BS: The Pope in America

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: GUEST,#
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 10:35 PM

Sorry. Last post was me.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: GUEST
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 10:34 PM

I am amazed that her beatification came just six years after her death. Usually the Catholic Church moves very s l o w l y on such matters.

The churches--meaning not just Catholic--would be of greater help to the poor were they to pay their fair share of taxes just like mostly-honest people and corporations. I say that because while one might argue the taxes on money given to churches has been paid by the giver, that fails under scrutiny because those same givers are entitled to receipts for tax purposes that essentially cause others to pay more in tax than they otherwise would.

I will never understand why she was so honoured. She did some seriously bad stuff in her pursuit of something or other, but had she not been beatified she'd likely be remembered by history as another Lucrezia Borgia. I am not wise enough to know whether the good she did outweighed the bad, but I am wise enough to know that saints ain't supposed to come from neocons and capitalists, and she was both. Of course, the world being what it is today I'm not surprised. We've come to revere money and remain subservient to the power money buys, so shocked I'm not.

--------------------------

I'm very disappointed that the Pope visited and encouraged Kim Davis. Made his visit seem tawdry. If there really is a division of church and state, the division line sure is getting blurry.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 09:32 PM

That's a good, thought-provoking article which should have thinking Catholics lusting for more information about her, and it doesn't deny the positives in her legacy. It isn't ideological to take off the blinkers. It's honest.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: GUEST,#
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 09:05 PM

Beatification six years after her death? Why?

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 08:58 PM

Point taken, but this woman is a step away from sainthood. Dodgy expediency in a saint would have shocked my old granny.   I think that she would have expected better. And there is not a scintilla of doubt that she used most donor money for her convents.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 07:57 PM

What to do when it turns out a donation comes from a crook can be a dilemma, especially if it's been spent or earmarked. It's not what I'd call misappropriating donations.

Many, perhaps most, people with access to large amounts of money - directors of big corporations, politicians - are probably exceedingly shady characters. Does that mean that money is tainted so it cannot be used?

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 07:17 PM

One other thing that you'll discover if you do your own delving. Most of the accounts of the dreadful conditions in the homes run by this multi-millionaire come not from outside observers but from good-hearted volunteers who worked in those homes and who were shocked by what they saw. As I keep saying, it's all out there - if you really want to cast off the blinkers.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 07:01 PM

I invite you to look into it. It's all out there. One of the big problems with being an iconoclast is persuading the already-persuaded to do their own digging in an honest and dispassionate way. In the age of the internet, as long as you know how to discriminate, it's easier than ever. It's a very uncomfortable exercise and it's no wonder that many would rather not go there. But far better that you do it yourself then listen to me giving you a ton of links that you can then call biased or ideological. Here's your starting point. Mother Teresa attracted many millions of dollars in donations. I invite you to examine the extremely dubious sources of some of them. Over a million dollars, for example, came from a man who had come about the later-to-be-donated money by criminally-fraudulent means. Mother Teresa knew this but did not pay the money back. Look into her dealings with the Duvaliers, about whom I surely need to say no more. Here's the thing. She had millions with which she massively expanded her convents, yet het her homes for the dying were squalid slums. When she got sick later in life, she purchased the best health care for herself that money could buy. Please do your homework on this. Honestly, every word of it is true. I fully understand that loyal Catholics don't want to hear it. Too bad. But please don't argue back until you've checked it out.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 06:25 PM

"Misappropriation of donations" means that donations given and received specifically for one purpose are diverted to be used for another purpose. It doesn't mean that critics might believe the money should have been spent in a different way, or even that donors might believe that.

I take it that you are talking about cases where such misappropriation has been proved to have taken place, instigated or approved by Mother Teresa.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 05:57 PM

Well, though abortion is a subject that is difficult to avoid in any discussion about Mother Teresa, this is not a thread about abortion. Start a thread about abortion and I'll take you on any time. The reason that you do not know about the misappropriation of donations is that you haven't bothered to look into it. My criticisms of her are entirely factually based. If you wish to challenge anything I've said about her, let's be having it please. It's so easy for charlatans such as yourself, who do no research, to accuse people with whom you disagree of being "ideological", isn't it. As for her agreement on the sanctity of human life, well if only we could ask some of the victims of her homes for the dying, who were subjected to squalid conditions, who suffered neglect, who were refused medical interventions and many of whom undoubtedly died either prematurely or unnecessarily. Of course, we can't ask them, because they're dead. If that's your idea of Christian thinking on the sanctity of life, well I'll stick to my non-Christian version if you don't mind. I'd add, finally, and not for the first time, if you really want to get rid of abortion, you'd be condemning her out of hand for campaigning against real sex education and contraception. I'm not hearing that from you. Perhaps, just like her, you're actually rather in favour of abortion so that you can have a nice big stick to bash us pro-choicers with. I think we call that hypocrisy.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 05:23 PM

while I would not know if there was misappropriation of donations , it is clear, steve, that your criticisms of Teresa are to a large extent ideological. she may not have been very delicate in expressing her moral outrage ....but then, she is a saint compared to your outpourings at times !....., but essentially she is in agreement with both Christian thinking on the sanctity of human life , and logic in saying that the woman having an abortion is killing her baby. and having Christian convictions does not make someone wicked , except maybe in the mind of hardened atheists . and on what authority do you call something wicked , other than your own subjective......or dare I suggest it....historically Christian imbibed, values.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 11:26 AM

By their fruits, Greg, by their fruits...

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 11:24 AM

Sorry, Keith, but I find Joe's posts to be sincere and very challenging and I'm trying to have a proper conversation (if he wants to keep going) if you don't mind.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: Greg F.
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 10:22 AM

Meeting Confirmed
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/30/us/county-clerk-kim-davis-who-denied-gay-couples-visited-pope.html?_r=0

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: Greg F.
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 10:15 AM

The Guardian
Stephanie Kirchgaessner in Rome, Harriet Sherwood in London and Calla Wahlquist

Wednesday 30 September 2015

Pope Francis allegedly thanked Kim Davis, the Kentucky county clerk who refused to issue same-sex marriage licences on religious grounds, for her courage after reports say the pair had a private meeting. "Pope Francis thanked me for my courage and told me to 'stay strong'," said Davis.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 06:41 AM

You OK with her being "honoured" by the IHO?

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 06:32 AM

Earlier, you suggested that I couldn't back up my claims about her. Here's a snippet I meant to include, so I couldn't resist posting it now.

When the International Health Organization honored Teresa in 1989, she spoke at length against abortion and contraception and called AIDS a "just retribution for improper sexual conduct".

You OK with her concept of justice?

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 06:19 AM

You make some good points, Joe. Yes, too serious, too severe. As yet, you haven't said much about her paean to the Duvaliers. Was that wrong-headed, naive, devious, or was it because their modus operandi chimed with her? Well, she was also an admirer of Enver Hoxta and she supported the contras in Nicaragua just as their death squads were at their height. It seems be stacking up just a little that she was rather fond of extreme right-wing dictatorships. Of course, that would be well in keeping with her ultra-authoritarian and fundamentalist takes on birth control and abortion. She even tried to intervene in the debate about divorce in Ireland. Perhaps she thought that everyone was Roman Catholic, or at least damn well ought to be. As for "caring for people in poverty", well I'll grant her this much: her words (concerning the virtuous nature of poverty) and actions (maintaining terrible conditions in her homes, with unqualified and uncaring staff, the absence of even basic hygiene, refusals to provide medical attention for people in mortal agony) are certainly in harmony. Reflect on the rather awkward fact that this multi-millionaire was the past master when it came to squirrelling away money, given in good faith by donors who had fallen for the spin, in order to expand her convents, the chief aim being to expedite the conversion of as many as possible to Catholicism, especially the poor and vulnerable. And what was that about baptising dying babies...?

However, it's undeniable that her legacy has some good things. There are lots of people in this world wearing her badge doing lots of good work, as you describe. Most of them are better than me, definitely. But a couple more points to reflect on. Do we need badness for goodness to emerge? Had mother Teresa never existed, would there be fewer people doing that good work? Since the Holocaust, there has been far more revulsion and protest against antisemitism (another area in which the Church has dragged its feet, incidentally). You could say that, in part at least, the Holocaust facilitated that revulsion and protest. Good coming out of bad. But not one person here, I'm sure, is going to say that that justifies the Holocaust. Your pious young nun doing such admirable work does not justify or exonerate in any way Mother Teresa's wickedness. There are other ways.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: Joe Offer
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 03:33 AM

Hmmmm. Megan, I don't know how to respond to that....I could get in BIG trouble.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: Megan L
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 03:25 AM

Joe advise her against the thing those things are just plain uncomfortable to wear,especially the tweed ones that oaks and Severn were designing in the chat room a few years ago.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: Joe Offer
Date: 30 Sep 15 - 01:48 AM

Steve, my friend, you're the one who said that Mother Teresa favored abstinence from sex. Well, ya know, if you do it (abstinence), it's a very effective method of birth control. Women who abstain from sex, rarely have need of abortion...

