Re: To the person who left an irrelevant and poorly argued anonymous commentfpbApril 2 2005, 19:05:15 UTC
I will let this one stand. I repeat: this article is about the Pope, whom I freely criticized. It is not about anyone else. Your polemic is irrelevant, OT, and a waste of space. And if Christopher Hitchens is your main source of information, God help you. But if you want to argue about something, argue about the Pope. Or have I left you no reasons to insult him?
As for what you call arguments: I clearly said that Mother Teresa was a living Saint "to all Catholics and most others". I never said that there were no people such as Hitchens and yourself, who react to obvious greatness with a snarling itch to diminish it at all costs. I do not assume you are a Catholic, and I never read the biography you refer to. I have, however, had a look at Muggeridge - who deserves it for his literary excellence if for no other reason. If I wanted to find dubious features about Mother Teresa, I would refer rather to her friendship with such figures as Princess Diana than some photograph showing her with Enver Hodja. What in the name of Heaven are you saying: that the most prominent and devoted Catholic woman in the twentieth century ever collaborated with a man who hated and persecuted her faith? The very notion is insane.
Finally, let me tell you a little anecdote. I once ventured some mild criticism of Mother Teresa in the presence of a Hindu aristocratic lady from Calcutta. She let me finish - being as polite as Indians always are - but then came down on me like a ton of bricks. As far as she was concerned, to watch this woman from another world build her enterprise purely around the most rejected and ignored people in her city - people whom her family and everyone else in Calcutta had allowed to die without so much as noticing them - had been a life-changing experience. Will anything you ever do amount to this, for anyone?
Re: To the person who left an irrelevant and poorly argued anonymous commentfpbApril 2 2005, 19:39:17 UTC
I'll just respond to one thing, as it shows your clear inability to read and comprehend: I cited Sebba's book, as being UNLIKE the polemic of Hitchens which is unreliable. How do you go from that into "if Hitchens is your main source of information" other than by deliberately misreading what was said?
I am saying that there are photos of Mother Teresa visiting Albanian in photo ops with Enver Hoxha, laying a wreath at the base of the statue of Mother Albania. This is independently verifiable, as are the photos taken in Haiti with Baby Doc and Michelle Duvalier. I'm saying that she lent her image to those repulsive people, and I think the less of her for it--those were not situations one could have wandered into and simply been exploited by mercenary forces.
Re: To the person who left an irrelevant and poorly argued anonymous commentfpbApril 2 2005, 19:57:52 UTC
I take your point about biographies. Where I was wrong, I apologize. Tell me, what does laying a wreath to the statue of her country, or even being seen with the Duvaliers (or with Princess Diana) do to invalidate her real life's work? And how many people have done much worse, without losing prestige? G.B.Shaw's Stalinism is notorious; Carl Orff was a Nazi within the meaning of the act; does that mean that we should not perform the Plays Pleasant and Unpleasant, or listen to the Carmina Burana? (This is a review of a more or less outright Nazi in my own field of research: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/customer-reviews/0405105584/ref=dp_nav_0/002-0828778-5768013?%5Fencoding=UTF8&n=283155&s=books)
But there is a difference: proximity to those nasty individuals was structural in their case, occasional in hers. And that while in her case it was without doubt the Hodjas and Duvaliers and Dianas who sought some respectability in her light, in the case of Orff, Shaw and many people like them, the opposite definitely was the case.
And you still have not answered my point: What in the name of Heaven and of all the Saints in paradise has any of this to do with the subject of my post? Can we not be talking about the great historical figure who lies dying as we write?
Re: To the person who left an irrelevant and poorly argued anonymous commentfpbApril 2 2005, 20:00:09 UTC
I correct myself. He has just died.
"Well done, thou good and faithful servant. Thou hast been faithful in little things, thou shalt be rewarded in great. Enter thou into the glory of thy Lord."
Mario Luzi - my grandmother - the Pope. I have suffered many losses this bitter season.
Re: To the person who left an irrelevant and poorly argued anonymous commentfpbApril 2 2005, 20:18:22 UTC
It means that we should think long and hard about these figures and the nature of their work. In the case of Mother Teresa, what I mainly object to is the way in which she has been insulated from criticism and thus the nature of what she has done has been obscured. She, of course, did what she thought was correct; but she was always more about bringing the poor to Christ than helping their lives more directly, and that's not how she was portrayed to the public. People gave her mission money because they thought she was directly helping the poor; there are ways that she was, and ways that she was not.
I don't think she should be canonized. I am wary of the rush by the Pope to canonize as many figures as he has. I disagree with many of his policies, and do not think the scandal with the priests is restricted to the United States. The church has behaved shamefully with regard to it, and needs someone who can restore broad confidence in it.
Re: To the person who left an irrelevant and poorly argued anonymous commentfpbApril 2 2005, 20:23:40 UTC
So why the Devil did you start your polemic in the first place, when my post was full of criticism of the Pope? MY POST WAS NOT ABOUT MOTHER TERESA, and if it had been I would have put in all the criticism I felt right to put in. You have been wasting my time on a non-issue at a highly emotional time. Thank you very much.
As for what you call arguments: I clearly said that Mother Teresa was a living Saint "to all Catholics and most others". I never said that there were no people such as Hitchens and yourself, who react to obvious greatness with a snarling itch to diminish it at all costs. I do not assume you are a Catholic, and I never read the biography you refer to. I have, however, had a look at Muggeridge - who deserves it for his literary excellence if for no other reason. If I wanted to find dubious features about Mother Teresa, I would refer rather to her friendship with such figures as Princess Diana than some photograph showing her with Enver Hodja. What in the name of Heaven are you saying: that the most prominent and devoted Catholic woman in the twentieth century ever collaborated with a man who hated and persecuted her faith? The very notion is insane.
Finally, let me tell you a little anecdote. I once ventured some mild criticism of Mother Teresa in the presence of a Hindu aristocratic lady from Calcutta. She let me finish - being as polite as Indians always are - but then came down on me like a ton of bricks. As far as she was concerned, to watch this woman from another world build her enterprise purely around the most rejected and ignored people in her city - people whom her family and everyone else in Calcutta had allowed to die without so much as noticing them - had been a life-changing experience. Will anything you ever do amount to this, for anyone?
And now, please, let us get back to the Pope.
Reply
I am saying that there are photos of Mother Teresa visiting Albanian in photo ops with Enver Hoxha, laying a wreath at the base of the statue of Mother Albania. This is independently verifiable, as are the photos taken in Haiti with Baby Doc and Michelle Duvalier. I'm saying that she lent her image to those repulsive people, and I think the less of her for it--those were not situations one could have wandered into and simply been exploited by mercenary forces.
Reply
But there is a difference: proximity to those nasty individuals was structural in their case, occasional in hers. And that while in her case it was without doubt the Hodjas and Duvaliers and Dianas who sought some respectability in her light, in the case of Orff, Shaw and many people like them, the opposite definitely was the case.
And you still have not answered my point: What in the name of Heaven and of all the Saints in paradise has any of this to do with the subject of my post? Can we not be talking about the great historical figure who lies dying as we write?
Reply
"Well done, thou good and faithful servant. Thou hast been faithful in little things, thou shalt be rewarded in great. Enter thou into the glory of thy Lord."
Mario Luzi - my grandmother - the Pope. I have suffered many losses this bitter season.
Reply
I don't think she should be canonized. I am wary of the rush by the Pope to canonize as many figures as he has. I disagree with many of his policies, and do not think the scandal with the priests is restricted to the United States. The church has behaved shamefully with regard to it, and needs someone who can restore broad confidence in it.
And he has passed on; may he rest in peace.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment