Why is the most famed scholarship on this woman a deliberate hitpiece that doesn't even attempt historical rigor?

they are right she loved watching people suffer

she thought suffering will bring the patient closer to god

she was a fucking sadistic monster nothing else deal with it christcuck

Is there ANY evidence she ever actually did something to inflict unnecessary pain on people?

Specific examples, not vague accusations.

food for thought, if her organization had the money and the ability to lessen the suffering of patients, but didn't do it because it went against their beliefs, didn't they cause the person to suffer more than they should have?

>if her organization had the money and the ability to lessen the suffering of patients, but didn't do it because it went against their beliefs

Did they do this? Keep in mind I know nothing about what is being talked about at all.

>Who is building up Mother Teresa to be worshiped?
> People are just recognizing the good work she did

She's been declared a saint. A SAINT. Do you even understand what that means in the Catholic institution and throughout history. It is a pretty major acclamation for an individual.

Why is the most famed scholarship deliberate hitpieces that don't even attempt historical rigor?

>Is there ANY evidence she ever actually did something to inflict unnecessary pain on people?

Withholding treatments she knew worked better than what she gave?

they were one of the most foremost charities in the world. At the same time independent doctors from britain came and saw that there was large scale sharing of needles, access to only over the counter pain pills and the like.

It even got better after her second in command took over after MT kicked the bucket.

>Did they do this?

Yes.

>Withholding treatments she knew worked better than what she gave?

And did she do this??????

Proof?

>At the same time independent doctors from britain came and saw that there was large scale sharing of needles, access to only over the counter pain pills and the like.

Finally, a specific claim. Yeah, sharing needles isn't good. That's how people get AID's. I can understand the criticism then.

She wasn't running a hospital retard; she was running a hospice

>she wasn't running a hospital
>therefore everyone who enters the place must leave in a bodybag.

How about you learn what a hospice is first

So people aren't entitled to a second claim?
Random nuns are better versed on proclaiming whether or not a patient has a better shot than doctors?

For fuck's sake she wasn't kidnapping poo in loos off the street.

If they believed they were dying (or had a doctor's confirmation) they went there on their own accord. If they wanted to be healed or double checked; they should have gone to a hospital

Not sure if actually retarded or trolling.

This is the Internet. You can dismiss anything anyone links in just the same way you've been dismissing everything. If you want evidence use ***Google***. If you can't or don't care enough then gtfo.

they didn't always go there off their own accord you retard, nuns oftentimes did take them there.
Several of them were rather poor slumdwellers who just got hospitalized and then left to die. She had the wherewithal to send people to hospitals for getting a second treatment. Hell the missionaries of charity did start sending people out after she died.
>poo in loos
into the trash your opinion goes.

She is a big deal because she was a nice lady who was a bright spot when people associated the RC church with diddling altar boys.

>they didn't always go there off their own accord you retard, nuns oftentimes did take them there
After asking them if they believed they were dying. If they didn't; they could have checked out any moment.
>She had the wherewithal to send people to hospitals for getting a second treatment. Hell the missionaries of charity did start sending people out after she died.
Again; that's their prerogative. The hospice was intended for the dying who didn't have anything in the world.

>into the trash your opinion goes.
>waaah mommy he used a bad word on Veeky Forums :((((

Fuck off Rajesh

>make a claim
>proof?
>umm do it yourself

That's not how this works

>dude let me tell you about your country based off wikipedia and a smug frog
take that level of bullshit to /int/.

So you are saying that once you enter the hospice you only exit after you are going to die.

Thats some hotel california level shit, but I assume you will say something like
>those poo in loos were so poor that they were better off dying. :^)

If her goal was to cause suffering than why bother helping anyone at all?

Tell me what you think being a saint means. As a Catholic to me it just means they're in heaven. You non Catholics seem to have this weird idea that saints are perfect super heroes or something.

If their goal was inflicting suffering then why not just leave these people to die in the streets?