But in reality, I agree with you more than you think. I've often said that if the Catholic Church truly wanted to reduce the number of abortions, it would drop the prohibition against contraception and form an alliance with Planned Parenthood. Contraception eliminates the need for abortion almost as well as abstinence - and abstinence just ain't practical.

I can't really believe that Mother Teresa would want people to be poor or ignorant. That's spin again. Why would anyone promote poverty and ignorance? That just doesn't make sense.

And as for her opposition to abortion and opposition to sex education, I can't believe these were defining aspects of her life. If they were, wouldn't the anti-abortion movement be using her as some sort of poster girl? All I ever heard her talk about, was caring for those in poverty.

Mother Teresa started out as a Loretto nun, a member of the Institute of the Blessed Virgin Mary (IBVM) that was founded in England to specialize in educating young ladies. In 1950, she founded a separate religious order, the Missionaries of Charity. Wikipedia says the order now has 4500 nuns, active in 133 countries. They wear white saris trimmed with blue as their religious habit. I've met a few of them. They're usually young and very pious. It's hard to talk or joke with them because they are so serious about themselves. But they do get in and do the dirty work in situations of dire poverty, so I have to give them credit for that.

My boss at the women's center is an IBVM, and she wears normal clothing and has worked with the poor and homeless for over thirty years. And she loves to chat and joke and get goofy. She invited a homeless man to her house on Saturday to take a shower and wash his clothes, and then spent last Sunday afternoon on a social visit to his homeless camp, so she could meet his friends there. Her homeless friend needs a hip replacement and eye surgery, so she is working to get that arranged for him. He keeps telling her she should get a thong bikini and get divorced from Jesus...

But as for Mother Teresa and abortion, I'm not sure I believe it was a major issue for her. She seems to have placed her focus on poverty and the illnesses of the poor. But for me, she was too serious, too severe. I like my boss better.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 09:04 PM

Correct, Greg. The hypocrisy here is that Mother Teresa opposed sex education (abstinence was one of her big things) and she opposed birth control. As such, she didn't oppose abortion at all. She positively encouraged it. She was the world champion of abortion in that she opposed every possible means of avoiding unwanted pregnancy. Ignorance plus no contraception equals unwanted pregnancy. Unwanted pregnancies equal abortion. I'll tell you summat, Joe Offer. I'm a hundred times more opposed to abortion than Mother Teresa ever was. I want equality, not poverty. I want education, not ignorance. I want universal access to birth control, not abstinence. She didn't care about the abortion statistics. She needed abortion as a big stick with which to attack women. Open your eyes. You are exonerating pure evil.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: Greg F.
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 08:50 PM

"Abortion is never a cause for celebration."

Agreed. But nor should it be a cause for condemnation, especially by religious bigots. Especially where it is legal.

And its also none of anyone's business but that of the woman involved.

And now, back to Saint Bigot & Saint Genocide.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: Joe Offer
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 08:36 PM

Yep, Steve, it's very clear that Mother Teresa didn't like abortion. Neither do I, although I word my opposition a little more gently and I don't think abortion should be prohibited by law.

Nonetheless, can you name me some mothers Mother Teresa attacked?

To me, abortion is the taking of a life. War is, also - but sometimes it's justified although deeply regrettable.

And I'm sorry, but I can see nothing wrong with opposing abortion. As a Planned Parenthood doctor once told me, "Abortion is never a cause for celebration."

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 08:20 PM

Yes, Steve, there is virtue and dignity to be found in poverty. A poor person should not look upon her/himself as somehow less worthy than a person with money.

"I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people."

And yes, Steve, Mother Teresa opposed abortion. I haven't found any quotations from her where she attacked women who had abortion.

"But I feel that the greatest destroyer of peace today is abortion, because it is a war against the child - a direct killing of the innocent child - murder by the mother herself. And if we accept that a mother can kill her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another? ... By abortion, the mother does not learn to love, but kills even her own child to solve her problems."

You're not really digging, are you, Joe?

