Mother Teresa in Theory and Practice - The Missionary Position

In discussing this book with my friends and co-workers, I found that they reacted with the same "raised-eyebrow shock" that I did. But what we also shared was the same mis-quided, media driven vision of a person that was suposedly unquestionable. After reading this book, intently I might add, I wanted answers. I want to know where all the donations to Mother Teresa's organiztion has gone because it certainly hasn't gone to the poor. I want to know why Mother Teresa has posed in pictures with the wife of a dictator, with a man claiming to have a higher spiritual consciousness than Jesus himself, and with Charles Keating, the man who financially raped so many. Her actions and her words are not congruent and I am thankful to those who look at a situation and make the hard decisions. Christopher Hitchens is intelligent and courageous for writing this book and I am now a fan. The book was well written with sources that will withstand independant scrutiny. I don't know how anyone, after reading this book, could say that Mother Teresa is a saint.

Stripping away the myths and spin perpetrated by the Catholic Church and an uncritical press, this book gives an insight into the beliefs and flawed character that was Mother Teresa. Instead of the story of a woman devoting her life to helping the dying poor in India, we hear of a woman who spent much of her time outside of the country raising funds - in some cases from some very dubious characters - and far from using this money to improve care for these desperate people, she continued to let them suffer. Much of the money given to her cause never made it to where those giving it thought it would go, instead being filtered off to fund other church activities. I wonder how those that gave money in the expectation of assisting those in desperate need, felt about their money going to bolster a group of cloistered nuns somewhere in Europe instead? Hitchens writes a great book, to the point and pertinent, in this era of instant fame and apparent almost instant sainthood. A book anyone interest in the truth should read.

It's always amazing to hear how masses and masses of people accept stories and opinions as fact without looking into the story itself or even picking up a book. Read this and then read more. Hegemony does not put out stories that does not enforce the status quo so you have to look for them.
Christopher Hitchens assembles contradictory information to Mother Teresa's saintliness and does it quickly and succinctly. You are not drowned in tons of conspiracy theories but it will open up your mind to new things.

Many people remember where they were when Mother Theresa died. I was only young at the time, but I recall my parents speaking about her and her Nobel Peace prize among other things.

Considering the incredible praise she managed in her lifetime, I am rather pleased with this "pamphlet", by Hitchens. He writes at his best here, with an unrelenting barrage of clear writing.

Some may find the topic a little much, and some may scorn Hitchens for attacking a soft target. I personally don't believe she is a soft target (dead or not), and I think her extraordinarily zealous attitude on topics such as abortion, divorce and suffering deserve to be remembered and not excused. It is worth remarking (as Hitchens does) that Mother Theresa was quite happy to discuss these views at length, and it is extraordinary that no one ever recalls some of the rather horrible things the woman said.

I would recommend this to everyone, but it would be of particular value to those passionate about debating and journalism.

Interesting, very different perspective, on this famous woman. Wish I've read this years ago.We all grew up hearing that Mother Theresa was the epitome of goodness and selflessness. Turns out there is more to the story.

Concise, powerful and (supported) argument against the teflon image of Mother Teresa held by most (including myself, prior to reading this). As some reviewers have asked, "is nothing sacred?" The answer should be absolutely - nothing should be above examination. We must not fail to critically examine Mother Teresa's life and legacy. As Hitchens notes, our reputations should be based on a truthful account of our actions - our actions should NOT be viewed through the prism of our reputations.

Worth it alone for the reprint of the letter to Mother Teresa from the prosecutor in the Keating Savings and Loan case. Mother Teresa had an agenda that was very much political - and not simply alleviating the suffering of the poor.

Challenge yourself to read it with an open mind for the facts.

Hitchins expertly chips away at the legend to expose the catholic church's lies in lionizing a woman who deserved it least. The church wanted a hero and using myths and lies elevated a self serving woman to the level of potential saint in the eyes of millions. Hypocrisy, dishonesty, and downright theft are revealed in this book as well as toadying to some of the most evil people in the world, ostensibly to help the poor, but actually to spread the influence of her order around the world.

An enormously courageous book, giving facts and figures, not just conjectures, and showing the dark side of so-called charity, vested interests and - of course - the ever-gullible public, asking for more!

What wonderful insight yet again into the fetish of religion. A powerful woman who ensured the poor were never helped out if their despair but deliberately made to suffer.
My only criticism is that the book was not long enough.

Mother Teresa is revealed as a cunning, less than holy fundraiser. She failed to ensure the comfort of those dying in pain.
She told them their pain meant that "Jesus" was "kissing them".
Surely, Jesus would have gone to the drug cupboard and administered analgesics which were well-funded by donors world-wide.
Well done, Christopher Hitchens : showing up yet another hypocrite held in world-wide esteem!