She didn't do enough is what I am saying. I would give other examples of indian groups helping poor people by actually giving them medical treatment and taking them to hospitals, but it would just trigger the catholics that are going to come in to swarm and defend their newest saint.

Yes? That's generally the point of a hospice? There are other Church orders that run hospitals; MT wanted to run a hospice

Do you understand that St. Teresa was not part of a medical order? All she was concerned with is providing a bed for the terminally ill. That doesn't mean her and the sisters didn't treat what they could, it's just that wasn't main intention.

>they could have checked out any moment
>any moment
Please get out of the basement,hit gym,join some club, mingle with people,have sex.

what does this pic have to do with the thread?

they consistently didn't do enough, like have a staff of doctors to see whether or not who could be treated or saved.

>gets BTFO
>starts projecting

how the fuck are you supposed to check out if you are quite possibly going to die and the only people around you are nuns who are finding god through suffering?

>inb4 life finds a way.

I wish people could explain to me how they would have done better in that time with St. Teresa resources. She was only concerning herself with the poorest of the poor. If she ran a hospital instead of a hospice than she de facto would not have been able to serve those "untouchables" that were dying in the street. Her goal was to provide comfort to the dying people who had nowhere else to go and that's what she did.

Because guess what; she wasn't running a hospital; where the doctors were needed. The doctors are needed to be able to, y'know, ACTUALLY treat illnesses, instead of wasting their time with terminals.

If you believe you're beyond the point of saving and you have no one to take care of you; you went there. Otherwise, to the hospital

They're nuns; just get up and walk out; they've got more important stuff to do and beds are scarce; if you want to leave they'll help you

>don't do anything
>no one cares or thinks about Indians

>establish a hospice for the dying
>spend years of your life in a Indian slum
>OMG WHAT A FUCKING SADIST, U SHOULD OF DONE MORE BLARGH!

Why do you care about Indians only when it concerns criticizing someone who did actual work for their poor?

Journalism not scholarship.
Not that you'd know the difference.

Here we go again.
>untouchable
spamming that again and again alone would get your opinion discarded on the spot. I explained it pretty well in the previous thread that it is extremely hard to tell who is untouchable and who is not based on the color of their skin.

Lets see.

>she had absolute huge amounts of money
>she could easily create a hospital that allowed her access to large amounts of opiates legally in India to ease the suffering of the poorest of the poor that everyone keeps harping about.
>she could have at least used more modern procedures like not reusing needles.
>she could have hired more doctors and people who could prescribe better painkillers to patients.

You know, like her successor Nirmala Joshi actually did?

I'd say considering the amount of money she received, the standard of medical care provided was unacceptable.

and who were determining whether the cases were terminal?
Hired doctors?
or nuns?

>you might be terminally bedridden
>"Just go out and go to the hospital bro :^)"

Oh fuck off, her biggest contribution to calcutta wasn't even her ebin mortuary If you actually knew what she did you would have pointed to all the orphanages or women's shelters the order built in calcutta, but you faggots HAVE to try and defend her practice of grandstanding and letting people die without oftentimes getting second medical opinion.

In a country where medicine is limited and space even more so, there was no room in hospitals for the terminally ill poorest of the poor. Whether you call them untouchables or not doesn't matter. The of the matter is that if she ran a hospital instead of a hospice she would not have been able to help those that were dying in the street. That's who she was concerning herself with. She could have ran a hospital but those weren't the people she wanted to help.

>Muh internet points guys.
Well I'm not that guy but your replies and memes sure is making you look like the butthurt one.

Just calm down.

You would have every right to complain if she ran a hospital.

You didn't address the second part of his point, how her successor did exactly that.

But bro, you don't care about indians
don't you see, they were UNTOUCHABLES thrown out of hospitals that she took in.

Disregard the fact that denying someone medical treatment or any mistreatment based on their caste or religion fucking illegal in india and would get the hospital's license revoked.

