this post was submitted on 25 Aug 2023
319 points (100.0% liked)
chapotraphouse
13538 readers
916 users here now
Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.
No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer
Gossip posts go in c/gossip. Don't post low-hanging fruit here after it gets removed from c/gossip
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It's easy to view this as an aberration, some corruption of the true Christian faith by some outside force, but the cruelty has always been the point. Look at "Mother" Teresa. She's seen across denominations as an exemplar of the faith, but, in reality, she hoarded donations meant to help the poor, withheld palliative care from the dying, and provided inadequate care to the treatable. She has the suffering of thousands at her feet, suffering dealt out because she thought it was necessary given the parameters of her religion. That the eternity of bliss that surely awaited them on the other side could be purchased with a lonely and agonizing death. The whole enterprise is rotten from first principles. Burn that shit down.
After she blew up and gained international prominence and again when the church began the canonization process, people looked into the conditions in the houses of the poor and what they found wasn't great - treatments administered before the diagnostics were done, lack of painkillers stronger than aspirin, untrained nuns doing medical work, inconsistent sanitation and hygiene. Conditions didn't really start improving until after her death, by which point her order had amassed hundreds of millions in donations, some of which were used to open up facilities elsewhere but most of which ended up unaccounted for and likely ended up being absorbed by the Catholic Church. A lot of the criticism out there comes from Christopher Hitchens, who defenders argue had a chip on his shoulder and twisted the facts, and Hindu nationalists, who argue that she was engaged in forced conversions, but even her softer critics describe someone who was fundamentally well intentioned but who ended up with a twisted worldview as a result of her religion:
CW slight ableism:
spoiler
Mother Teresa was, without question, the most dedicated, self-sacrificing person I’ve ever known, but not one of the wisest. Mother Teresa wasn’t interested in providing optimal care for the sick and the dying, but in serving Jesus, whom she believed accepted every act of kindness offered the poor. She had her own doubts and feelings of abandonment by God, but her spiritual directors urged her to interpret these “torments of soul” as signs that she had come so close to God that she shared Jesus’ passion on the cross. Under the sway of such spin, Mother Teresa came to glorify suffering. This resulted in a rather schizophrenic mindset by which Mother Teresa believed both that she was sent to minister to the poor AND that suffering should be embraced as a good in itself. Mother Teresa often told the sick and dying, “Suffering is the kiss of Jesus.” Mother Teresa’s sisters offer simple care and a smile, not competent medical treatment or tools with which to escape poverty. One could argue that Mother Teresa’s faith both facilitated and tragically limited her work. With the enormous resources at her disposal, Mother Teresa could have done more, but she always saw helping the poor as a means to a supernatural end, never a good in itself.I personally trend more toward the opinion that she should have known better and her presence in Calcutta did substantial harm, but, even if you disagree, the amount of good she did was severely limited by an ideology that praised intentions over outcomes and didn't require her to inform herself or incorporate the improvements that were happening in the secular medical field while she was active.