The myth of altruism and generosity surrounding Mother Teresa is dispelled in a paper by Serge Larivée and Genevieve Chenard of University of Montreal’s Department of Psychoeducation and Carole Sénéchal of the University of Ottawa’s Faculty of Education.
The paper will be published in the March issue of the journal Studies in Religion/Sciences religieuses and is an analysis of the published writings about Mother Teresa. Like the journalist and author Christopher Hitchens, who is amply quoted in their analysis, the researchers conclude that her hallowed image—which does not stand up to analysis of the facts—was constructed, and that her beatification was orchestrated by an effective media relations campaign.
“While looking for documentation on the phenomenon of altruism for a seminar on ethics, one of us stumbled upon the life and work of one of Catholic Church’s most celebrated woman and now part of our collective imagination—Mother Teresa—whose real name was Agnes Gonxha,” says Professor Larivée, who led the research. “The description was so ecstatic that it piqued our curiosity and pushed us to research further.”
As a result, the three researchers collected 502 documents on the life and work of Mother Teresa. After eliminating 195 duplicates, they consulted 287 documents to conduct their analysis, representing 96% of the literature on the founder of the Order of the Missionaries of Charity (OMC). Facts debunk the myth of Mother Teresa
In their article, Serge Larivée and his colleagues also cite a number of problems not take into account by the Vatican in Mother Teresa’s beatification process, such as “her rather dubious way of caring for the sick, her questionable political contacts, her suspicious management of the enormous sums of money she received, and her overly dogmatic views regarding, in particular, abortion, contraception, and divorce.”
‘The sick must suffer like Christ on the cross’
At the time of her death, Mother Teresa had opened 517 missions welcoming the poor and sick in more than 100 countries. The missions have been described as “homes for the dying” by doctors visiting several of these establishments in Calcutta. Two-thirds of the people coming to these missions hoped to a find a doctor to treat them, while the other third lay dying without receiving appropriate care. The doctors observed a significant lack of hygiene, even unfit conditions, as well as a shortage of actual care, inadequate food, and no painkillers. The problem is not a lack of money—the Foundation created by Mother Teresa has raised hundreds of millions of dollars—but rather a particular conception of suffering and death: “There is something beautiful in seeing the poor accept their lot, to suffer it like Christ’s Passion. The world gains much from their suffering,” was her reply to criticism, cites the journalist Christopher Hitchens. Nevertheless, when Mother Teresa required palliative care, she received it in a modern American hospital.
Mother Teresa’s questionable politics and shadowy accounting
Mother Teresa was generous with her prayers but rather miserly with her foundation’s millions when it came to humanity’s suffering. During numerous floods in India or following the explosion of a pesticide plant in Bhopal, she offered numerous prayers and medallions of the Virgin Mary but no direct or monetary aid. On the other hand, she had no qualms about accepting the Legion of Honour and a grant from the Duvalier dictatorship in Haiti. Millions of dollars were transferred to the MCO’s various bank accounts, but most of the accounts were kept secret, Larivée says. “Given the parsimonious management of Mother Theresa’s works, one may ask where the millions of dollars for the poorest of the poor have gone?”
The grand media plan for Mother Teresa’s holiness
Despite these disturbing facts, how did Mother Teresa succeed in building an image of holiness and infinite goodness? According to the three researchers, her meeting in London in 1968 with the BBC’s Malcom Muggeridge, an anti-abortion journalist who shared her right-wing Catholic values, was crucial. Muggeridge decided to promote Teresa, who consequently discovered the power of mass media. In 1969, he made a eulogistic film of the missionary, promoting her by attributing to her the “first photographic miracle,” when it should have been attributed to the new film stock being marketed by Kodak. Afterwards, Mother Teresa travelled throughout the world and received numerous awards, including the Nobel Peace Prize. In her acceptance speech, on the subject of Bosnian women who were raped by Serbs and now sought abortion, she said: “I feel the greatest destroyer of peace today is abortion, because it is a direct war, a direct killing—direct murder by the mother herself.”