I have always liked Hitchens.. one of my fav authors... this is very fact based...and eye opening... its sad what religious people do in the name of god... Hitchens had no problem pointing that out... he is missed

At face value, this book is damning to the reputation of Mother
Teresa. And this is exactly where most reviews should end. But in my opinion, this book is well written, terse and funny. Morality has nothing to do with Christianity, and this is the sad part about religion in general. Yes, Chris Hitchens is not Mother Teresa's biggest fan, but he writes this book through facts, and and the questionable deeds of the subject herself. That's why this book has been really helpful to me. I know nothing about Mother Teresa except the saintly portraiture I see on television once in a while and sadly, on top of my patients' overhead tables who are dying or suffering from pain. She was a patient at one of the most exclusive hospital in Torrey Pines in California sometime in the early 90's. People that work there still talk about it as though they were visited by the Virgin Mary herself. But when I ask basic questions like, Why did she have to came all the way here in La Jolla, CA to ge treated? Who is she anyway? And stuff like, who paid for her treatment? I was treated like a bothersome child and at worst a heretic for asking such questions. I guess we have lost our own ability to be objective. In conclusion,I value this book for being a tool of objectivity. I should drop a start though, because it was too short.

Hitchens does a thorough analysis of Mother Theresa's operation and exposes it for what it really is: a donation collecting operation that does little if anything for the sick and dying, while lending credibility to some of societies' worst characters. It is a must read for anyone willing to look behind the "oh so caring" facade of this organized religion.

Hitchens does a thorough analysis of Mother Theresa's operation and exposes it for what it really is: a donation collecting operation that does little if anything for the sick and dying, while lending credibility to some of societies' worst characters. It is a must read for anyone willing to look behind the "oh so caring" facade of this organized religion.

What a miserable woman she was, based on this book. Allegedly so special, and apparently so successful in fund-raising, all she was really good for was attracting money for the Church. Apparently it's blessed to be poor, and beautiful to suffer, which brings you closer to Jesus.

It is noted that Mother Teresa didn't have to rely only on her own Order's ministrations when she herself needed medical attention...what does that tell you about her? And the Church is rushing her canonisation!

Revealing and startling in its lucid analysis ! Mother Theresa's adroit manipulation of the sick and the poor in aid of her own insidious agenda is a powerful spiritual emetic. It literally makes you sick !

Fascinating insight into a great modern myth from the great scalpel of reason that is the Hitch! Even if you disagree with the premise of the book, his use of prose alone is worth the price of admission!

This little book provides an "alternate view" of the life and work of Mother Teresa. The balance it provides should be shared widely among her strongest fans as part of "setting the records (factual)" straight... that is, if one can remain objective in forming a new position with regards to her life long effort to support fundamentalist, Catholic views.
An easy read!

I have mixed feelings about this book. On the one hand, many of the author's concerns about Mother Theresa appear well documented and need certainly to be rectified. For instance, he commented that Mother Theresa refused to build an elevator in a New York City building to be in compliance with legal codes for people with disabilities in order that people partake in the sufferings of Christ. She also did not give appropriate analgesics for people in severe pain, preferring instead a spiritual soothing so to speak. "Jesus is kissing your wounds" she said. Many of her workers also used blunt needles without washing them because they "didn't have the time" to clean them. When meeting with a gang leader in the Chicago inner city she preferred to give him "charity," rather than decent paying jobs as he wanted. The author also implied that Mother Theresa's workers would in a subtle, if not so subtle, way urge patients to be baptized in order to receive their care. Certainly, those and other instances that the author documents needs to be examined with scrutiny. A patient may not want to be carried up the stairs, have Jesus kiss his/her sounds, or be a recipient of charity. In that regard Mother Theresa does err in that she does not elicit input from those most affected by particular policies. in this case, those driven by Mother Theresa's interpretations of religious doctrine.

Yet, despite those criticisms, I still feel that she was extremely dedicated to the poorest of the poor, giving her almost entire life to their service. I have an image of her changing bedpans, holding hands of people till the moment of their death, giving a home for unwanted children, helping the homeless and downtrodden as much as she could, despite her limitations. She was also a strong believer in the "Paradoxical Commandments", which speak essentially about doing good, despite all the criticisms one might receive. In other words, like the rest of us, she is human and not perfect in the way she meted out what she perceived as the social gospel. But, still, being human is not excuse for some of the injustices the author documents.

