Seems that a planned postage stamp honoring 1979 Nobel Peace Prize Winner Mother Teresa has some atheists in a hissy fit. An excerpt from the Fox News article:
An atheist organization is blasting the U.S. Postal Service for its plan to honor Mother Teresa with a commemorative stamp, saying it violates postal regulations against honoring “individuals whose principal achievements are associated with religious undertakings.”
The Freedom from Religion Foundation is urging its supporters to boycott the stamp — and also to engage in a letter-writing campaign to spread the word about what it calls the “darker side” of Mother Teresa.
The stamp — set to be released on Aug. 26, which would have been Mother Teresa’s 100th birthday — will recognize the 1979 Nobel Peace Prize winner for her humanitarian work, the Postal Service announced last month.
“Noted for her compassion toward the poor and suffering, Mother Teresa, a diminutive Roman Catholic nun and honorary U.S. citizen, served the sick and destitute of India and the world for nearly 50 years,” the Postal Service said in a press release. “Her humility and compassion, as well as her respect for the innate worth and dignity of humankind, inspired people of all ages and backgrounds to work on behalf of the world’s poorest populations.”
But Freedom from Religion Foundation spokeswoman Annie Laurie Gaylor says issuing the stamp runs against Postal Service regulations.
“Mother Teresa is principally known as a religious figure who ran a religious institution. You can’t really separate her being a nun and being a Roman Catholic from everything she did,” Gaylor told FoxNews.com.
Postal Service spokesman Roy Betts expressed surprise at the protest, given the long list of previous honorees with strong religious backgrounds, including Malcolm X, the former chief spokesman for the Nation of Islam, and the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., a Baptist minister and co-founder of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference.
“In fact we honored Father Flanagan in 1986 for his humanitarian work. This has nothing to do with religion or faith,” Betts told FoxNews.com.
Gaylor said the atheist group opposed Father Flanagan’s stamp but not those for King and Malcolm X, because she said they were known for their civil rights activities, not for their religion.
Martin Luther King “just happened to be a minister,” and “Malcolm X was not principally known for being a religious figure,” she said.
“And he’s not called Father Malcolm X like Mother Teresa. I mean, even her name is a Roman Catholic honorific.”
Gaylor said Mother Teresa infused Catholicism into her secular honors — including an “anti-abortion rant” during her Nobel Prize acceptance speech — and that even her humanitarian work was controversial.
And there’s the real issue. Mother Teresa was pro-life, not just an Albanian social worker slumming in Calcutta. Her solid ethic of life infused her work at every level.
As for Mother Teresa’s title ‘Mother’ being uniquely Catholic, what of African-American Mother Hale of Harlem who opened an orphanage for babies?
Especially noteworthy in the article was the note that Martin Luther King Jr. was only incidentally a minister.
Really!?
Consider the following excerpts from King’s famous letter from the Birmingham jail:
“Letter from a Birmingham Jail [King, Jr.]”
16 April 1963
My Dear Fellow Clergymen:
While confined here in the Birmingham city jail, I came across your recent statement calling my present activities “unwise and untimely.” Seldom do I pause to answer criticism of my work and ideas. If I sought to answer all the criticisms that cross my desk, my secretaries would have little time for anything other than such correspondence in the course of the day, and I would have no time for constructive work. But since I feel that you are men of genuine good will and that your criticisms are sincerely set forth, I want to try to answer your statement in what I hope will be patient and reasonable terms.
I think I should indicate why I am here in Birmingham, since you have been influenced by the view which argues against “outsiders coming in.” I have the honor of serving as president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, an organization operating in every southern state, with headquarters in Atlanta, Georgia. We have some eighty five affiliated organizations across the South, and one of them is the Alabama Christian Movement for Human Rights. Frequently we share staff, educational and financial resources with our affiliates. Several months ago the affiliate here in Birmingham asked us to be on call to engage in a nonviolent direct action program if such were deemed necessary. We readily consented, and when the hour came we lived up to our promise. So I, along with several members of my staff, am here because I was invited here. I am here because I have organizational ties here.