Following her death, the Vatican decided to waive the usual five-year waiting period to open the beatification process. The miracle attributed to Mother Theresa was the healing of a woman, Monica Besra, who had been suffering from intense abdominal pain. The woman testified that she was cured after a medallion blessed by Mother Theresa was placed on her abdomen. Her doctors thought otherwise: the ovarian cyst and the tuberculosis from which she suffered were healed by the drugs they had given her. The Vatican, nevertheless, concluded that it was a miracle. Mother Teresa’s popularity was such that she had become untouchable for the population, which had already declared her a saint. “What could be better than beatification followed by canonization of this model to revitalize the Church and inspire the faithful especially at a time when churches are empty and the Roman authority is in decline?” Larivée and his colleagues ask.
Positive effect of the Mother Teresa myth
Despite Mother Teresa’s dubious way of caring for the sick by glorifying their suffering instead of relieving it, Serge Larivée and his colleagues point out the positive effect of the Mother Teresa myth: “If the extraordinary image of Mother Teresa conveyed in the collective imagination has encouraged humanitarian initiatives that are genuinely engaged with those crushed by poverty, we can only rejoice. It is likely that she has inspired many humanitarian workers whose actions have truly relieved the suffering of the destitute and addressed the causes of poverty and isolation without being extolled by the media. Nevertheless, the media coverage of Mother Theresa could have been a little more rigorous.”
About the study
The study was conducted by Serge Larivée, Department of psychoeducation, University of Montreal, Carole Sénéchal, Faculty of Education, University of Ottawa, and Geneviève Chénard, Department of psychoeducation, University of Montreal.
The printed version, available only in French, will be published in March 2013 in issue 42 of Studies in Religion / Sciences religieuses.
WIshing it were true doesnt make it so. This may sound like I am taking aim at Catholics, but really I am addressing the folks who pulled together this polemic assaulting Mother Theresa.
The evidence presented is thin at best and says much more about the authors’ inabity to understand a value system that is not their own. I don’t revere Mother Theresa, but I am broadminded enough to grasp what she was doing, or trying to do.
Sadly, the intellectual verve of the report’s authors (and that of the author of this blog post) is missing in action.
@Michael
Here is the link to the abstract:
http://sir.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/01/15/0008429812469894.abstract
The full article is behind a pay wall.
What is this crap, Fox news ? She established 517 missions throughout the world yet we we find her accounting practices ‘questionable’ ? ‘Doctors’ found that people were dying unnecessary in those missions, yet did not offer their own assistance or separate care ? She was a catholic against abortions ?
This article is 100% sensationalist bullshit, I can only hope the study itself is more balanced and does not jump to colosal accusations without colosal evidence.
Seems that no one is arguing with the quotes that were quoted here. Seems that the facts [no painkillers, nasty conditions] correleate with her views of the world [likes to see other people suffering]. No one seems to be arguing the facts, just the conclusions. Based on these facts, I conclude that Mother Teresa was a sadist.
One cannot help but compare this to the maxim from The Prince: the end justifies the means.
So it comes down to your belief that your method will (eventually) produce a better outcome than the method that was out-mediaized.
I respects Mother Teresa very much and remember her quote “If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other.”
That’s all.
When I read this article with the line above about Mother Teresea’s interview with a journalist “who shared her right wing catholic attitudes” I knew this was an amateurish diatribe by some angry, liberal catholic haters who know nothing about the Catholic religion.).
Respecting life and being anti abortion is part of being a follower of the Catholic religion. That rings true with Mother Teresa’s behavior.
The details given here on MTs handling of money are so sparse and unmeaningful that there’s not much to go on to determine the role MT played in the donations, her role in dispersing them or whether the donations were used at all, for what or if it was improper. The authors did allude to MT not giving the poor any money….another typical liberal diatribe, always looking for a handout.
MT genuinely cared for the poor and prayed with them, for them and opened missionaries all over the world trying to ease suffering. I’d say that’s a sainty goal these days.
