The Missionary Position: Mother Teresa in Theory and Practice

Rating:
Summary: The cleverness of corruption or the corruption of cleverness
Review: One can only wonder what Hitchens would have made of Christ having dinner with sinners, glorifying Samaritans, and forgiving harlots, as well as making pronouncements on sexuality and marriage.

Mother Teresa doesn't need my defense, but clearly Hitchens doesn't desire to write well or to probe complex situations to discover the truth. He desires to be clever and as with most falsities of style his cleverness corrupts whatever it touches.

Rating:
Summary: Although it is not a best seller, it raises questions
Review: While it is good that Mother Theresa wants to help other people and keep herself in shape to help others, one must question the methodology behind her beliefs and practices.

Even though the size of the book and the lack of footnotes does not paint a solid case, it also does not silence important questions. If she was perfectly willing to let citizens of Calcutta have access to primitive facilities, why on earth would Mother Theresa not feel like they were good enough for herself? Presumably, god would still love her regardless of whether or not she got fancy hospital care.

Granted, the allegations raised by this book are not pretty and are guaranteed to inflame some readers, but it does provide important information. Because it does not mention such discrepancies are the standard practice for Catholic orders (indeed, an overwhelming majority are very modern and believe all patients should have acess)it is Mother Theresa who is the spirtual oddity.

While it is quite possible that she could have planned her nomination for sainthood (Nuns are still human and subject to the samre whims)I don't necessarily think she should be faulted for it. Expecting complete selflessness is unrealistic of any person whether they be lay or clergy.

One can disagree with Mother Theresa's position on reproductive self-determination while seeing why she would have to make a series of shrewd political moves. Mother Theresa problaly realized that women DO face a harder journey to sainthood because of their gender and that she WOULD have to have lots of ambition to pull it off. Only she will have to answer whether or not those connections were ultimately the best option.

Rating:
Summary: Easy to criticize, hard to be charitable
Review: While I normally admire Hitchens' work, and while I am sure that Mother Teresa, like every other human being, was not perfect, I am amazed as to what his purpose was in writing this book. It is a fact that one of the first people whom Mother Teresa helped on the streets of Calcutta was a dying woman whose face had been half-eaten away by rats--how many of us, even the most "Christian", could do the same? I certainly could not, and I have no doubt that Hitchens is also incapable of living as Mother Teresa did, and as her nuns continue to do. She may have received top medical care, but really, what government on earth would have allowed the world-famous Mother Teresa NOT to have had the best hospital treatment--for that matter, what airline would not have insisted on her travelling in style? (Imagine the bad publicity if they did otherwise.)

When Hitchens has spent even one day and night working with the world's most poor, wretched, and despised, let him criticize. Until then, his book is just silly.

Rating:
Summary: All dogs are pink Lou is a dog Therefore Lou is Pink WRONG!
Review: As a Catholic after recovering my shock at this book and the various reviews (AH HA NOW WE SEE THROUGH THAT CHARLITON etc...!) I decided to read this book myself to see what was being said. I found the book compact and easy to read and much to my surprise VERY AMUSEING!

It wasn't the facts as presented that amused me. They were presented in a fairly straight forward manner. It wasn't the attacks on Mother Teresa's order methods from the doctor or the nurse. Both have the right to their opinion aquired first hand though apparently the vast majority of people who also have the same first hand knowledge would disagree. It wasn't even the attacks on her for not rejecting people like Baby Doc, and Keating (I note the authors political leanings glaring out when he lumps Reagan with that group.) It doesn't seem odd to myself that a person unwilling to reject the lowest of the low of the poor and feeble would reject anybody from any station (that is the whole tennent of Christianity love of neighbor not of GOOD neighbors only) I'm sure that Mr. Hitchens would be happy to provide us all with an approved list of people we can associate with to be considered saintly.

The two things that got me laughing out loud was his SHOCKING DISCOVERY that a Roman Catholic Nun would have Roman Catholic Beliefs and would consider her primary mission to spread those beliefs! And his belief apparently in a Vast Vatican Conspiracy against the world of which he considers Mother Teresa a part. How amazing that a member of a religious order would consider the salvation of souls the most important thing there is above all else. I'm reminded of Lincoln when asked about slavery to paraphrase: "My primary purpose is to save the Union, If I can save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; If I can save it by freeing none of the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others in bondage I would do that too." Apparently her and her orders ACTIONS are inaquate since they don't come to the standard of Mr. Hitchens FEELINGS on how they should be done. Once again we see the example one who FEELS the right way is superior to one who ACTS and doesn't reach the level demanded by the feelings of the other. (For myself I don't see how refusing medical care offer to her would have made the lives of others better.) I'm sure that using the profits from this book and others the Hitchens hospice for the dying will do much better. Who would believe that a Catholic Nun would be more concerned with the soul than the body? Amazing! It is even more amusing to see Mr Hitchens make his arguement that it is all part of the evil Roman Catholic Churches' master plan. It displays a complete ignornace or misunderstanding of Christianity in general and the Roman Catholic church in particular at best or at worst a complete UNDERSTANDING of the Church and its message concerning the soul, that this world is transitory vs eternity. To any reader of this book I must recommend C.S. Lewis' Classic THE SCREWTAPE LETTERS (in particular #28) I suspect the reader will find its arguemnts similar to what he reads here.

In short Mr. Hitchens makes the following arguement: The Roman Catholic Church is an evil conspiracy; (All dogs are pink.) Mother Teresa is a member in high standing of the church; (Lou is a Dog) THEREFORE Mother Teresa is not a potential saint or even a doer of good works but mearly a cog in that conspiricy to harm mankind. (Therefore Lou is Pink.) The intelligent man, well read in history, will see through this arguement (DOGS AREN'T PINK) in the same way the child saw the emperor had nothing on. The incidious plan of the church if there is one is to repeat to all people in the world the offer of forgivness and salvation that Jesus Christ continues to make to all. If this is the conspiracy that Mr. Hitchens fears then I suggest that he needs Mothers prayers far more than the dying in her followers care.