What the author missed, however, and what I consider a criticism, more or less, of her is that she never really appeared to deal with the structural issues that caused homelessness or led to premature death, such as unjust economic and social arrangements that deny people their human rights, also as recently expounded upon by Pope Francis. I do not recall her ever speaking about capitalism or militarism, for example. But, one cannot do everything, so she chose to deal with the symptoms, rather than causes of social injustice, which is also a viable and worthwhile strategy. So, I admire Christopher Hitchens for his courage in taking on a cultural icon and some of his criticisms strongly suggest further scrutiny of this saintly figure. Be that as it may, I still see this saintly, but human figure, as one truly dedicated to service of the poorest of the poor. If the reader is interested, I also discussed Mother Theresa in my recent book: Human Rights and Social Justice: Social Action and Service for the Helping and Health ProfessionsHuman Rights and Social Justice: Social Action and Service for the Helping and Health Professions,

Mr Hitchens gives, in his inimitable style, an accurate, concise and clear account of a misguided catholic nun whose only aim in life was self aggrandizement and eventual canonization, whilst offering no real help, treatment or comfort to the needy.
She takes her place next to Albert Schweitzer, another dismal failure, and many other Nobel Peace prize laureates, who obtained this meaningless prize not for any achievements, peaceful or humanitarian, but only for sly politics.

I always knew all catholic zealot"s are hypocrite"s.She was one mean bitch. Anyone thinking otherwise just think of yourself dying of cancer in pain that is indescribable and a nun over you saying"now you will be closer to god"!!!!. Shows just how gullible people can be in thinking she was a saint. I hope all those people can experience becoming closer to god through" teresa"s way".

This book was delivered on time and well packaged. It is a very mind opening analysis of people who claim to be perfect, god fearing and holy being. The book shows the facts for us to make our mind.

Hero worship is always a bad idea. Mother Teresa was not – and is not – a saint, but a person like any other. She also wielded great power, and great power inevitably brings with it arrogance and mistakes. Christopher Hitchens brings his invaluable critical eye and inimitable writing style to this much-needed examination of Mother Teresa's life and work.

Intersting book. Makes you wonder how many lies that eventhough they are too impressive to be true, we still believe on, just because of the flow other's comments.

Common sense is the least common of the senses.

Somebody had to say it -- Mother Teresa was an egotist of limited intelligence who cared little for the material welfare of her charges and sucked up to the rich and powerful. The problem is that Hitchens does not say it particularly simply or well.

This is curious, since he wrote another book, Why Orwell Matters which is a paean to that writer's spare writing style. Unfortunately, Mr. Hitchens seems unable to follow Orwell's example.

Christian theology teaches that everyone is imperfect and tainted by Original Sin. All human beings are tempted by the sin of pride and other vices. Why should Mother Theresa be any different? There are indeed serious questions that were never adequately answered regarding the large sums of money at her disposal. Were they spent according to the wishes of the donors, or was much of it siphoned off to other endeavors that had little to do with assisting the hopelessly downtrodden? Did these unfortunates truly receive the best medical care possible? Is there any truth to the allegations that many of these patients were denied pain killers to supposedly prepare them spiritually for life everlasting? Why didn't Mother Theresa comprehend the cold fact that dictators and convicted criminals were giving her money stolen from other people? Would trained certified public accountants have found many abuses and squandering of funds? Alas, often even well meaning people unwittingly waste the resources under their direct responsibility. A good heart alone is not enough when managing a large organization.
It is intellectual dishonest to ignore "The Missionary Position." Christopher Hitchens is an avowed atheist, but this shouldn't be held against him. The author's rhetoric is admittedly a bit too aggressive and borders on the abusive. Nonetheless, Hitchens has presented some strong evidence that tarnishes the hagiographic memory of the often described Saint of Calcutta. The man deserves a point by point careful rebuke and not argumentum ad hominem attacks. This relatively short book earns a place among all the other works on Mother Theresa....

I struggled with how many stars to give this book, though the decision was always between two or three stars, never any more or less. (I'd love to be able to give it 2 and a half)... I suppose that before getting into my thoughts on the book, I should preface it with how I approached the work.

I am an Orthodox Christian who is studying the differences between Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism. One of the ways that I think one can see the effects that the differences in dogma and practices have is in the differences between their saints (though Mother Teresa is not yet given the title of 'saint' in Roman Catholicism, she is clearly on the way). After all, when a Church glorifies a person with sainthood, does not this mean that that figure embodies much of what the members of that faith are struggling to become? Thus, while reading Kathryn Spink's "Mother Teresa" and the recently-released personal letters of Mother Teresa (Mother Teresa: Come Be My Light) I also picked up this little book for another viewpoint. The book, however, didn't fit my purpose. I review it, then, both for what it is and what it is not...

Firstly, I find Hitchens an interesting character who often provides sometimes very interesting insights - whether I agree with them or not - into different topics, though who sometimes lacks the ability to look at things beyond a superficial way. This latter trait often causes him to fail to understand (or maybe ever want to understand) the worldview behind one's beliefs and actions. This, I think, occurred a bit in this book.

Hitchens' anti-religion attitude soils some of the pages here. I use my language intentionally. Hitchens' atheism influences negatively what might have been a more convincing tract because it corrupts a purely reasoned-based approach. I had expected an approach aimed to convince Catholic and non-Catholic alike; the approach used, however, appears to let the author's atheism (especially early on in the book) stand up front equally with straight logic.

