Pope Francis Declares Mother Teresa a Saint

She wasn't one?
She was Beatified in 2003, which under Catholic doctrine means that the Pope had to look into her life and see if she performed a second miracle. According to Pope Francis, that second miracle happened when she healed a brain tumor, thus making her eligible to be a saint.
 
Last edited:
She was Beautified in 2003, which under Catholic doctrine means that the Pope had to look into her life and see if she performed a second miracle. According to Pope Francis, that second miracle happened when she healed a brain tumor, thus making her eligible to be a saint.
So many jokes here, mostly in poor taste, but I think you mean beatified.
 
I've seen some pretty idiotic things before, but did you really just compare Mother Teresa to Hitler?
It's not idiotic (or in poor taste) when you consider how keen she was about making people suffer under her incompetent care as if it "brought them closer to God" yet always arranged the best possible health care for herself when needed.

I'd like to know what kind of "sainthood" anyone sees in that bitch.
 
1AM-dJf6.png
 
It's not idiotic (or in poor taste) when you consider how keen she was about making people suffer under her incompetent care as if it "brought them closer to God" yet always arranged the best possible health care for herself when needed.

I'd like to know what kind of "sainthood" anyone sees in that bitch.

While she did some questionable things and while sainthood might be questionable, there's no way she's on the same level as a ruthless leader who committed mass genocide.
 
To be fair, I probably should post some external evidence before I get called out for the lack of that...

(more links within the post)

I don't know what the Catholic Church's exact definition of "good" is, but they can celebrate this scum's life all on their own. I just roll my eyes every time people casually refer to her as an ideal good person in common language ("Trump sure makes Bush look like Mother Teresa" as a crude example). Then again, between her suffering clinics and Mandela's terrorism, it sure is pretty tough to find proper upstanding famous figures from this world.
 
I really like the move that the Pope did, and it really should define his papacy.
Unfortunately, it probably will. I say "unfortunately" because as much as it is a universal good, there is so much more that Francis could be doing - like addressing child sexual abuse in the Church, or promoting a more contemporary attitude towards subjects like homosexuality and transgender issues, or euthanasia or womens' reproductive rights.
 
I know I shouldn't care, and in the grand scheme of things I don't, but the way she's venerated so highly... it is slightly irksome. It's also something I have been discussing lately because I have a lot of Irish friends who are classic "grew up a forced Catholic and found atheism" and some of their favourite topics are what charlatans people like JP2 and Mother Theresa are.

A load of old Roman Catholic closed shop self-congratulatory backslaps. It is what it is.
 
I could well be wrong since I'm no expert in such matters, but it seems to me one of the basic requirements if sainthood is the working of miraculous cures. Are such claims asserted in the present case?
 
I could well be wrong since I'm no expert in such matters, but it seems to me one of the basic requirements if sainthood is the working of miraculous cures. Are such claims asserted in the present case?

People pray to her and get better, therefore it's a miracle and she cured them. Same thing happened with John Paul II. People in the RCC are usually called a "Servant of God" or "The Venerable" when they die and are not martyrs, then miracle one comes with the title "Blessed" (beatification) and miracle two comes with the title "Saint" (canonisation).
 
Last edited:
I know I shouldn't care, and in the grand scheme of things I don't, but the way she's venerated so highly... it is slightly irksome. It's also something I have been discussing lately because I have a lot of Irish friends who are classic "grew up a forced Catholic and found atheism" and some of their favourite topics are what charlatans people like JP2 and Mother Theresa are.

A load of old Roman Catholic closed shop self-congratulatory backslaps. It is what it is.
Irish ex-Catholic here, can confirm. Off the top of my head, I know that she interfered in our divorce referendum back in 1995 for the "No" side, which was hypocritical considering her support for her good friend Princess Diana's divorce - maybe she thought that Diana was damned already for being an Anglican and that a divorce couldn't make her afterlife any worse. :rolleyes:
 
I could well be wrong since I'm no expert in such matters, but it seems to me one of the basic requirements if sainthood is the working of miraculous cures. Are such claims asserted in the present case?
As stated earlier, "miracle" number two was a curing of a brain tumor. I don't know what "miracle" she performed that would qualify her to be beatified, as Pope John Paul II beatified her, and Pope Francis conferred sainthood on her.
 
....I was under the impression that the process of bestowing a sainthood takes decades if not centuries. What hastened it?

If I didn't know better, it all sounds a bit like a con to distract the punters, from the seemingly endless tumblings of the various skeletons out of the Catholic closet. Maybe generate some positive press, some goodwill towards themselves along the way.

I wasn't really aware of the allegations against Mother Teresa though.
 
Christopher Hitchens said "I wish there was a hell to which she could go". His main complaint was her lifelong advocacy against birth control and contraception, the lack of which causes poverty and misery.

One of his most famous television pieces in Britain was this 1994 Channel 4 special, made during her lifetime, and served as a precursor to his lengthy writings on her which started the following year.

 
She was a horrible woman. But then Catholicism is a horrible cult, so the two go hand-in-hand 👍
 
I could well be wrong since I'm no expert in such matters, but it seems to me one of the basic requirements if sainthood is the working of miraculous cures. Are such claims asserted in the present case?
I don't know the details concerning her second "miracle" but the first one is certainly dodgy enough. From Wikipedia:
Wikipedia
In 2002 the Vatican recognised as a miracle the healing of a tumour in the abdomen of an Indian woman, Monica Besra, after the application of a locket containing Mother Teresa's picture. Besra said that a beam of light emanated from the picture, curing the cancerous tumour. Some of Besra's medical staff and Besra's husband said that conventional medical treatment had eradicated the tumour.[138] Dr. Ranjan Mustafi, who told The New York Times he had treated Besra, said that the cyst was not cancer at all but a cyst caused by tuberculosis. He said, "It was not a miracle.... She took medicines for nine months to one year."[139] According to Besra's husband, "My wife was cured by the doctors and not by any miracle ... This miracle is a hoax."[140] Besra's medical records contain sonograms, prescriptions, and physicians' notes; Monica Besra said that Sister Betta of the Missionaries of Charity took them away. Time magazine said that calls to Sister Betta and to the office of Sister Nirmala, Mother Teresa's successor as head of the order, elicited no comment on this. The officials at the Balurghat Hospital where Besra was seeking medical treatment said that they were being pressured by the Catholic order to say her cure was miraculous.[140]
 
....I was under the impression that the process of bestowing a sainthood takes decades if not centuries. What hastened it?
There is at least a five-year waiting period between death and the formal process of canonization can begin. Only the Pope can override that period, as was done in this case by John Paul II. Even John Paul II's rise to sainthood was done using the bypass method under Pope Benedict XVI.
 
One of his most famous television pieces in Britain was this 1994 Channel 4 special, made during her lifetime, and served as a precursor to his lengthy writings on her which started the following year.
My problem with Hitchens - and I am thinking of his wider body of work here - is that he doesn't seem to be arguing for anything; he's just trying to prove that everyone and everything is horrible. And if everybody was as cynical as he is, then the world would be the messed up place that he thinks it is.
 
Back