But more basically, I am in Birmingham because injustice is here. Just as the prophets of the eighth century B.C. left their villages and carried their “thus saith the Lord” far beyond the boundaries of their home towns, and just as the Apostle Paul left his village of Tarsus and carried the gospel of Jesus Christ to the far corners of the Greco Roman world, so am I compelled to carry the gospel of freedom beyond my own home town. Like Paul, I must constantly respond to the Macedonian call for aid…
…I have heard numerous southern religious leaders admonish their worshipers to comply with a desegregation decision because it is the law, but I have longed to hear white ministers declare: “Follow this decree because integration is morally right and because the Negro is your brother.” In the midst of blatant injustices inflicted upon the Negro, I have watched white churchmen stand on the sideline and mouth pious irrelevancies and sanctimonious trivialities. In the midst of a mighty struggle to rid our nation of racial and economic injustice, I have heard many ministers say: “Those are social issues, with which the gospel has no real concern.” And I have watched many churches commit themselves to a completely other worldly religion which makes a strange, un-Biblical distinction between body and soul, between the sacred and the secular….
…There was a time when the church was very powerful–in the time when the early Christians rejoiced at being deemed worthy to suffer for what they believed. In those days the church was not merely a thermometer that recorded the ideas and principles of popular opinion; it was a thermostat that transformed the mores of society. Whenever the early Christians entered a town, the people in power became disturbed and immediately sought to convict the Christians for being “disturbers of the peace” and “outside agitators.”‘ But the Christians pressed on, in the conviction that they were “a colony of heaven,” called to obey God rather than man. Small in number, they were big in commitment. They were too God-intoxicated to be “astronomically intimidated.” By their effort and example they brought an end to such ancient evils as infanticide and gladiatorial contests. Things are different now. So often the contemporary church is a weak, ineffectual voice with an uncertain sound. So often it is an archdefender of the status quo. Far from being disturbed by the presence of the church, the power structure of the average community is consoled by the church’s silent–and often even vocal–sanction of things as they are.
But the judgment of God is upon the church as never before. If today’s church does not recapture the sacrificial spirit of the early church, it will lose its authenticity, forfeit the loyalty of millions, and be dismissed as an irrelevant social club with no meaning for the twentieth century. Every day I meet young people whose disappointment with the church has turned into outright disgust.
Perhaps I have once again been too optimistic. Is organized religion too inextricably bound to the status quo to save our nation and the world? Perhaps I must turn my faith to the inner spiritual church, the church within the church, as the true ekklesia and the hope of the world. But again I am thankful to God that some noble souls from the ranks of organized religion have broken loose from the paralyzing chains of conformity and joined us as active partners in the struggle for freedom. They have left their secure congregations and walked the streets of Albany, Georgia, with us. They have gone down the highways of the South on tortuous rides for freedom. Yes, they have gone to jail with us. Some have been dismissed from their churches, have lost the support of their bishops and fellow ministers. But they have acted in the faith that right defeated is stronger than evil triumphant. Their witness has been the spiritual salt that has preserved the true meaning of the gospel in these troubled times. They have carved a tunnel of hope through the dark mountain of disappointment. I hope the church as a whole will meet the challenge of this decisive hour. But even if the church does not come to the aid of justice, I have no despair about the future. I have no fear about the outcome of our struggle in Birmingham, even if our motives are at present misunderstood. We will reach the goal of freedom in Birmingham and all over the nation, because the goal of America is freedom. Abused and scorned though we may be, our destiny is tied up with America’s destiny. Before the pilgrims landed at Plymouth, we were here. Before the pen of Jefferson etched the majestic words of the Declaration of Independence across the pages of history, we were here. For more than two centuries our forebears labored in this country without wages; they made cotton king; they built the homes of their masters while suffering gross injustice and shameful humiliation -and yet out of a bottomless vitality they continued to thrive and develop. If the inexpressible cruelties of slavery could not stop us, the opposition we now face will surely fail. We will win our freedom because the sacred heritage of our nation and the eternal will of God are embodied in our echoing demands. Before closing I feel impelled to mention one other point in your statement that has troubled me profoundly. You warmly commended the Birmingham police force for keeping “order” and “preventing violence.” I doubt that you would have so warmly commended the police force if you had seen its dogs sinking their teeth into unarmed, nonviolent Negroes. I doubt that you would so quickly commend the policemen if you were to observe their ugly and inhumane treatment of Negroes here in the city jail; if you were to watch them push and curse old Negro women and young Negro girls; if you were to see them slap and kick old Negro men and young boys; if you were to observe them, as they did on two occasions, refuse to give us food because we wanted to sing our grace together. I cannot join you in your praise of the Birmingham police department…
It’s pretty evident that the real issue here is abortion.