The authors have produced a kindergarten work here that will only serve to turn readers against them, instead of intelligently guiding the reader towards a conclusion that they intended…
On October 7, 1950, Mother Teresa and the small community formed by her former pupils was labeled as the Diocesan Congregation of the Calcutta Diocese, and thus received the permission from the Vatican to exist as a Church subject. Their mission was to care for (in Mother Teresa’s words) “the hungry, the naked, the homeless, the crippled, the blind, the lepers, all those people who feel unwanted, unloved, uncared for throughout society, people that have become a burden to the society and are shunned by everyone.” It began as a small community with 12 members in Calcutta, and today it has over 4,500 Sisters running orphanages, AIDS hospices, charity centres worldwide, and caring for refugees, the blind, disabled, aged, alcoholics, the poor and homeless and victims of floods, epidemics and famine in Asia, Africa, Latin America, North America, Europe and Australia.
She offered comfort and gave a voice for all that were sick and dying. She opened eyes of many on the horrors in our lives and all around the world. She was dedicated to easing pain.
This article shows what the catholic church truly is… A bunch of fakes and phonies!!!!
This is amateur attempt to discredit a woman who does not deserve it. I’m always astonished at the lack of balance and integrity when it comes to these type of attacks, which only goes to show how truly irrational they are. Let’s just disregard all of her merits and many good works and rake her through the coals. Ah yes, thank you for your noble aspirations of trying to undermine a woman who has inspired countless others to help the poor and underprivileged. To do so in the name of science I find disgusting. In the end I find this article only does the opposite of what the authors intended by discrediting them and their so-called research.
Another man made fairy tale and lllusion.. To withhold palliative care and pain killers is inhumane .. Haven’t fact checked this story .. But seems like more lies we have been fed in the name of Religion.. Some one or cause profited as people suffered .. Shame shame .. Why am I not surprised . .. Watch your loved one die a miserable death in pain and let me know how that goes… Wake up .. Money is the root of all evil.. And so it goes ..
This article… and ridiculous, “scientific” inquiry… seems to be a lame attempt to garner self serving attention. Unfortunately, it was a waste of time to read. It is an unsuccessful attempt to discredit character and attach Mother Teresa’s person to the Catholic church, her own church and a church she stood up to when needed and had personal conflict with. No reporting on that… to balance the article, eh? Oh, I forgot, the article is not about the church? By the way, not a fan of the Catholic church here. Is someone trying to tie in beautification with science? Not only is that inapproriate, it is just plain stupid.
“Why is a “science” blog so obsessed with religion and religious figures if they claim that religion has no place in science? If it has no place then why are you so threatened by it?
Nazism was driven by the idea of eugenics which drew its inspiration from darwinism.
If you are a devout darwinist then you cannot believe in free will and if you don’t believe in free will then you cannot believe in morality.”
The amount of stupidity in this statement is incredibly high!
This is a science blog? Where are the citations to these alleged facts?
I volunteered at Mother Theresa’s ashram in Ahmedabad in 2009, and i have found few other places on earth in which I could honestly say that i felt felt genuinely ‘holy’. I have also worked around patients in nursing homes as well over the years, and I feel sad for ‘scientific’ people, since most of them eventually recant their views towards the end. Mother Theresa has left a wonderful legacy behind her, and countless people who would have spent decades of their lives in misery, isolation, & abject poverty instead found sanctuary in the arms of humble sisters & volunteers thanks to her efforts. It is actually for these giant efforts and all of her everyday sacrifices that we celebrate her and not for her fiscal foresight or lack thereof. Being saintly surely must not be equated with being perfect in all areas.
Why is a “science” blog so obsessed with religion and religious figures if they claim that religion has no place in science? If it has no place then why are you so threatened by it?
Nazism was driven by the idea of eugenics which drew its inspiration from darwinism.
If you are a devout darwinist then you cannot believe in free will and if you don’t believe in free will then you cannot believe in morality.
History is repeating itself again. Humanity will never learn. You attack what you don’t understand.
I’ve looked for the paper you site in the present, 42nd, March 2013 of Studies in Religion/Sciences religieuses and I cannot find it. Am I being silly?
I was always captivated by the key point in Hitchens’s original thesis: Who, exactly, pulled the media strings to market Teresa as a saint?
Which leads to the next question: Why market *anyone* as a saint? What’s the purpose? In fact, shouldn’t such marketing been seen askance by anyone with an abiding interest in divine things?
In other news, Christians are still delusional and easily fooled by ancient Mediterranean myths.