along. She probably got some amusement out of the hatred vented against those who told the real truth.

According to Hope Endures by a former nun from Mother Teresa's order, The Missionaries of Charity, Collete Livermore, the order though it had sufficient money donated to it for the purpose of buying books to help with the medical work this was not done (page 115). As a result, the health of the sisters was at risk. The book explains how the nuns were not provided with medical advice, the use of mosquito repellents, information about malaria and vaccinations (page 115). It attributes this to the idea that God would look after the nuns.
 
The book recounts how Colette, then called Sister Tobit, got into trouble with the order for helping a man with dysentery who was in danger of dying (page 163). The order cared more about obedience than doing the right thing. Mother Teresa declared according to page 168, that she recognised 1 Peter 2:18-23 as being correct. This text ordered slaves to obey their masters even if they were abusive and difficult. It said that it is great to be beaten for doing wrong when one is innocent and that such patience pleases God. Peter also says that this has to be the right attitude for Jesus gave us an example to follow. Mother Teresa used this text to urge her nuns to obey superiors without question (page 168). Sister Tobit decided to leave the order. She didn't like the way she was expected to let the poor suffer rather than disobey orders and she made that clear to Mother Teresa (page 172). Mother Teresa was "not sympathetic" and told Tobit that her feelings were sourced in temptation and pride (page 172). In other words, Tobit was bad for seeing sense. Mother was judging her despite forbidding Tobit to judge those who acted as dictators in the order over her (page 224).
 
Later Colette recounted the tale of what happened in Manila when she tried to help a sick boy called Alex. Sister Valerie who was in charge of her forbade her to help him though Colette told her there was no reason why they couldn't.
 
Mother Teresa wouldn't let the nuns have a washing machine (page 194). This forced the nuns to wash the underwear of the incontinent with brushes. The order was more concerned about inflicting hardship on the nuns than on helping the sick. A washing machine would have freed up their time to help people. Mother was definitely misusing the funds so kindly donated to her from all over the world. It was the struggle to help not the helping that mattered in her Christian philosophy.

Sister Tobit applied for a dispensation from her vows (page 224) because she was expected to do things like sending dying children away when commanded to do so and because she was not allowed to have a mind of her own. She wrote that she felt that "the order whose raison detre was to show compassion, chronically failed to do so, both to its own members and to the poor." "The Society demanded that I have no mind of my own and censored everything I read, a form of brainwashing that almost turned me into an automaton". These quotes can be read on page 224. On page 213 we read that Mother Teresa held that if an event happened, it was either willed by God or allowed by him to happen. We read that it led her to conclude that what the religious superior commands is either willed by God or at least allowed by him to be made meaning the commands no matter how silly or harsh they are are from God's authority. To disobey them is to disobey God.
 
When Tobit came Colette again she began to suspect that the gospel commands given by Christ to give to all who ask and thought that attempts to love unconditionally and forgive unconditionally really made one a doormat (page 287).

The book proves that Mother Teresa cannot be called a good woman. It proves that living the gospels properly is bad for you. The Missionaries of Charity experienced the damaging power of the gospels and yet they lived their lives as an example to those who they helped and those who knew them - ultimately to see them take on the same torments. Some charity!

Just to add something to the Mother Teresa debate. The worst thing she ever did was to hoard up millions while her nuns were forced to use the same syringe over and over again on the patients. I have googled and there is no refutation of that at all. We need hard evidence to refute such a terrible deed. The excuse that Teresa and her nuns were doing all they could do under the circumstances is just an excuse. There is no excuse for spreading disease that way. The believers are blinded by faith. Real faith in God should be based on reality and determination to get rid of bias. Any faith that does not care enough about truth is an idol. As Bonhoeffer said we need to be careful that our religious faith in God does not become an idol. The fundamental problem with idolatry is that it cuts you off the real God if there is one. When a saintly person shows terrible serious flaws you can be sure the God they are a saint for is the one they have created in their heads. Jesus made that very point about the Pharisees.


It is startling how people on the internet are dismissing Colette Livermore a good woman without reading her book which exposed Teresa. That is bias pure and simple. As for calling her disgruntled and dishonest that is a biased judgement. Did they walk in her shoes? As for Christopher Hitchens, though he was correct, he should have been a little more methodical in his refutation of Mother Teresa's humanitarianism. But the argument does not depend on Hitchens - there are many testimonies and investigations that support his thesis and those are carried out by people more qualified than those armchair religionists who despise the findings and want them forgotten.

The case against Teresa being truly good is conclusive. This wily Pope who has made her a saint can ignore facts if he wants but he cannot make them wrong. And I would ask people what is the best risk to take: "What comes first? Upholding Mothers good name or risking condoning the spiritual and physical suffering she enabled and caused and did? Do the poor matter as much to me as her?!"

THE WWW

The following sites show just what a liar Mother Teresa was and her callous heart is laid bare. They show the deceit of Pope John Paul II who was eager to make a saint of her.

An interview with Christopher Hitchens on Mother Teresa: http://www.SecularHumanism.org/library/fi/hitchens_16_4.html

Defending Mother Teresa: http://www.thehappyheretic.com/3-98.htm

Mother Teresa's House Of Illusions: http://www.SecularHumanism.org/library/fi/shields_18_1.html

The Illusory Vs. The Real Mother Teresa: http://www.ffrf.org/fttoday/august96/hakeem.html

The Mother of All Myths: http://website.lineone.net/~bajuu/