Coming Home 
this is a really great blog in the service of life. Soon, the errors of the pro choice assumptions will be laid to rest and the slaughter of the unborns will go down in history as a feat worse than the holocaust— perhaps thanks to people like you who have highlighted the truth in charity and empirical data.
I join you in despising the Gaylor girls, and all the totalitarian freethinkers at Freedom From Religion Foundation, who can’t keep their prepositions straight.
They want everyone to be free to think just like them.
They don’t get that freedom OF religion gives a special honored place to religion, generally, while declining to authorize The State to weigh in on which one is The True Faith. Freedom FROM religion is their personal fantasy, not enshrined in the Constitution.
I think a Malcolm X stamp was just fine, but he did become a public figure as a Minister of the Nation of Islam, and his last project was called Muslim Mosque Inc.
I could say a lot of critical things about Mother Teresa, but if John Wayne can have a postage stamp, so can she. I wouldn’t have made her an honorary American citizen, but if she is one, good enough. Everything that happens in this country doesn’t need my personal approval.
But please, these silly twerps are not worthy of outrage. They thrive on it, like Antaeus grew strong being thrown to the ground. Laugh at them, lightly, and then ignore them. They have had such bad luck in the courts they have sworn never to file another case in Wisconsin state court — their home state, and mine. The judge said a creche could stay in a city park. Awwwwww.
” could say a lot of critical things about Mother Teresa”
Really? Like what?
Come on, Jasper, you KNOW………
……… and ………. and…….. and ……
The stamp should be issued on Sept. 5, the anniversary of her death and her Feast Day, IMHO, not her birthday. Oh well.
Mother Teresa is principally known as a religious figure who ran a religious institution. You can’t really separate her being a nun and being a Roman Catholic from everything she did,” Gaylor told FoxNews.com.
I’m surprised Gaylor doesn’t fault Mother for NOT separating her Catholicism from her work. That’s their usual gripe.
Gerard,
“It’s pretty evident that the real issue here is abortion.”
Also from the Fox article:
“The Foundation is encouraging its supporters to purchase the new stamp honoring the late actress Katharine Hepburn, who was an atheist, instead — or any of the other 2010 stamps…..”
Actress Katharine Hepburn’s mother, Katharine Houghton Hepburn, was active in the birth control movement with PP founder Margaret Sanger in the early 1920’s and the actress herself was on the Board of Planned Parenthood.
See: http://www.nyu.edu/projects/sanger/secure/newsletter/articles/hepburn.html
How ironic.
When these clowns from the Freedom From Reigion Foundation have done as much good in the world as Mother Teresa has done, then they will be in a good position to criticize her. When they’ve lived in a Calcutta slum, ministered to the hungry and sick, taken care of children, ministered to the dying, and arranged medical care for the sick and injured; when they’ve done all that, then they will have earned the right to be listened to regarding Mother Teresa. Until then, why should I pay any attention to their noise?
Mother Teresa wasn’t perfect, but no human is (except Jesus).
If it looks like the Postal Service is caving in to these jackels, there should be mass complaints about it, telling the Postal Service not to obey these worms.
News Flash for the Freedom From Religion Foundation: Most of the world believes in some kind of God. And we live in a free country like the USA, not North Korea. If they want to live in a country scrubbed of religion, maybe they should move to North Korea. In the mean time, they should leave the rest of the American citizens alone to enjoy their freedoms, instead of trying their hardest to stomp out our freedoms.
I would be surprised, but this is such typical liberal behavior…these people cannot stand free speech, and hate God so much want to scrub anything that mentions God or faith in Him from the face of the earth- unless, of course, it is coming someone who merely pretends to appreciate God…like Obama. Then they hail them as wonderful devoted religious people, and expect us to not notice a double standard.
I could say a lot of critical things about Mother Teresa
What things do you find objectionable about her, Siarlys?