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 07:42 PM

"I mean the great act of genocide in the modern period is Pol Pot, 1975 through 1978 - that atrocity - I think it would be hard to find any example of a comparable outrage and outpouring of fury." Noam Chomsky in 1993.
........................

Reverse hagiography is at least as prone to distortion - or spin, to use the vogue synonym - as hagiography.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: Joe Offer
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 07:40 PM

Yes, Steve, there is virtue and dignity to be found in poverty. A poor person should not look upon her/himself as somehow less worthy than a person with money.

And yes, Steve, Mother Teresa opposed abortion. I haven't found any quotations from her where she attacked women who had abortions. Apparently, you haven't either - since all you can do is resort to paraphrases.

And I don't think I have a "romanticated" view of Mother Teresa. I don't think I'd like her, personally. Too rigid a personality. Too likely to see things as black-and-white. More your kind of person, I think. Maybe you'd like her.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 07:31 PM

Incidentally, -Defending/attacking is what fundamentalists do

Well not really. That is a pretty poor characterisation of fundamentalists. But, if you insist. Do you think that Mother Teresa's gratuitous attacks on women who have abortions are fundamentalist? Or maybe you haven't read about them, not wanting to ruin your rather romanticated view of her? How about her telling the poor that their poverty is a virtue, not to be opposed? I won't go on. Though I could, if you really insist.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: Joe Offer
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 07:23 PM

I suppose St. Chomsky is Noam Chomsky. Yeah, he gets a pass. He's an interesting person who gives people a lot to think about. I would consider him for sainthood. Why would he need a pass?

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 07:21 PM

Well I haven't even mentioned Junipero-whoever-he-was, so I hardly think I've cartoonishly exaggerated anything about him. As for your grey and pastels, well sometimes you really need to lift that particular veil in order to see the truth. Mother Teresa was a very simple case. She was not interested in improving the lot of the most deprived people. She was obsessed with converting them. Nothing else mattered to her. She took money from dictators and praised them. Instead of ploughing that money, and the money of many well-meaning donors, back into her institutions for the sick, she ploughed it into her convents. I'd be happy for you to bring evidence that denies this stuff in which case I'd eat my hat. But you know it's true, don't you (I note your serial inability to address this). It's all very well painting over blackness with grey and pastels, but by so doing you are doing a major disservice to the Church and to Teresa's thousands of victims. All I ask you to do is to look at the facts. So far, you have used every argument under the sun to explain why you shouldn't have to.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: Greg F.
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 06:35 PM

for something that is seen as needing to be symbolized.

Like genocide, perhaps?

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: GUEST
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 06:33 PM

I suppose you give Pol Pot a pass, eh?

St. Chomsky does so why should he not.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: Greg F.
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 06:32 PM

Part of life is failure. There was failure in the lives of all four of these people.

Yup- and apparently some feel the need to celebrate and validate that failure, instead of condemning it.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 06:30 PM

Mother Teresa's Cookbook

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: Joe Offer
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 06:30 PM

Well, Steve, I'm not really interested in defending John Paul II, Mother Teresa, or Junipero Serra. I've stated their flaws, and I've stated their good points. None of them are particularly inspiring to me, although I find all three to be interesting personalities - and they are inspiring to many people.

And I don't like to get into defending/attacking mode. That's not my way of thinking. I find it destructive and negative. If I get myself pushed into it, it puts me in a mode akin to anger. I generally find my life to be fuller if I direct my mindset toward exploring and appreciating things and ideas. Defending/attacking is a form of battle, and I don't find that to be particularly useful. Defending/attacking is what fundamentalists do, and I hate myself when I get sucked into that mode - so I'm usually pretty good at deflecting it.

So, yeah, all I want to say is that your depictions of Junipero Serra, Mother Teresa, and now John Paul II are almost cartoonishly exaggerated. But that's apparently the way you like to live life - in absolutes, seeing all good or all bad. Good luck with that.

As for me, I prefer to explore the greys and pastels. It's a different mindset. You probably wouldn't understand it.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 06:11 PM

Actually, come to think of it, I take pleasure from the fact that in your long post you riposte by attacking me and signally failing to defend her. A failure of nerve there, Joe. Deep down, you really do know how rotten to the core she was, don't you?