This influences Hitchens' writing style, as well. Even when I disagree with Hitchens, I find much of his writing very eloquent, a priceless aid when trying to convince readers. However, in certain places, Hitchens' style crosses the line from reasoned eloquence to bitter polemics. This certainly did not occur as often as it could have, but when it does occur, the result is a desire in the reader to dismiss Hitchens as being a fanatic in his own right. Though this may be unfair, Hitchens makes it too easy to do at times.

Beyond Hitchens' pure distaste for Catholicism, a certain quibble I had was that he seems not to understand both some simple and more difficult elements of RC doctrine. One or two cases of this are dismissible, as they do not altar his line of reasoning. At times, however, I think it causes his understanding to remain, as stated above, on a very superficial level. Because he did not try to understand Mother Teresa's worldview, he remained incredulous and astounded at certain quotations of hers that I found to actually speak in her favor.

Coupled with Hitchens' anti-religious views is his anti-abortion stance which again influences much of his objections to Mother Teresa. Though, like his atheist views, this is fine for some, I found that it detracted from a more convincing read. If a reader is already anti-religion and pro-abortion, there would be no need to read a book against Mother Teresa; Hitchens would have done better to focus more on the person of Mother Teresa from a more balanced standpoint.

Finally, even when ignoring all of these objections to view the book from a purely logical standpoint, certain pages of the book do contain logical fallacies which rupture the foundations of Hitchens' reasoning. A good Philosophy 101 could point out some of these fallacies without many headaches.

All this being said, Hitchens did make some valid points along the way questioning the exalted view much of the world has of Mother Teresa today. Though these views can be found in multiple other reviewers, I will say that I found this question the most interesting: How is it that, with so many donations and so much publicity, the quality of the care being given be the Missionaries of Charity did not seem to improve, much, with time? Where was the money going? This could be the result of Mother Teresa' s exalted view of suffering, but to arrive full circle, I end up looking to examples of recent Orthodox saints which took a very different approach:

Elder Paisios, for instance, was an amazing ascetic who suffered greatly from physical maladies, especially at the end of his life. However, he constantly asked God to be given the pain of those he met. He wanted to suffer for them; he didn't want them to suffer. It was his example that taught others how suffering can be transfigured and made good.

I would like to see Mother Teresa examined from a spiritual point of view, especially given her private letters which were recently published. She seemed to want to balance spirituality and humanism in a way that could not be done, so that she said many profound things and had a great and respectable personal piety even in the face of great doubt but, in her efforts to help others, she neglected the quality of care that her clinics and houses had a potential to give.

I understand much of what Hitchens was trying to do with this book, and though I can think of possible objections to many of his arguments, I think that one conclusion bears further examination: Mother Teresa is a phenomenon who may be more myth than reality. I think that there are questions which should be answered. Ultimately, however, a more balanced approach is needed. Unfortunately, I am afraid that Hitchens' own agenda mars much of his judgment.

Reading this on my Kindle, I was surprised it ended so suddenly. I wanted more. Subsequent events since this appeared in 1995 show that Mother Teresa is on the fast track to canonization after her 1997 death led to her 2003 beatification. In retrospect, the furor over Christopher Hitchens' little book reveals a more-carefully considered study of her media impact and the finagling of her financial empire behind a sort of calculated willful ignorance. He starts each section with apt and clever quotations from earlier skeptics and in tying the Albanian woman to cronies as far-flung and as dreadfully connected to filthy lucre such as Duvaliers in Haiti, Hitchens makes the case with wit but also sorrow that so many of us fell for this.

The money amassed by the millions, the donations to her by Charles Keating of some of the $250+ million he gained by fraud and deceit, and the destitution in which both the Sisters of her Missionaries of Charity and those whom they care for are skillfully narrated and analyzed by Hitchens. As in much of his journalism, he can show signs of too brisk or showy a dash over territory that requires slow navigation. The Albanian context examined late on saps the momentum of his earlier chapters, although his interest in the Balkans surely contributed to his decision to cover this.

His moral is simple. “The rich world likes and wishes to believe that someone, somewhere, is doing something for the Third World. For this reason, it does not inquire too closely into the motives or practices of anyone who fulfills, however vicariously, this mandate.” We shift a guilty conscience to the admittedly devoted Missionaries of her Order, he suggests, and we let them and its idolized founder act in the name of an apostolate that, however well intended, manipulates the poor to score points against contraception and abortion but neglects any critique of overpopulation. Poverty rather than fought against is embraced. While the Sisters may accept this, their patients, Hitchens reasons, may not.

After all, as a noted atheist, Hitchens has the advantage of standing apart from such as Malcolm Muggeridge, a journalist predecessor who was taken in by her glow, attributing a miracle not to Kodak film stock but to Mother Teresa's intervention while she was alive to illuminate an interior. Against such shenanigans. a rationalist like Hitchens offers a counter-argument, lest the credulous trust too much in clerical leaders like her.