I forgot to mention in my first comment that I agree with Gerard’s statement that it comes down to the abortion issue. Most of the time, when I see people talking badly about Mother Theresa, they refer to the fact that she opposed “family planning” in disgust.
I’m sure these clowns are among the many people who for one reason or another favor legal access to abortion, but for them, its really not ALL about abortion. These are people who, if they happened to notice, would want When We Were Very Young removed from public libraries because it contains a line “Hush, hush, whisper who dares? Christopher Robin is saying his prayers.” (I hope they aren’t reading this site. I might have given them an idea.)
I have to insert another history lesson here. Liberalism was not invented by atheists. It was invented by whigs and nonconformists who went to long church services every Sunday, sometimes twice, listened to sermons that in a certain way were more arrogant than the homily typical of a Roman service, delivered by ministers who thought parishioners had nothing better to do than listen to them expound for hours, in short, heretic or not, very devout people. English prime minister Gladstone, definitely a liberal, on the first occasion he met his future wife, asked her “Have you meditated on the goodness of God today?”
Atheists becoming liberals is a rather recent phenomenon. If they really are. It’s not liberal to try to shut people up because they have religious sentiments. There really aren’t any liberals any more, and there aren’t any conservatives either. These are hollow labels, so over-used they mean nothing.
In terms of what standing these clowns have to speak, Cecelia has it about right. I might think a bit of voluntary family planning would be good for India, but Mother Teresa devoted her entire life and all her energy to feeding all those people, non-stop. I bet FFRF hasn’t even posted a mention of the needs of Haiti on their web site. Yup, I just checked — they haven’t.
What do I object to about Mother Teresa? Of course she and I disagree about (a) abortion, and (b) family planing. These are two different considerations; you can have either one without the other. But philosophically, I object to her saying that the reason God made poor people is so rich people can perform acts of charity. Real concern for poverty would aim to end it, not perpetuate it as a means for the charity of others. I can’t claim to have ended poverty either, but I have spent a few decades in what seem quite impoverished neighborhoods by American standards, and that was always how I measured my work.
Siralys,
“But philosophically, I object to her saying that the reason God made poor people is so rich people can perform acts of charity. Real concern for poverty would aim to end it, not perpetuate it as a means for the charity of others. I can’t claim to have ended poverty either, but I have spent a few decades in what seem quite impoverished neighborhoods by American standards, and that was always how I measured my work.”
Mother Teresa? You have probably taken her words out of context if your believe this is her philosophy. Please provide a quote from Mother Teresa.
By the way, do you think God would have asked us specifically to “feed the poor” if hunger weren’t going to be a problem for the ages? It’s a horrible thing, but if will never be completely eradicated, practically speaking.
* * * *
Off topic, but Liberals and Conservatives certainly do exist. A true political conservative follows and reveres the principles set forth by our Founding Fathers.
Siarlys Jenkins,
Your snide remarks regarding the “Roman church” that dot your comments are distracting and disrespectful to Catholics. In addition, they generally do nothing to promote thoughtful discussion. Why do find it necessary to include them?
Janet.
SJ, needs her anti-Catholicism to confirm her life. Without it, she is dimished intellectually.
The Dalit’s love Mother Teresa, and have begun to overcome the years of bigotry and prejudice against them. They were her family.
And what has SJ done for the poor that will be remembered by history? Nada.
At the National Prayer Day Breakfast, hosted by Congress on Feb. 3. 1994, in the presence of the Clintons and Gores, eager for the photo op, we have Mother Theresa:
Any country that accepts abortion is not teaching its people to love, but to use violence to get what they want. That is why the greatest destroyer of love and peace is abortion.
The greatest destroyer of peace is abortion because if a mother can kill her own child, what is left for me to kill you and you to kill me? There is nothing berween.
The way to plan a family is natural family planning.
The expression on their faces was priceless! EWTN has the entire speech. Read it for a real upper.
Other greats:
Each of them is Jesus in disguise. (Explains why she and her sisters do what they do for 40 years + and don’t burn out.)
Even the rich are hungry for love, for being cared for, for being wanted, for having someone to call their own.
The most terrible poverty is loneliness and the feeling of being unloved.
