Product Description

Recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize, feted by politicians, the Church and the world's media, Mother Teresa of Calcutta appears to be on the fast track to sainthood. But what, asks Christopher Hitchens, makes Mother Teresa so divine? In a frank expose of the Teresa cult, Hitchens details the nature and limits of one woman's mission to the world's poor. He probes the source of the heroic status bestowed upon an Albanian nun whose only declared wish is to serve God. He asks whether Mother Teresa's good works answer any higher purpose than the need of the world's privileged to see someone, somewhere, doing something for the Third World. He unmasks pseudo-miracles, questions Mother Teresa's fitness to adjudicate on matters of sex and reproduction, and reports on a version of saintly ubiquity which affords genial relations with dictators, corrupt tycoons and convicted frauds.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #50885 in Books
• Published on: 1997-04
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Paperback
• 98 pages

Features

• ISBN13: 9781859840542
• Condition: NEW
• Notes: Brand New from Publisher. No Remainder Mark.
• Click here to view our Condition Guide and Shipping Prices

Amazon.com Review
What's next--The Girl Scouts: The Untold Story? How could anybody write a debunking book about Mother Teresa and her Missionaries of Charity order? Well, in this little cruise missile of a book, Hitchens quickly establishes that the idea is not without point. After all, what is Mother Teresa doing hanging out with a dictator's wife in Haiti and accepting over a million dollars from Charles Keating? The most riveting material in the book is contained in two letters: one from Mother Teresa to Judge Lance Ito--then weighing what sentence to dole out to the convicted Keating--which cited all the work Keating has done "to help the poor," and another from a Los Angeles deputy D.A., Paul Turley, back to Mother Teresa that eloquently stated that rather than working to reduce Keating's sentence, she should return the money he gave her to its rightful owners, the defrauded bond-holders. (Significantly, Mother Teresa never replied.) And why do former missionary workers and visiting doctors consistently observe that the order's medical practices seem so inadequate, especially given all the money that comes in? (Hitchens acidly observes that on the other hand, Mother Teresa herself always manages to receive world-class medical care.) Hitchens's answer is that Mother Teresa is first and foremost interested not in providing medical treatment, but in furthering Catholic doctrine and--quite literally--becoming a saint.

From Publishers Weekly
An extended, nun-busting polemic from the The Nation columnist.
Copyright 1998 Reed Business Information, Inc.

From Library Journal
Hitchens (For the Sake of Argument, LJ 6/1/93), a columnist for the Nation, debunks missionary Mother Teresa's saintly, humane persona. He characterizes this 1979 Nobel Peace Prize winner as a political opportunistic promoter of a cult of submission among the poor, who suffer under her substandard medical care. Hitchens claims she is an ideological accomplice and moral legitimizer for the political right, including Charles Keating of the Savings and Loan scandal, Ronald Reagan, and the Haitian Duvaliers. This readable, caustic polemic is very short on biographical data and cited sources and lacks scholarly development. Given its provocative nature, it is recommended for libraries owning several titles about Mother Teresa despite its weaknesses.?Charles L. Lumpkins, Bloomsburg Univ. Lib., Pa.
Copyright 1995 Reed Business Information, Inc.

Customer Reviews

My review is based on personal experience...
I first read a portion of this book in the Washington Post a number of years ago. As I'd worked closely with Mother Teresa in Calcutta for a bit over two years, I was amused by it and bought several copies which I then gave to those I knew who painted halos on her. Now I admit to some mixed feelings (more on that later) but the book's strength is still formidable.

While working in an office that provided Mother with much of her food, a Scottish pharmacologist who'd been volunteering in the Home for Dying Destitutes visited. She proclaimed that the people she was taking care of there "don't need to die!" She asserted that most of the sisters caring for the destitute weren't very bright, and that there are means of keeping the destitute alive of which the Missionaries of Charity would not partake. After that, and after picking up a small child who died in my arms at the mother house not far from my residence, my eyes were more opened to that saint of Calcutta.

Incidentally, the child who died was the product of one of the "natural family planning" sessions the MC sisters held for Muslim women in Calcutta. That degree of naivete, as if the sisters who lived among them understood so pathetically little about Islam as to teach Muslim women of that means of birth control--in one of the most crowded square miles on planet earth--was enough to make one question Mother Teresa even if other things, many of which Hitchens points out, were not.

As for the intellectual level of the sisters, it's important to note that what I describe is typical in much of the Third World. As an Indian friend said, most of the sisters, if they had not become nuns, would have been stuck in their Indian village, in a prearranged marriage. Their entry into the sisterhood freed them and, in some cases, allows them to "see the world." I'm not saying that in a derisive way; were I in their shoes, I may do the same.

And there was one sister whose intelligence and sensitivity did impress me. She shared with me one day that she was concerned about children being adopted into families in, say, Denmark, which had negative population growth at the time. She wondered what would happen when the fad wore off of the obvious adoptions--brown children among the more pale Danes--and what social problems might come about as a consequence. As I'm not familiar with any Scandanavians, I don't know what may be happening there today.

The situation, though, also has its ironies. I know many a feminist who is impressed to no end with Mother Teresa, an allegedly strong woman. As I knew Mother, I guarantee to the feminists that such a label turns Mother over in her grave. Indeed, while some reviewers have commented on the MC sisters in the U.S., their commitment to AIDS patients, etc., I see most of the sisters as sheep, little girls despite their ages, following their leader, whoever she may be, with a girl's unquestioning attitude. That's not feminist, despite illusions to the contrary.

Mind you, I'm not in any way opposed to taking care of the poor. I'm as far from a Reaganite as one can imagine. But I had--and still have--close friends who are nuns in other orders in India who do far more for "human development" than the MCs do. Are they proclaimed saints? Not in this world they're not. But I don't blame Mother for that. Rather, I blame the media who are anxious to sell papers by finding one individual, a sort of Horatio Alger in reverse, who stands out. Thusly Saint Mother Teresa was born through the likes of Malcolm Muggeridge whom Hitchens covers mercilessly in his text.

As I have reflected for a number of years on my experience in Calcutta and the rest of India (MC sisters telling lepers in colonies to be fruitful and multiply per Catholic teachings, thereby ensuring another generation of lepers) I've concluded that my biggest objection to the MC regime is that Mother Teresa unwittingly prevented change. Politicians, including Reagan, loved her as she said, "write a check and help the poor, the dying, and help these kids to be adopted." It never occurred to her that there must be something wrong with a system which enabled countless people to die miserably. And that extended to us in the "developed" world. How many people do you know who feel secure in having their Mother Teresa holy cards, maybe writing a check, but they'll still act and vote to perpetuate systems in which so, so many people die destitute.

Oh, the reason I have some mixed feelings toward the MC sisters now is that I'm still acquainted with some American nuns. Many of them are close friends, and women for whom I have a great deal of respect and love. But many too are living more comfortably than I am, e.g., having their community pay for their homes for which they then pay substantially less rent than I would pay. At least Mother Teresa and her sisters DID live and work among the poor.

Anyway, I still recommend the book. It puts much of the media hype, especially the tourists who'd visited Calcutta for two days, visited Mother Teresa, then returned to write news stories about how wonderful she is, into perspective with some of the things Mother REALLY did.

Triple Entendre
In swift and sly prose, Hitchens relates his personal observations of Mother Teresa's clinics in Calcutta. He tells one story of a nursery full of starving, sick babies crying in insufficient cribs, which M. Teresa describes as the way "we fight abortion." He writes of men dying of AIDS, denied pain medicine, because according to M. Teresa, their suffering will assure them of ultimate salvation. Paitients too weak to object are baptized in their final hours.

I have now doubt that all of this is true, and at first glance it is surprising, but it shouldn't be. M. Teresa is a Roman Catholic nun and Mother Superior; in fact, founder of an order. She is not merely Christian in a vague way, but a zealot for Catholicism. I knew this-- in fact I even knew that at one point, all she allowed her nuns was an impoverished diet of rice, and insufficient calories of that, because she thought they should the same thing as the people they served. This was not necessary, as her order had plenty of money. She began feeding her nuns a living diet only after the Pope ordered her to do so.

I suppose as a Catholic nun and zealot, she's did a fine job, but I don't think most Americans, especially non-Catholic Americans, knew this. Every year, millions of dollars are donated to her order, most of which sits in banks, while patients in her hospitals suffer from insufficient care. Some of this money comes from non-Catholic Americans who know next to nothing about M. Teresa and her actual mission. All people know is some vague idea that there's a lot of hunger and inadequate medical care in Calcutta, and M. Teresa order is doing something out there to help.

Christopher Hitchens lets people know exactly what she did; anyone who reads this book will never blindly donate money on the assumption that since there's poverty in Calcutta, any money sent to charity workers there must be doing some good.

More than exposing her clinics, Hitchens shows the disingenuous way M. Teresa has presented herself to the world. There is here in the book reprinted a very quaintly written letter on behalf of Charles Keating(!) reprinted here, yet plenty examples of her savvy that belie the innocent charm of her letter.

Hitchens does not hide his distaste for his subject, and while it is easy to accuse him of less than objectivity, he does stick to the facts; he just reports them with biting, venomous words. If you are a fan of M. Teresa, this book will offend you. If you seek the truth about her, you must read this book. If you have always harbored doubts about her, but never had any real evidence, this book will be a great relief, as your gut feeling is confirmed.

Hitchens' book on Mother Theresa deserves a fair hearing
Christian theology teaches that everyone is imperfect and tainted by Original Sin. All human beings are tempted by the sin of pride and other vices. Why should Mother Theresa be any different? There are indeed serious questions that were never adequately answered regarding the large sums of money at her disposal. Were they spent according to the wishes of the donors, or was much of it siphoned off to other endeavors that had little to do with assisting the hopelessly downtrodden? Did these unfortunates truly receive the best medical care possible? Is there any truth to the allegations that many of these patients were denied pain killers to supposedly prepare them spiritually for life everlasting? Why didn't Mother Theresa comprehend the cold fact that dictators and convicted criminals were giving her money stolen from other people? Would trained certified public accountants have found many abuses and squandering of funds? Alas, often even well meaning people unwittingly waste the resources under their direct responsibility. A good heart alone is not enough when managing a large organization.

It is intellectual dishonest to ignore "The Missionary Position." Christopher Hitchens is an avowed atheist, but this shouldn't be held against him. The author's rhetoric is admittedly a bit too aggressive and borders on the abusive. Nonetheless, Hitchens has presented some strong evidence that tarnishes the hagiographic memory of the often described Saint of Calcutta. The man deserves a point by point careful rebuke and not argumentum ad hominem attacks. This relatively short book earns a place among all the other works on Mother Theresa....