“It is often said, inside the Church and out of it, that there is something grotesque about lectures on the sexual life when delivered by those who have shunned it. Given the way that the Church forbids women to preach, this point is usually made about men. But given how much this Church allows the fanatical Mother Teresa to preach, it might be added that the call to go forth and multiply, and to take no thought for the morrow, sounds grotesque when uttered by an elderly virgin whose chief claim to reverence is that she ministers to the inevitable losers in this very lottery.”

While some of this spirited polemic rushes by too rapidly, Hitchens provides a look at what is necessary. Believers in this mission may cringe or carp. But a service, however cattily aimed at generating controversy from the title on, is rendered. The faithful need to heed views of such skeptics.

Purchased because book club was reading it. Language and approch extremely biased although issues raised were thought provoking and important. The book would be difficult to understand if you were not familiar with christian terminology and church history and you did not have a vast general vocabulary.

I enjoy reading books that plausibly and intelligently challenge commonly held beliefs. That is why I appreciated Diane Johnstone’s “Fool’s Crusade”, which questioned the almost religiously held belief that Serbia was the principal, if not only, malefactor in the Balkan wars that led to the break-up of Yugoslavia during the 1990s. Christopher Hitchen’s book “The Missionary Position” provides a powerful challenge to another belief that began in the Balkans, the Mother Teresa phenomenon. Until I read his book, I assumed that this benefactor of the poor in Calcutta, who was born of Albanian parentage in the Macedonian city of Skopje, was a saintly character. Now, I have serious doubts.

If we can rely on Hitchen’s evidence as being largely objective, then we must begin to consider the ‘good’ Mother in rather the same light as her somewhat less sympathetic compatriot, the late Enver Hoxha who ruled Albania with a fist of iron for four decades. Both Mother Teresa and Hoxha believed that what they were doing was in order to promote the well-being of their ‘subjects’ or ‘flocks’. Hoxha’s activities were restricted to the small population of Albania, whereas Teresa’s affected not only vast number of poor people of Calcutta but also in many other places across the globe.

The main thrust of Hitchen’s argument is that Mother Teresa aimed not to help the bodies of the poor but to save their spirits, to ensure that they gained salvation after they had ended their miserable lives miserably. It seems that little she did actually made much material or physical or medical difference to the poor. Hitchens and others provide evidence that the medical care offered to those who sought her help was largely ineffective if not outdated. Krishna Dutta in “Calcutta: a cultural and literary history” (first publ. 2003) writes: “…many people who worked at Nirmal Hriday, especially foreign volunteers with medical knowledge, were dismayed by the lack of training available to the helpers… and by the lack of commitment to scientific medical treatment.” He also points out, as does Hitchens, that those who were dying were given last rites according to Roman Catholic practices regardless of their actual religion, often Hindu or Moslem. Dutta, incidentally, felt that on balance Mother Teresa was not a bad thing for Calcutta, but felt that her mission would do well by devoting itself to, “… looking after the poor as well as the dying by offering proper medical care.” The word ‘proper’ is important. Hitchens quotes evidence that helpers in the Calcutta mission were instructed to mop the foreheads of the dying as if they were actually soothing them, when in reality they were quietly baptising the sufferers before they passed away.

It would seem from Hitchen’s book that Mother Teresa’s principal aims were those of the Roman Catholic Church; proselytising, prevention of abortion, and condemnation of birth control. Whilst proselytising might not harm the poor (many low-caste Indians have benefited materially by becoming Christians), damning abortion and birth-control is unlikely to alleviate the lives of the impoverished. Hitchens emphasises that Mother Teresa’s aim was to improve the spiritual condition of those who sought her help, not their physical well-being. It is interesting that one of Teresa’s friends and admirers was India’s President Indira Gandhi during whose reign strongly encouraged sterilisation and a programme of birth-control was carried out widespread in India.

Mother Teresa was a phenomenal fund-raiser - one of the world’s best. Hitchens wonders what became of those funds, but can provide no answers. She was beloved by the rich and famous and also infamous. In the opening pages of the book, Hitchens describes how the good Mother was filmed offering respect to Michèle Duvalier the wife of Haiti’s unpleasant dictator ‘Baby Doc’ Duvalier at the occasion when she was happy to receive the Haitian award, the Lègion d’Honneur. This was soon before the Duvaliers fled to the French Riviera. This is one of several examples of Teresa’s apparent lack of discomfort with hob-nobbing with the infamous.

Hitchen’s book is well-written, concise, and seems to be based on solid sources. It is essential reading for those interested in modern India, and also of some interest to those interested in the Balkans. Sometime after Enver Hoxha died, Mother Teresa visited Tirana where she laid a wreath on the grave of her compatriot Enver Hoxha. There is no record of her having said a word against this man who tyrannised and killed many of his subjects for over 40 years.