I want you to be concerned about your next door neighbor. Do you know you next door neighbor? (No, Mother, here in the West we’re worried about contracepting and aborting brown-skinned people in Latina America and Africa!!)
Let us touch the dying, the poor, the lonely, and the unwanted according to the graces we have received and let us not be ashamed or above to do the humble work.
Let us more and more insist on raising funds of love, of kindness, of understanding, of peace. Money will come if we seek first the Kingdom of God – the rest will be given.
Siarlys, your tone is generally measured and thoughtful, though we disagree on some important matters. But please, if you’re going to refer to the “Roman Church”, why not just go whole hog and call it the “Romish” Church?
Anyone who invited Mother Teresa to a prayer breakfast could and should have known she was going to speak for what she believed. If they were caught by surprise, that’s on them. There is no reason she shouldn’t say it either — nor are they obligated to agree with her.
I was surprised by all the comments about my use of the word “Roman,” so I did a quick search on this page. I could only find one incidence in my comments, so I’m a little mystified that it drew so much attention.
I haven’t used the term “Romish” church because I’m not familiar with it. I use the term “Roman” without the word “Catholic,” because the church governed by the Bishop of Rome is not, and has never been “catholic” in the generic sense of the word, although it has aspired to be. It never had governance of the churches which after 1054 AD adhered to the Orthodox communion, nor the Coptic churches, nor the Assyrian church, and it has not since the Reformation had dominion over the Protestant churches. It is Roman. I still use the word Catholic, capitalized, at times, because that is common usage.
Some Protestant churches recite the Apostles Creed substituting the words “holy Christian church” for “holy Catholic church,” some retain the word “catholic” (lower case) and give an introduction every Sunday that they mean “the church universal, not the Roman Catholic Church,” and some say “holy catholic church,” lower case, without bothering to announce why every Sunday.
I’m not sure why it is offensive to say “Roman” without “Catholic,” unless you are offended by the possibility that your church is not universally recognized as “catholic.” I know Benedict XVI has made provocative statements about that, and he is both wrong and arrogant to do so, but it doesn’t greatly concern me, because he doesn’t command police powers to enforce his will on anyone. So long as that is the case, he can say whatever he pleases. Further, we can have peaceful conversations with each other, because we are in no danger of taking up arms over matters that only God can judge.
Off topic: According to the definition offered by Janet, I am a conservative. However, there are so many people who call themselves conservatives who disregard and distort the intent of the fouding fathers, as I understand them. So, where does that leave us?
As to what I may or may not have done for the poor, don’t speak without knowledge. I could recite 30 years or so of work which would make you rather embarrassed to have made that statement, but this is not the place for it. I wasn’t paid for it either. Currently I’m working on opening the doors of the prisons, a sacred purpose presented by both Isaiah and Jesus. I won’t ask what you are doing, because I’m sure there is something, and neither of us should be pouring biographic details all over this site.
“So, where does that leave us?”
I’m not sure what you mean exactly. What bothers you?
You seem to be annoyed that Roman Catholics call themselves as such. (Count how many times you’ve used the term “Roman Church over the course of this blog’s many threads, not just this one and I think you’ll see my point.)
Catholic means “universal” and I believe that you’ll find the Catholic Church in most corners of the world. I’m no Church scholar and I realize that there are various sects, if that’s the correct word, but there is no doubt that the Catholic Church is the church Jesus founded here on earth with Peter as the head, beginning in Rome and spreading throughout the world. What happened after that does not erase that thread that is the RCC.
Perhaps I have once again been too optimistic. Is organized religion too inextricably bound to the status quo to save our nation and the world?
Perhaps I must turn my faith to the inner spiritual church, the church within the church,
as the true
ekklesia
and the hope of the world.
Gerard,
What do know about this Greek word ‘ekklesia’?
Are you interested in knowing more?
yor bro ken
Hey Ken,
I’m always interested in knowing more. What have ye in mind sir?
Odd. This started out as a main post all of us can agree on. Now we are somehow back to debating the history and authenticity of the Roman Catholic Church, a point we will never agree on, and really don’t need to.