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 06:05 PM

Ah, I forgot about John Paul II. I can do the sums but I forgot about him. Actually, there's another whose sainthood throws the Church into disrepute. Think of all those child abuse issues that got swept under the carpet on his watch. You'd have been better off not mentioning him, I reckon. Oh well. Still, I admit you got me on the maths there. As for the rest, a bit snide there, Joe, for such a Christian fellow. I try not to smear you, but I suppose I don't care if you don't return the compliment. The reason I spared the thread a litany of awful Teresa quotes is that anyone who wants to find them can easily do so. To be honest, I'd rather fill my post with my views. But tell me to do and I'll do it. You may get more than a dozen. As for not being able to back up my assertion that your post was just a load of spin, well what do you think I've been doing? I've given you specific examples of the woman's awfulness, so I assume you are either in denial or you don't believe me. I can back up everything I say about her (not that I should need to, as it's all on public record, whether you've looked for it or not), so be careful what you wish for. Instead, I suggest that you cast off the blinkers, get honest and do your own collar work. It won't be edifying. Your long post is pretty desperate. Do your homework and reflect on it. You are defending a woman who was everything you claim to oppose, and her attributes were extremely damaging, both to Catholicism and to the thousands of her victims.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 05:39 PM

People talk about canonization as "making a saint", but that's not at all what it's about. And it's not about saying they were perfect. It's about picking out officially someone who can provide a symbol for something that is seen as needing to be symbolized. Rather like Pope Francis rolling ip to the White House in that little Fiat. That wasn't about identifying that car or Fiats as uniquely great cars, it was a way of saying something that needed to be said, in concrete terms

Most saints never get canonized, and no one much ever heard of them. Like Joe's granny.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 05:30 PM

People talk loosely about canonisation as "making someone a saint". That's not actually what it's about. It's about official recognition, and the rationale is, as Joe Offer said, about symbolizing something seen as significant rather than everything about the individuals themselves. Rather the same way Pope Francis turning up to the White House in that little Fiat. That wasn't about endorsing Fiat cars as such, it was about saying in cconcrete terms some things that needed to be said.

Most "saints" no one ever heard of outside a small circle, and they never got canonised. Like Joe's grandmother.

And the one's that did get canonised weren't perfect.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: Joe Offer
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 05:16 PM

Greg, a declaration of sainthood is not a declaration that a person was perfect. In fact, most of the saints were kinda weird. The canonization efforts for Mother Teresa, Junipero Serra, John Paul II, and Pius XII have all generated interesting and fruitful discussion - and not all that discussion was positive. I hope we've learned from that discussion.

Part of life is failure. There was failure in the lives of all four of these people. I hope we learn the lessons they have to teach.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 05:10 PM

That's Steve Shaw for ya. All spin, little fact. And he can't do the math.

Maybe not, Joe, but he does speak English :-P

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: Greg F.
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 04:53 PM

Joe, accepting the limitations imposed on persons by the context of their times and viewing them within that context is one thing.

Elevating a person to "sainthood" in PRESENT times, knowing what we know now about their activities, and "that the bad things will be [should be?] forgotten" - is quite another.

"The bad things" NEED to be remembered, if not to the exclusion of, then in conjunction with, the good things and an intelligent assesment be made in our OWN time.

This was NOT done with and Teresa & Serra.

And by the way, I LIKE this pope - best thing since John 23rd & the best of a bad lot. That don't mean he gets carte blanche & shouldn't be called out when he screws up.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: Joe Offer
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 04:34 PM

Notice that Steve Shaw said he could come up with "a dozen real Mother Teresa quotes at you to show what a horrid person she was." But he's not going to do that. He prefers to re-state what she said.

Then he says my "post regarding Mother Teresa is just one huge piece of Catholic spin, a classic in its way" - by he is mysteriously unable to back that statement up with anything specific.

My contention is that both Mother Teresa and Junipero Serra had plenty of flaws. If you look at the lives of the saints, you'll find all sorts of fascinating weirdnesses. And yeah, I freely admit that Catholics ignore a lot of the shortcomings of the saints. I hope that I, too, with be judged for the good things I've done and that the bad things will be forgotten or at least understood. I'm sure that my grandmother had her faults and I know that she had a rocky relationship with my grandfather, but to me she was the most wonderful woman who ever lived - and I consider her to be a saint.