Are indians collectively retarded and can't tell whether they're dying or not?

You want to be sure? Go to a hospital to double check.

If they're terminally bedridden then that's where they belong; isn't it?

Who cares? That's not the people was concerning herself with.

the same guy who raised the point. post 97 india was probably an easier place to do buy medicine in because around this time india started making extremely cheap generics.

No, I have every right to complain with her running a hospice. Palliative care of terminal patients is an important part of medical care.

I wonder if it would have been better to let them die in the street?

Try Aroup Chatterjee's book Mother Theresa: The Final Verdict:

www meteorbooks com

You forgot
>Then some guy from the BBC shows up in 1969 and points a movie camera at Mother T. The result is the documentary Something Beautiful for God. The hagiography instantly confers celebrity status on its unknown subject. And the film is followed by a book of the same name. Suddenly, Mother Teresa had become a household name. And then something happened.
And:
>westerners prefer to think that Calcutta is worse than Interzone and The Commonwealth, gibe lots of monies
>westerners are non believers, but likes religion as a concept
>westerners doesn't listen to what she says nor looks at what she does
>westerners gibe even more monies

>should we get a doctor to see if the guy can actually survive
>nah bro, just use ur intuition, its better than medical training anyway.

>MT and her order are to blame Indians are retarded

Letting them die in the street would have been better than torturing them to death, but it wouldn't make that just. One action being better than another doesn't justify the former action, just as someone being worse than you doesn't make you a good person. I don't think she did enough to relieve suffering with the resources she had available, and deserves criticism for it.

>getting free money
>fugging westerners
?

To be fair she was relatively well known in india at that time as a nice lady that was helping the poorest of the poor get better treatment and dying with dignity. She was on par with your Lawyer who practices in court 5 days a week, comes back home and gives guest lectures in local colleges for free because the college is too poor to afford giving him regular payment.

>Letting them die in the street would have been better than torturing them to death, but it wouldn't make that just
Oh fuck off with this bullshit. She wasn't sticking bamboo sticks under her fingernails; she just believed morphine and such were against her order and only gave them mild painkillers.

So no; dying in bed under a roof with at least a mild painkiller is NOT worse than dying in the street with dogs and/or rats chewing at you

>Letting them die in the street would have been better than torturing them to death

How about some evidence of this? Incoming Hitchens links who source.

>She dindu nuffin
>she a good girl
>its indians' fault poor people who are in a hospice aren't given access to pallative treatment by the people who run the hospice.
The problem is that she didn't use that money. She sat on it for the most part. Her successor did a better job of actually doing the pallative treatment bit with using sterilized needles and all that fancy jazz.

Where did I say, or imply that she was? I was pointing out that something being relatively worse doesn't make the first thing that's relatively better an absolute good. It's funny how you've become all about moral relativism when it's Mother Teresa being criticized (not all that harshly, I might add). She could have easily done more with her resources, and deserves criticism for not doing so.

>The one thing everyone can agree on is iconoclasm

First you openly mock and deride the Holy Church with false statements about worshipping saints, and you also support the heresy of Iconoclasm?

Absolutely disgusting.

I didn't say she was torturing them to death, moron. I was saying that letting them die would have been better than something worse. Obviously what she did is not that "something worse" but is in fact something better than letting them die in the street, but still not an absolute good because relative goodness doesn't make absolute goodness.

Are you people retarded or something?

>indians have the intelligence of a dog and are too stupid to go to a proper hospital
This is what you're saying.

You are literally treating Indians like apes.

I know you're the same designated shitter from every MT thread

>first

No, that was second. Learn to read.

You don't think providing any sort of comfort to the terminally ill qualifies as good?

Would you care to provide some actual criticisms of the scholarly pieces, Wolfshiem, or are you just asshurt that they're criticizing her?

>literally treating
So its the duty of the person who is dying in a hospice to go out and look for a second medical opinion?
The people who are actually running the hospice should just wash their hands off and forget keep feeding the person a proscribed dosage of pain pills until he or she dies instead of actually having doctors who can do a referral or give a second medical opinion?