Reviewed by author of “Scrabble with Slivovitz” and “Albania on my Mind”

Hutchins provides a blistering series of cases and proofs to go deep into the actions of Mother Teresa.
Hitchens' writing is sharp and on-target, and he certainly makes an interesting case. I also appreciated the book's short length.

Mother Teresa is about saving souls, not bodies. Her institutions are unsanitary and poorly operated despite a plethora of donations which should make better conditions affordable. Mother Teresa's statements about the godliness of poverty and suffering appear to be her justification for this.

Mother Teresa uses her influence to promote anti-birth control and anti-abortion dogmas, despite the fact that overpopulation and unwanted children are likely factors in the need for her institutions.

Mother Teresa is associated with all kinds of dubious individuals, from Robert Maxwell to Michele Duvalier to Charles Keating. She actually tried to advocate for the latter as he was being prosecuted for fraud; when Keating's prosecutor informed Mother Teresa of Keating's activities and encouraged her to return the funds he donated to her cause so that these funds could then be returned to the defrauded individuals, Mother Teresa never responded.

Mother Teresa and the West feed off each other. The West feels a need to believe they are helping the poor of the East; Mother Teresa publicly fills that need for them independent of the degree of help she is actually contributing.

The great polemicist Christopher Hitchens turns his attention to Agnes Bojaxhiu, aka Mother Teresa, in this searing look into her work that is universally accepted as humanitarian and above reproach. Hitchens presents an image of Teresa that is highly critical of her reputation in this brilliantly argued book on her life's work.

Hitchens recounts Teresa's relationships with known dictators such as the Haitian dictator Jean-Claude Duvalier and his wife Michele who all but bankrupted their country and fled to France. Teresa, despite supposedly caring for the poor, does little for them - she demands that they accept their lot and live with poverty rather than try to help them escape it. This is a woman whose fame rests upon her help with the poor, and yet she failed to use her power and influence to alleviate their suffering by encouraging the many world leaders she met to work on this issue.

But she's not political! you say, as she claimed many times herself. And yet she often involved herself in politics, especially when it came to the subject of abortion. She travelled to Spain to protest when post-Franco legislation was to be passed regarding the legalisation of divorce, abortion, and birth control, and even spoke to Margaret Thatcher about passing a bill that was in the House of Commons that wanted to limit the availability of abortions.

Teresa was a fond one for abortion (despite being a virgin and not knowing anything about what it's like to give birth, and sex, besides the end product) and made it the subject of her speech when she won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979 (a win that remains questionable as to what she actually contributed to world peace or peace in any single country), claiming that abortion was the biggest threat to mankind.

Maybe the biggest criticism of Mother Teresa above all is the way she and her order withheld painkillers from the very sick and dying. In a filmed interview, she recounted an exchange she had with a cancer patient who was dying, who she refused to give painkillers to, where she said "You are suffering like Christ on the cross. So Jesus must be kissing you", to which the person replied "Then please tell him to stop kissing me". Teresa, it seems, was unaware of the irony of that comment. Also, her Homes for the Dying are run by nuns who aren't medically trained or know anything about palliative care, or even basic hygiene as they wash medical equipment in cold tapwater rather than sterilise them!

Hitchens also raises the question of what Teresa did with the millions she received in donations. There will never be an audit because it's the Catholic Church but given the basic requirements of her homes, it seems likely that a lot of it didn't go into helping the poor. And a lot of the donations came from questionable sources like Charles Keating, a fraud who was imprisoned for 10 years for his part in the Savings and Loans scandal in the early 90s. He donated $1.25 million to Mother Teresa who wrote a character reference to the judge when he was on trial. It had no effect but the co-prosecutor of the case, Paul Turley, wrote back explaining to her why he was on trial, informing her that the money she had received was stolen from ordinary, hard working people who're now poor people like the ones she tries to help, and that she should return it on basic principle. He never received a reply to his letter and the money was not refunded.

Teresa comes across as a PR tool for the Catholic Church and a political pawn, willingly used for the Church's own dogmatic ideas and as a fundraising figure. Hitchens has written a fascinating book in "The Missionary Position" which rightly questions a person long held to be untouchable because of her work and yet whose actions remain highly dubious and contradictory. "The Missionary Position" is a highly recommended and thought-provoking read.

Also worth checking out is Hitchen's documentary on Mother Teresa, Hell's Angel. The first half of this book is basically a retelling of the documentary. It's available for free on Youtube.

Christopher Eric Hitchens (1949-2011) was a British-America author and journalist, who wrote other books such as God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything,The Portable Atheist: Essential Readings for the Nonbeliever, etc.