The assertion “there is no doubt that the Catholic Church is the church Jesus founded here on earth with Peter as the head, beginning in Rome and spreading throughout the world,” is believed sincerely, and solely, by those who are adherents of the Roman Catholic Church. I have no desire to take that belief away from you. For all I know, it may be true. But I doubt it, and you certainly won’t find me talking or writing as if it is a known fact or commonly accepted history. I believe it is about as credible as that well-known forgery, “The Donation of Constantine,” which provided a semblance of a title deed for the former Papal States.
Some of the tiniest Protestant denominations believe that their own order of worship is the restored True Faith as originally practiced by the ecclesia in the time of the Apostles and immediately afterward. I think that’s a bit silly too. Really, God is bigger than all of our petty squabbles.
There is a church I often visit, where I am no more eligible for communicant membership than I would be at a Roman Catholic parish, which has never removed from its stated doctrine that the Church of Rome is indeed the Whore of Babylon. However, I recently watched a video presentation on their church schools, including a lengthy comment from a member of the school accreditation committee, a Roman Catholic, who praised them for how well they have integrated their Christian faith into the curriculum. I don’t know which is the greater apostasy, to take pride in the praise of a Catholic or for a Catholic to praise a Protestant school, but either way, it is great to live in a country where this can happen.
I once knew a man from Belgium who said the strangest thing about coming to America was to see Catholic and Protestant churches in the same town. In Europe, they are either in separate nations, or at opposite ends of Germany, Holland, or Belgium. People use to fight to the death over the difference.
Incidentally, this church which formally still considers the Church of Rome to be the Whore of Babylon is vigorously pro-life. I had a conversation with a retired pastor shortly after Dr. Tiller was murdered, when there was some controversy about him being an usher at a church. This pastor said, he would have been welcome to worship, but not as a communicant member unless he ceased performing abortions. So, you have some points in common with this church, and some points of difference. Some of the reasons I could not be a communicant member concern points of doctrine where I agree with the Roman Catholic Church. Go figure.
I grew up Protestant with a Jewish name (not Jenkins obviously — that’s a pen name derived from my mother’s father’s mother’s family) in a Catholic neighborhood, and most of my childhood playmates were Catholic. I really don’t believe they are all doomed to hell for being Catholic. They were great neighbors. I’ve been to mass a few times, mostly with an elderly Hispanic friend who needed a ride and didn’t want to miss an obligation. I found it a perfectly inspiring service of Christian worship. The prayers offered by a bishop at a Christmas Eve service even brought tears to my eyes — the part about “for those who are in prison, for those with AIDS and ARC, for… I forget what else preceded “Let us pray to the Lord,” but I had a good friend recently sentenced to life in prison.
When news came out that Cardinal Ratzinger had been selected as Pope, I was in my third stint at a Catholic Worker house. My co-workers were rather upset, and being Catholic, they had a right to be. It is their church. I cheerfully said, my only comment would be “Thank God for the Reformation.” That’s not a put-down to Catholics being Catholic. Thanks to the Reformation, Benedict XVI has no authority over me, therefore, I need not concern myself that a church I don’t belong to chose him as their leader.
That is similar to my comment on the Episcopalian Church choosing a gay bishop in New Hampshire. I have never submitted myself to the discipline of the Episcopalian Church. I do not pay tithes or offerings to that church, nor do I worship there. It is none of my business who they choose as their bishop. If he had some authority over me, or I funded his work, then I would take an interest.
And, for those who are Catholic, well, part of being Catholic is understanding that the Pope is supreme, and is chosen by the cardinals, who are chosen by the previous Popes, not by vote of the church membership, or elected representatives, like a Presbyterian Stated Clerk or a Methodist Bishop. If you want to vote for your church leadership, join a Protestant church.
“As to what I may or may not have done for the poor, don’t speak without knowledge.”
That still doesn’t change the fact that your esteem is bound to your anti-Catholic history lessons offered at this site.
In the end, Mother Teresa changed India, while your hobby of helping the poor is, just that, a hobby.
Astran, Mother Teresa, for all her effort, did NOT change India. She didn’t even restore a measure of prosperity to one neighborhood in Calcutta, nor did she aspire to do so. She gave one blanket at a time to innumerable people who needed a blanket at that moment, ditto for food, health care, and all else that she gave, and devoted every moment of her life to doing so. She gave a little comfort, to a lot of people. She expected that the poor would always be there, and when she finished her work. they were.