Now it's clear that for Steve, a person's ideology is a very important factor in that person's character. And since he disagrees with Mother Teresa's ideology, he finds her to be a horrible person. I don't agree with her ideology, either; but I think she did the best she could with her life within that context. I'm sure that if Mother Teresa and Junipero Serra were in my congregation, we'd have frequent, bitter disagreements. It's a real stretch to be able to find goodness and value in people I disagree with - but I think that's what people have to do if they want to see harmony in this world.

And I keep trying. Heck, I've even succeeded in being able to not consider Steve Shaw to be a horrible person....

So, and then there's Greg F, who brings up Pol Pot as an example of somebody whose evil even the demonizers couldn't exaggerate. And I suppose he's got me there, but Mother Teresa and Junipero Serra were no Pol Pot. Greg calls Serra "St. Genocide." Very clever, but rather unsubstantiated.

Still, I think that what the Americans did to the Indians WAS genocide. The Spanish conquest of California was one part of that genocide, but the guilt for the genocide must be borne by all people of European ancestry - on both sides of the Atlantic. I suppose we could place the blame on the Ruling Classes, and thus escape any clout of responsibility inherited from our ancestors, but would that be accurate?

I think we're best off admitting that none of us have ancestors who were perfect - and our descendants will someday realize that we weren't perfect, either. So, then, how should we deal with the truth that our ancestors were flawed? Is it wrong for us to cherish their memory. How should we regard anyone who has done something wrong, sometime in their lives?

I think we should cherish the memory of what they meant to us, of the good things they have done. And perhaps we should forgive their faults, since we all have faults.

I will repeat: despite her faults, Mother Teresa called the attention of the world to those who were poor and suffering. And Fr. Serra built 9 beautiful missions, a lingering reminder to us that somebody was here before we got here. Some people cherish their memory.

Oh, regarding Mother Teresa, Steve Shaw says "she could easily become the fastest-tracked saint in history." John Paul II died in 2005. He was declared a saint in 2014. John Paul, by the way, single-handedly dismantled many of the accomplishments of Vatican II. Mother Teresa died in 1997, and she's not a saint yet. Do the math.

That's Steve Shaw for ya. All spin, little fact. And he can't do the math.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 02:06 PM

Mother Teresa's comments, activities, dealings and institutions are all well documented. It is not difficult to fjnd corroboration of Hitchens' claims about her. She was in cahoots with the Duvaliers and she praised them. She spirited away millions from donors to fund her convents whilst her institutions for the sick were a scandal. Her aim was to convert, not minister. She was a fundamentalist of the very worst kind when it came to birth control and abortion. She told the poor not to fight. She told the people of Bhopal not to fight. When she herself was sick, she paid for the best healthcare available. Had Hitchens not put this together in one place there would have been plenty of others to do it. Face up to it.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 12:38 PM

The Hitchens brothers were good entertainers and rhetoricians (Peter Hitchens, the far right one, back in England, still is). But I wouldn't rely on either of them for any reliable guide to anything.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: GUEST,Mrr at work
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 11:04 AM

I like this pope, and I'm an atheist. I'm just glad he didn't get shot while here.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 10:44 AM

"I will grant you Greg that you are an expert on specious logic."

Well let's hear some of your logic then.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 10:40 AM

Maybe the "demonisers" could never be as bad as their detractors make them out to be. On the whole, though, the "demonisers" tend not to be Catholics, so maybe they can be as bad.

I'm not going to, but I could throw a dozen real Mother Teresa quotes at you to show what a horrid person she was. You can watch the footage of her institutions which shows that they were every bit as dreadful as the "detractors and demonisers" claim. Not because I'm a detractor or a demoniser, but because I for one have sought to get round the Catholic spin machine (so effective that she could easily become the fastest-tracked saint in history) and get at the truth about her. It isn't difficult, unfortunately for her legacy. I don't have a problem with the poor deluded souls that want her for their saint, but I do have an issue with a massive political institution like the Catholic Church that can spin like crazy to persuade the world that we have an accommodating and progressive Pope whilst simultaneously and furiously indulging in brainless sycophancy with regard to this deeply wicked woman. There are words for it.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: GUEST,HiLo
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 10:30 AM

I will grant you Greg that you are an expert on specious logic.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America
From: Greg F.
Date: 29 Sep 15 - 10:04 AM

Nobody could be as bad as their detractors make them out to be, so therefore I tend not to believe anything the demonizers say.

Now THAT, Joe, is a particularly horryfying perspective on your part. By the same specious logic I suppose you give Pol Pot a pass, eh?