He wrote in the Foreword to this 1995 book, "Who would be so base as to pick on a wizened, shriveled old lady, well stricken in years, who has consecrated her entire life to the needy and destitute? On the other hand, who would be so incurious as to leave unexamined the influence and motives of a women who once boasted of operating more than five hundred convents in upwards of 105 countries---'without counting India'? Lone self-sacrificing zealot, or chair of a missionary multinational?... It still seems astonishing to me that nobody had ever before decided to look at the saint of Calcutta as if, possibly, the supernatural had nothing to do with it." (Pg. xi) He adds, "If the baffled and fearful prehistory of our species ever comes to an end, and if we ever get off our knees and cull those blooms, there will be no need for smoking altars and forbidding temples with which to honor the freethinking humanists, who scorned to use the fear of death to coerce and flatter the poor." (Pg. xiii)

Commenting on her acceptance of a $10,000 check from John-Roger (i.e., Roger Delano Hinkins, founder of the Movement of Spiritual Inner Awareness [MSIA]), he says, "No doubt Mother Teresa's apologists will have their defence close at hand. Their heroine is too innocent to detect dishonesty in others. And $10,000 is $10,000... So what is more natural than that she should quit Calcutta once more, journey to tinseltown and share her aura with a guru claiming to outrank the Redeemer himself. We will discover Mother Teresa keeping company with several other frauds, crooks and exploiters as this little tale unfolds. At what point... does such association cease to be coincidental?" (Pg. 7-8)

He observes that in the film 'Something Beautiful for God,' "Mother Teresa spoiled her own best moment for me by implying that her life's work was a mere exercise in propaganda for the Vatican's population policy, she cheapens her own example by telling us... that humanism and altruism are 'dangers' to be sedulously avoided. Mother Teresa has never pretended that her work is anything but a fundamentalist religious campaign... the 'poorest of the poor' are the instruments of this; an occasion for piety." (Pg. 31-32)

He quotes a visitor to one of her hospitals, "No chairs anywhere, there were just these stretcher beds... There's no garden, no year even. No nothing... This is two rooms with fifty to sixty men in one, fifty to sixty women in another, They're dying. They're not being given a great deal of medical care. They're not being given painkillers really beyond aspirin... for the sort of pain that goes with terminal cancer and the things they were dying of... They didn't have enough drips. The needles they used and re-used over and over..." (Pg. 39-40)

He observes, "At a vast open-air mass in Knock, Ireland, in 1992, Mother Teresa made it plain yet again that there is no connection at all in her mind between the conditions of poverty and misery that she 'combats' and the inability of the very poor to reach the plateau on which limitation of family size becomes a rational choice." (Pg. 58) He argues, "when Mother Teresa is choosing to speak on matters such as sexuality and reproduction... she must necessarily admit to being disqualified by inexperience." (Pg. 66)

When a Deputy District Attorney objected to Mother Teresa's plea to the judge over Charles Keating (of the 1980s savings and loan scandal infamy) for clemency (Keating, a staunch Catholic, had donated money to her cause), Hitchens charges, "This is by no means the only example of Mother Teresa's surreptitious attitude to money, nor of her hypocritical protestations about the beauty of poverty, whether self-imposed or otherwise... in her transactions with power, Mother Teresa reigns in a kingdom that is very much of this world." (Pg. 68-71)

He concludes, "There is no conceit equal to false modesty, and there is no politics like antipolitics, just as there is no worldliness to compare with ostentatious antimaterialism." (Pg. 86) He adds, "Her success is not... a triumph of humility and simplicity. It is another chapter in a millennial story which stretches back to the superstitious childhood of our species, and which depends on the exploitation of the simple and the humble by the cunning and teh single-minded." (Pg. 98)

No one---including "saints"---is immune from criticism. And Hitchens does make some valid points against Mother Teresa and her work. But to me, his unrelentingly negative slant on every issue becomes wearisome, and ultimately detracts from the effectiveness of the case he is trying to make against a woman who was genuinely revered by the thousands whom she helped, during her life.

One reviewer described this book as a 'little cruise missile', and I have to say that I agree totally with that description. Hitchens has given the clear documented evidence to discredit Mother Theresa, the Catholic Church and the nuns in the Missionaries of Charity order. He was appointed by the head of the Catholic church to play devils advocate at the proposed canonisation of Mother Theresa, and this tells us that his opinions were well respected in this area. The book is short, well written and the facts are backed up with documentation, letters and personal anecdotes by people who were working for her or had contact with the charity. The misuse of charity funds is shocking and corrupt but should not really be a big surprise to anyone who has studied the financial dealing of the Vatican. However, more shocking to me is the mistreatment of sick and dying people in the care of these missionary workers which continues in this present time. No medical treatment, no painkillers, no dignity, not even clean needles or nappies for orphaned babies who are kept in filthy conditions till they die, from an organisation which has collected million in donations over the years and now needs to be taken to task regarding the lack of distribution of these millions even for basic human needs for poor dying people.

This book is a must read, and especially for anyone who has ever given money to religious charities thinking they were helping the poor. Please think again.