Yes and no. It beats doing nothing, but she absolutely deserves to be criticized for not doing more considering the vast amount of money she received to help the poor.

>Hitchens
>unsourced book made to demonize a Saint and make money on literary clickbait
>Scholarly piece

There's nothing wrong with criticism. It's the making shit up that and purposefully removing context behind her actions is what irritates me.

How do you know she wasn't doing enough?

Wolfshiem specifically referred to an unnamed scholarship piece. There have been multiple.

and the fact still remains that despite the money she received she did objectively less than her own successor when it came to providing pallative treatment.

He probably doesn't consider it an absolute good.
Doing the bare minimum to make a situation better considering the resources you might have at hand specifically for that task is more good-ish than good.

The fact her successor immediately started doing more, and the fact she sat on vast amounts of money that could have been used to do more. The fact the standards of her hospice fell way below those of any other western-funded charity hospice.

But nobody knew what was happening in Calcutta until Mother Teresa shined a flashlight on it and told the world. There would be a successor who by your standards does better without the person who set the stage.

>The fact the standards of her hospice fell way below those of any other western-funded charity hospice.

I would like to see sources for this.

educate yourself fucking christian moron

huurrr I don't like facts so I ignore them.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Mother_Teresa

>nobody knew
plenty of people knew.

Calcutta was not somalia from black hawk down. Plenty of other missionaries and the like worked in calcutta, stayed there and made it a somewhat better place for the people living in slums.

>her successor needed someone who set the stage

her successor worked with Mother teresa before she was a darling of the west and was just another sister with a small flock helping the poor and needy. For god's sake at least do some research before defending her.

>citing Wikipedia
>citing a Wikipedia article who only cite Hitchens and his poo in loo ally
>citation needed covers half the article

Nice job frog

>But nobody knew what was happening in Calcutta until Mother Teresa shined a flashlight on it and told the world.
Yeah, nobody knew how bad it was.

>poo in loo ally
>a person who worked in calcutta, worked in the hospice and spent years interviewing people who worked there.
>he is to be disregarded because he is indian.

ayy ho, is that dogmeat in the corridor?

np keep ignoring reality

did you talk to your imaginary skydaddy today?

btw more than just hitchens as a source faggot

many journalists wrote articles about her.

>WOLFSHIEM
You're a Catholic, just read a hagiography with Mother Teresa in its title.

Looking through Amazon, the most popular books on her seem to be that kind of stuff, like Spink's authorized biography.

>I'd rather people die in the streets than have my precious slums city have it's poverty shown to the world

Way to go Pajeet.

You are thinking about china m8.Indians revel in showing their poverty to the world.

>be successful con artist
>westerners are eating faeces from my hand
>suddenly, a wild drunkard appears
>he's got a Pajeet too
>IT'S SUPER EFFECTIVE!

oh shit

mobile.nytimes.com/2016/08/27/world/asia/mother-teresa-critic.html?_r=0&referer=https://www.bing.com/search?q=mother teresa critic&form=MB1078&mkt=de-DE&setlang=de-DE

what a fag you are

Hes not only an indian. He's also not a catholic.

All hail Bill Donohue, most respected theologian of the world.

>You non Catholics seem to have this weird idea that saints are perfect super heroes or something.
And yet you pray to them.

what does that have to do with anything?

Aroop Chatterjee actually worked in calcutta had had to serve in the same shitty parts of the city mother teresa had to serve in to get his medical degree. His major peeve is that she blew her own trumpet so hard that people thought calcutta was and mother teresa was the only person dying people alive.

To pray literally just means "to ask".

>what does that have to do with anything?
Because Donohue, as the good catholic he is, wants to cuck us all. Cuck us from what good science is.

>mother Theresienstadt didnu noffing wrong
She also got the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979. She good girl.

>backpedalling so hard
-_-