Rating:
Summary: charity done in stupidity
Review: A quick, pithy read, and quite truly a well needed critical glance at the manufacture of a saint. Even if we take it as a given that Mother Teresa was well-intentioned, there are several incongruities between the persona presented by the media and Christians, and the actual person. Mother Teresa's association with Charles Keating, the S & L embezzler, in addition to her dealings with Haitian dictators all come under fire- and with good reason seeing as at the time of the printing of the book Teresa's organization had not returned any of Keating's embezzled donations to their rightful owners. Hitchens makes the case that Teresa's character has been inviolate simply because of the vicarious alleviation of guilt over the sufferings of the third world. But just because Mother Teresa happened to do something, would be neglecting to note whether her aid was effective considering the resources available due to her prestige. There is reason to doubt this, due to the pathological austerity of the Sist'az of Caritas. Hitchens makes a number of sapient points which reveal the insipid nature of Teresa's ideology, as well as the intellectual poverty which seems to have accompanied Teresa's vow of material poverty. The bottom line is that charity done in stupidity may actually be harmful in the long term, and that many of Teresa's opinions are detestable in consideration of the side effects of unrestrained population growth. It may be the case that Mother Teresa has just been one of the most mediagenic of proselytizers, and a unthinking zealot, far from worthy of sentimental encomiums.

Rating:
Summary: It is a rant, but an amusing one
Review: Another reviewer said this wasn't a rant. Well, I'm afraid it is. But it's a very funny one. And Hitchens has some evidence behind his sharpened rhetorical knives. He points out the hypocrisy of many of Mother Theresa's actions, the poor care her hospitals give, when compared to other organizations, and the shady people she's chosen to be associated with.

Sure, she's dead; sure, she spent a lot of time with sick people; but that doesn't automatically make her a saint, as Hitchen's makes clear.

Still, this is a polemic not a biographical study (which is why I only gave it 4 stars). If you want an in depth history of Mother Theresa, this is not the first place to look.

Rating:
Summary: The Missionary Position
Review: Great book. With a razor wit Chris Hitchens shows the dark side of the Mother Teresa phenomenon. Instead being a savior of the downtrodden and dispossesed Mother Teresa comes off as advocate for the conservative branch of the Catholic Church. It also raises a question about the amount of money her organization receives while her patients ( or victims in some cases ) live in squalid conditions. This book should be required reading for anybody taken in by the Teresa for Sainthood bandwagon.

Rating:
Summary: hardly a saintly portrayal of MT
Review: In gThe Missionary Positionh, author Christopher Hitchens takes a critical look at Mother Teresafs devotion to the destitute of the world and the motives behind her charitable work. From Mother Teresafs overt support for the Duvalier dictatorship in Haiti to accepting stolen money from Savings and Loan swindler Charles Keating, Hitchensf portrayal of Mother Teresa is hardly saintly.

Hitchens quotes Mother Teresa as stating that git is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being helped much by the suffering of the poor people.h In her spiritual state of saintliness it is obvious that Mother Teresa doesnft concern herself with such social reform works as job-creation, low-income housing and social welfare.

Rational and secular, gThe Missionary Positionh reveals the real motivations of Mother Teresa - proselytizing for the most extreme interpretation of Catholic dogma – and her lucrative alliances with the orthodox and conservative powers of most countries her mission operates in. A must read for anyone pondering the role of religion in secular and societal affairs.

Rating:
Summary: EXTRA: Human Institution Imperfect
Review:

Rating:
Summary: A disturbing exploration of the facts behind the legend
Review: THE MISSIONARY POSITION is the ideal book for our times. Highly cynical and uncompromising, Christopher Hitchens has written the ultimate in hero-deflation, reminding us that nothing is ever as good as it seems.

Hitchens does not set out to destroy Mother Teresa; this is not simply an unfocused rant. Rather, by focusing on the words and actions of Mother Teresa, instead of her reputation, Hitchens has written a highly enlightening and engrossing treatise on the myths, the suspicions, the problems, and the downright lies that have been perpetrated both by Mother Teresa and those acting on her behalf.

The question must be asked, however; Is this simply propaganda? Can it be lumped into the many books Hitchens lists that are written in exalted praise of her devotion and charity? Well, of course it is. All books are propaganda to some extent, in that they espouse a particular point of view. Should that be used to dispose of Hitchens' research, as some other AMAZON critics have suggested? Hardly.

Of the many anecdotes Hitchens relates (both his own personal experiences and those of people who have worked alongside Mother Teresa), possibly the most startling is Mother Teresa's intervention into the trial of Charles Keating. Keating, you may recall, is the Savings and Loans magnate who personally bilked 17,000 people out of well over $250,000,000. Mother Teresa wrote a letter to Judge Lance Ito pleading for clemency, as Keating, through his $1,000,000 donation, had proved he was a friend to the poor. Hitchens then reprints the trial prosocutor's written reply to Mother Teresa, in which he lists Keating's many atrocities, and suggests that if she really wanted to help the poor, she would return the money. Unsurprisingly, she did not.

Something is rotten in the city of Calcutta. Under the guise of charity and Christianity, Mother Teresa has overseen one of the largest charities in the world. Where does the money go? Why does she receive millions of dollars, and yet doctors are disgusted with the level of care her houses provide? Why does she advocate the barest minimum of medical care to the suffering, and yet she herself received the finest medical care available?

Hitchens provides no clear answers. Those records are unavailable. But something is wrong. Something is very, very wrong.