My head just exploded.................Wow! What were those biases keeping me from seeing reality once again? How did I manage to keep Mother Teresa in a separate category from Falwell, Bakker, and Oral Roberts so long? Was it it because she was a woman? a Catholic? What?! I get the duality of human nature and still............Ouch!
Hitchens always backs up his work and does so once again. As usual, his claims are evidence based and he uses the letters from Mother Teresa herself and a response from a Deputy District Attorney from Los Angeles, Paul Turley, to tell the story. When Charles Keating was up for sentencing for his financial crime, Mother Teresa wrote a letter to Judge Ito asking for justice and mercy for this man who had stolen millions from others, and given quite a bit to her through the Missionaries of Charity. DDA Turley wrote to her asking what she thought Jesus would do in the given circumstances. Turley suggested she could help Keating make reparation by returning the stolen money he had given her to the people from who Keating stole it. She made no response and no transfer of funds.

On a second point, Hitchens stated in a recent interview that there is one known answer to poverty, one and only one solution that has worked wherever and whenever it has been tried, in a variety of different cultures and circumstances. That solution is addressing issues of women's health and reproductive rights. Mother Teresa has throughout her life, preached against women's rights to use birth control. These are only two of the points Hitchens makes in The Missionary Position.

Read it and weep.

An excellent book exposing Mother Teresa's not-so-holy actions.

Mother Teresa's work is nothing but a fundamentalist religious campaign at the expense of the poor. She is one of the few untouchables in the mental universe of the mediocre and the credulous. However, the naive and simple are seldom as naive and simple as they seem.

Mother Teresa's global income is more than enough to create several first-class clinics in the third world. Instead, she creates shanty clinics that provide inadequate care. In one instance, a fifteen year old boy was diagnosed with a liver disorder. The disease could be cured with antibiotics, but with Mother not approving of the boy visiting the hospital, he did not receive treatment and eventually died.

Another instance appears closer to home, when Mother built a night shelter in the Bronx. She refused to add an elevator for the handicapped. The city offered to pay for the elevator, again, Mother declined, which resulted in the project becoming abandoned.

Mother also taught the Sisters how to secretly baptize the ill on their deathbed. Secrecy was key, as Sisters were baptizing Hindus and Muslims.

During a visit to Washington D.C., Mother declared that although, "God could find it in his heart to forgive all sinners, she herself would never allow a woman or a couple who had an abortion to later adopt one of 'her' babies."
Why?
"Children born with appalling deformities and in overcrowded homes have been known to defy all odds and become exemplary...or merely human."
It is true that in rare circumstances, these people may beat the odds. But that's the reason why there are "odds" associated with deformities and overcrowding. The majority of these people become a statistic in regards to psychological and lifestyle hardships when born into unfavorable conditions.

Mother Teresa speaks out against population control through contraceptives in third world countries. People are suffering. These same people become pregnant and bring a child into a volatile situation, where the adults can barely support and protect themselves, much less a new dependent.
Millions of children are dying of malnutrition and pestilence. How does one justify allowing another human to suffer and die while resources are available to prevent the pregnancy in the first place?

Lastly, Mother Teresa's charity received large donations from Charles Keating, who was convicted of defrauding $252,000,000 from several thousand investors of his company. Mother Teresa wrote a letter to the judge on Keating's behalf. After the conviction, the prosecutor wrote to Mother Teresa, kindly asking her to return the money donated by Keating to its rightful owners. The prosecutor suggested to imagine what Jesus would do if he were in possession of stolen money.

Years later, Mother Teresa has yet to respond to the letter.

To close with a quote from Hitchens:
"Religion is a means of marketing hope, of instilling ethical precepts on the cheap. "

"There is always the DANGER that we may become ONLY SOCIAL WORKERS or just do the work FOR THE SAKE OF THE WORK. IT IS A DANGER. If we forget to whom we are going it. Our works are only an expression of our love for Christ. Our hearts need to be full of love for him, and since we have to express that love in action, naturally then the poorest of the poor are the means of expressing our love for God."

"I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people."

"See, this is how we fight abortion and contraception."

All three quotations are from Mother Teresa.

I really like that book wasnt only Hitchens critique, but also include critique from several people who works for her organisation (appreciate testimony of Susan Shields), editor of The Lancet (medical journal) and even testimony of some people who was treated by her and dont want to get back to her "charity," because lack of medical treatment, painkillers and of course - social life.

The book also contains the alternative explanation of "the miracle" by author (cameraman) Ken Macmillan. It was simply new product of Kodak, not God, who makes interior look bright.

Hitchens also participate on the documentary about her named Hell's Angel, which Agnes (according to her own words) didnt see, but she forgave him.

Would Jesus do that? Maybe. But i dont see any evidence that Jesus baptised people who dont want to be baptised, like Mother Teresa and her sisters did...