If nobody believed in superstition it would be unable to hurt anyone



Mother Teresa of Calcutta, once the irritating Blessed Teresa of Calcutta as a result of one of the milestones in the scheme by the late Pope John Paul II to fast-track her to sainthood, and now the even more annoying St Teresa of Calcutta, is destined to become one of the most popular saints in the Catholic Church. It has emerged that she had to be exorcised of demons on her deathbed. She certainly needed it! And the Vatican ghoulishly used the suffering of Monica Besra to pretend that Mother who was dead cured her miraculously. That cure was one of the grounds on which Mother was made a saint.

Writers Professor Serge Larivie and Genevieve Chenard in the journal, Studies in Religion/Sciences, have made it clear that Mother Teresa deserves severe criticism for "her rather dubious way of caring for the sick, her questionable political contacts, her suspicious management of the enormous sums of money she received, and her overly dogmatic views regarding, in particular, abortion, contraception, and divorce."

For example, the 517 missions she had set up for the poor and the sick in many countries were really just places for the dying to be dumped in. Doctors who checked out her activities in Calcutta have established this. The places were found to be needlessly dirty, the inmates were inadequately fed and looked after. Worse, they had NO PAINKILLERS!

Mother let people think that money was scarce but that was not the case at all.

The writers noted that Mother never gave money to help the victims of natural disasters in India. But she said prayers for them. And she wasted the money on sending them medals of the Virgin Mary. Millions of dollars were put by Mother into many secret accounts.

Thanks also to the work of Christopher Hitchens it is possible to see the truth about Mother Teresa who nobody dares criticise.

Mother aided the evil Duvalier family of Haiti and buttered them up. She got a million dollars from Charles Keating and kept it ignoring requests to her to return it after she knew he had stolen the money. She has opposed the human right to divorce, contraception and abortion and the rights of secular people. She thought she knew it all. It was okay for her to campaign against these things for she never needed them. She was an epitome of the reprehensible selfishness that exists in the worst fundamentalist Christians. She even said that poverty was a gift from God. She accepted the vicious idea that the purpose of suffering is for the betterment of character. The atheist refuses to condone suffering this way and so the atheist should have a greater hatred of the suffering in the world than the religionist. She refused to use anything in her clinics to relieve pain for she accepted the Catholic doctrine that suffering is a good thing. She checked into the best hospitals in the world when she was sick herself and anything was good enough for the poor she used to create her grand and glorious image.

Mother stated that dogs were fed on human foetuses. No evidence for this claim has ever been uncovered. She approved of a film about her, Mother Teresa and her world, which claimed that there were a quarter of a million lepers in Calcutta while another film she collaborated in said it was 40,000. She has exaggerated the number of lepers and has helped them in preference to the even more serious plague of malaria.

She lied as well that she knew no poor woman in Calcutta who had had an abortion though Calcuttans regarded abortion as no big deal and all classes used it.

Mother had 50 million dollars in the New York bank alone and yet the order greedily solicited for money. This was the order that used the same syringe on many sick patients under the pretext of hard times. The money shouldn’t have been lying in accounts. Every penny should have been used.

Mother Teresa spoke against Vatican II making any doctrinal or practical changes in the Roman Catholic Church in the sixties. She supported the old horrific triumphalist and sectarian Church system that existed before Vatican II. She did not want the Church to become more human. She has frequently presented Calcutta as being a worse city than it really was to pull in the donations.

Please look up the sites by Christopher Hitchens and Aroup Chatterjee on the Internet and do a search in Google. Free Inquiry Winter 97-98 Volume 18 and Issue 1 ran an article by a former member of the Order Mother Teresa founded the Missionaries of Charity. She left the Order and exposed the evil and predominant side of Mother Teresa in the article. The article can be found on page 31. She testified that |Mother believed that obedience to the Order and to the Church is God’s will and that it is good to choose to suffer for it makes God give more graces out to the Church. Attachment to people and friendship was forbidden. This is so that Christ’s command that God alone be loved and other things loved for his sake meaning not for themselves but for him and not for yourself but for him may be observed. The effect of all this was the nuns telling lies and refusing to commit the sin of thinking independently. Mother Teresa caused a lot of destruction among the nuns. Mother Teresa amassed huge donations for the order and made no effort to make sure that the nuns used clean needles when they injected. She wouldn’t supply them. The Order she ran is so much like an extreme religious cult.

The Lancet, a respected medical journal, gave a negative appraisal of Mother Teresa's methods of looking after people. She refused to listen. She had the money to improve the substandard care.
Two thirds of the patients who went to Mother Teresa's facilities were looking for a doctor and there was none available for them. Patients then died because they only had custodial care.

SF Weekly make it clear that Mother Teresa knew that her priest friend, Donald McGuire, abused a Bay Area boy in 1993. The Church, for a change, dismissed him from his ministry. She didn't care and made efforts to have him put back into active ministry. She stated this must be done as soon as humanly possible. In a letter she referred to the abuses as sad events and that he was guilty of imprudence. In other words, he made a mistake. She was close to excusing his behaviour. She got her wish for his reinstatement and the McGuire attacked more boys. He ended up arrested in 2005.
She wrote, "I understand how grave is the scandal touching the priesthood in the U.S.A. and how careful we must be to guard the purity and reputation of that priesthood". She lied that she considered his crime grave but she stated that the reputation of the Church took priority.
Again she implied the crime was not serious and made no difference to her, "I must say, however, that I have confidence and trust in Fr. McGuire and wish to see his vital ministry resume as soon as possible." There was no empathy for the victim.
The letter was used as evidence in litigation against McGuire's order, the Jesuits.
Teresa was a metaphysical terrorist. She loved a God who sends women to hell for all eternity if they have an abortion of their own free will and never repent. Mother then thinks that is right so if she were God for a day that is what she would be doing to those women. The fact is that accusing women who have abortions of murder is extreme hate speech and must be legally stopped.
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).
 he 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?!"