Since you used the word “esteem,” not “self-esteem,” I doubt that how most of those, who have known me, do or do not esteem my life, has anything to do with the history lessons I have offered at this site. It’s of rather small significance. Sometimes I just feel I have to set the record straight, whether it vastly improves my esteem or not.
I’m not even sure what you are arguing FOR, but you do yourself little credit taking ill-informed pot-shots speculating about what the significance of my life may or may not be. Incidentally, I’ve been speaking IN FAVOR of the Mother Teresa stamp, in case you’ve forgotten. I mentioned in passing that whatever criticisms I may have of her, there’s no reason the post office should not issue this stamp. If the Gaylor girls don’t want to buy it, there are plenty of other stamp designs they can use. Someone wanted to shift the discussion to asking me what in the world I could find to criticize about Mother Teresa, and I answered the question.
Since you used the word “esteem,” not “self-esteem,” I doubt that how most of those, who have known me, do or do not esteem my life, has anything to do with the history lessons I have offered at this site. It’s of rather small significance. Sometimes I just feel I have to set the record straight, whether it vastly improves my esteem or not.
Your “history lessons” only reveal your anti-Catholicism defines your self esteem.
Knowledge increases self esteem, and you know that. You are not setting the record straight, your setting yourself straight with your subjective history lessons.
In the end, you remember the history that you want to remember, and minimize the good actions of Mother Teresa.
If I set the record straight that Catholics founded “medical schools” via the Hospitalers, you would either find a anti-Catholic source to deny that fact, or suddenly pronounce that you contained such “knowledge”. Or state a minimum of that fact by writing they gave a blamket ot two, while doing nothing to relieve poverty.
HOSPITAL. An institution for the care of the sick. The first hospitals were charitable institutions founded and directed by the Church for the aged, poor, and afflicted, and in the Middle Ages they served foundlings, orphans, and lepers as well. The oldest hospital still in existence is the Hôtel Dieu, founded under religious auspices in Paris in A.D. 660. Many religious orders have as their distinctive apostolate the service of the sick in hospitals and most Catholic hospitals are conducted by religious institutes. Hospitals have always been intimately connected with the history of Christian charity in imitation of Christ in his compassion for the sick and disabled.
Admit it, your mind finds your “self esteem” in your subjective history that finds fault in the good of Catholics, such as Mother Teresa.
Eventually it defines yourself, without you knowing it yourself.
No Astran, I have nothing at all against the Roman Catholic Church building and staffing hospitals. Did you miss what I said about the strand of humanism that is unquestionably one of that church’s gifts to the world?
Nor have I minimized the actions of Mother Teresa. She herself never claimed that she had changed India, desired to do so, or thought it possible. Providing what comfort she could to a tremendous number of people, knowing it was only a drop in the bucket of total need, was precisely what she dedicated herself to.
I have on my shelf a book by one Michael Schwarz, called The Persistent Prejudice. His subtitle is “Anti-Catholic Prejudice in America.” It sits right next to Paul Blanshard’s American Freedom and Catholic Power. Blanshard wrote well and factually, but long before Vatican II. What he wrote about is a significant danger present within the long and complex history of the church, but it is not the whole story. Schwarz I must say shoots himself in the foot. He essentially says that the Roman Catholic Church is destined to rule Christendom, and North America, and anyone who denies this is showing “anti-Catholic prejudice.” That is foolish. I deny that the Roman Catholic Church has any authority at all except over the spiritual lives and moral upbringing of those who voluntarily commit themselves to its care. That amounts to many millions of people. Many of them do very good work. I’ve spent time in three Catholic Worker houses, one of them for periods of a year or more at a time. There is plenty of good in the church. But its not perfect, and it has no valid claim to temporal supremacy. If you believe it does, thank God we live in a diverse secular republic, so we don’t have to fight just wars over the difference.
[…] Thirteen years after her death, the enemies of Mother Teresa are hard at work trying to suppress the celebration of her life and legacy as we approach the 100th anniversary of her birth this August. Earlier this year there was an attempt to prevent the U.S. Postal Service from issuing a commemorative stamp, written about here. […]
[…] written twice before about the war against Mother Teresa here and here. […]