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/  


The following two 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.



This fascinating book reveals shockers such as that the pope has beatified Archbishop Stepinac of Zagreb who stood idly by as Jews and Communists were hounded to their deaths and the notorious fascist Cardinal Schuster of Milan.

Hope Endures, Colette Livermore, William Heinemann, North Sydney, Australia, 2008

Mother Teresa Bad Role Model: http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/eamonn-mccann-mother-teresa-not-such-a-good-role-model-1.2476467?utm_source=Secular Sunday&utm_campaign=fd2cea3ebf-198_copy_01_10_16_2015&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_09cfdc0dd4-fd2cea3ebf-79937429

Eamonn McCann: Mother Teresa not such a good role model
Canonisation an exercise in propaganda – which is, of course, the salutary point
Thu, Dec 24, 2015, 01:00

It’s not the fact that Mother Teresa has been credited with cures for which there is no known disease that renders the plan for her canonisation ridiculous. The ridiculousness lies in canonisation itself.

Not even the pope is authorised to hand out ceremonial passes to paradise. To qualify for canonisation, you have to have made the cut and be resident in heaven already. If you’re not in, you can’t win. All of which renders the elaborate ceremony planned for next year redundant – apart from its propaganda value, which is, of course, the point.

Propaganda has always been the name of the canonisation game. The main reason medieval popes came up with the idea was so the church could take control of the selection of role-models for society at large. It’s about shaping the world the way you want it to be, about power and influence, not holiness and prayer.

What model of society does the Albanian nun exemplify? Twenty years ago, in January 1996, writing for Hot Press, I phoned the Los Angeles district attorney’s office to check whether there had been progress in persuading Mother Teresa to hand back a million dollars stolen from the poor. Not a lot, assistant district attorney Paul Turley told me.
Front for fraud

The money had been filched from the pockets of pensioners and small savers by the notorious conman, Charles Keating, head of what turned out to be a front for fraud, Lincoln Savings and Loan.

Keating had siphoned $225 million from the accounts of thousands of victims, and had bunged a million of this loot to Mother Teresa. (The closest Irish equivalents of US savings and loan associations are credit unions.)

Four years earlier, in 1992, Turley had appealed to Teresa: “If you contact me, I will put you in direct contact with the rightful owners of the property now in your possession.” Any developments since, I wondered?

“She has ignored us,” Turley told me. “We have honestly given up on this. It is obvious she is determined to keep it.”

Sentenced to 10 years, Keating may have taken comfort from contemplation of the crucifix on the wall of his cell personally blessed by Pope John Paul and delivered by a messenger from Mother Teresa.

It has commonly been suggested, including in recent days by commentators sceptical about Mother Teresa’s sanctity, that in this and similar matters she had been blinded by intense religiosity, her mode of thought too other-worldly to appreciate mundane stuff like money.

As an excuse for the criminal offence of knowingly receiving stolen property, this would be laughed out of any court in the land. Thomas “Slab” Murphy had a better defence.

A more subtle argument advanced by Catholic traditionalists is that what matters most at a time of ideological turmoil and creeping secularisation within the church is the unwavering adherence and global witness she gave to the teachings of the church now most under siege, on contraception, divorce, abortion etc. It is this, they suggest, which, despite all, makes her a suitable role model for the times we live in.

But this won’t wash either. The journalist Daphne Barak quoted Mother Teresa in April 1996 in Ladies’ Home Journal, commenting on the break-up of the marriage of Princess Diana and Prince Charles. “I think it is such a sad story. Diana is such a sad soul . . . You know what? It is good that it is over. Nobody was happy. I know I should preach for family love and unity, but in their case . . . ” Then her voice “trailed off.”

The masses are told under pain of hellfire that they must unquestioningly obey the rules of the church, but when it comes to the useful rich and glamorous, immutable laws of God can be amended on the instant.

In October 1994, Mother Teresa sent a message to the UN International Conference on Population and Development in Cairo, pleading for outright rejection of contraception and abortion. “Every child is a gift from God. If you have a child you think is unwanted, give that child to me. I will find it a loving home where it will be cherished as a blessing.”

Dishonest opportunism

The Cairo conference was to hear that up to 40,000 children under 12 were dying every day of malnutrition or preventable disease. Mother Teresa’s order was not running any adoption operation anywhere in the world. Her statement was not off-the-cuff or a flight of holy fantasy. It was a written declaration, widely distributed. It was dishonest, manipulative opportunism for which it is hard to find adequate words. “Despicable,” maybe.

In the year before her death in 1997, as a team of doctors flown in from around the world tried by extraordinary means to bring her back to health, one Irish newspaper carried the headline, “World Unites in Prayer For ‘Living Saint’”.

We may hope there’ll be a lot less of that sort of thing in 2016.