Mother Teresa...

Just curious - I hadn't read anything on that yet.

I don't have all the details, but he wrote a whole book attempting to shred her reputation to pieces.

painkillers to people dying, took money from Charles Keating

Hell, doubt she's a saint, but I read everything by Snitch with a great deal of skepticism. She probably was a backwards woman who thought she was doing good--saint, hardly.

is an asshole. Simply put, allowing that man to say the shit he says is the worst thing England has done next to their oppression of the Irish Catholics.

Amen to that but they didnt only oppress the Irish Catholics.

about the care of the dying, yet he is an expert on giving pain killers to those near death - given the loss of feelings of pain that the very near death often experience, perhaps Snitch is wrong?

And she accepted a donation from a Catholic lay person. Snitch - who has sucked on the teat of evil for years, finds this bad.

Please - Snitch is sick - and needs our prayers.

:-)

In many ways, she was backwards, inflexible, ignorant, neurotic, but she was also dedicated, committed, and inspired millions of people to follow the SPIRIT of her work, which is to see the divine in everything, and to do for the most humble what you would do for the most exalted.

She is not being made a saint because of her failings, but because of the miracle of so many people being inspired by her more than they are inspired by greed.

It completely cracked me up.

IMO the Atheist Centre has done far more for the poor of India than she ever did.
http://www.ibka.org/en/articles/ag02/ratna.html

Maybe she didn't perform miracles, but she walked the walk in terms of leading a Christian life. Though the Catholic Church (which I'm a member of) might be out of it by believing in miracles and all that, this woman brought a lot of credibility to Catholicism after the Church kept its mouth shut on the Holocaust and other atrocities. She should be beatified simply for being the greatest Catholic in our church's long history.

...she has inspired countless people to try and do good, however they define it.

She was a supporter of the Contras during the 80s.

for the poor of Calcutta than anything the witch ever did!

Go ahead, we're waiting. :eyes:

In the meantime, why not recognize the good that she did do, consistent with her beliefs and faith.

see my post below.

But we can see the good AND criticize the bad. Alas, when we do so, we're immediately charged with "catholic-bashing".

I agree a handful of people here go over the top on their attacks on the Pope or MT. But a much larger group of us don't engage in that kind of vitriol, and still oppose the actions of the Church leadership.

the Catholic church is one of the major forces for conservatism in the world. Its role in the oppression of women and gays cannot be ignored, nor can the results of its backwards position on family planning.

I applaud the work the church does to feed and house the poor. I wish it would focus more of its energies on addressing the root causes of poverty, though - one of the biggest being lack of family planning.

They try to teach w/in the boundaries of the religion Natural Family Planning. When it comes down to it, each time you have sex you sort of have to be ready for any possiblity since nothing is 100%.

And maybe there'd be less poor people if condoms and other birth control was used, but they focus on getting them food, shelter, jobs, counseling and the sex part goes back to your own beliefs and it's sort of taboo in the Church to talk about. Which I don't think it should be.

and I refer to the Catholic catechism often. I'm familiar with their positions.

I think the church is wrong. Dead wrong. Dangerously wrong. The Bible says nothing about family planning. It says nothing about birth control. It says nothing about abortion. These positions are POLITICAL positions taken by the church, and are subject to change if only a Pope would realize that PREVENTING suffering is better than TREATING suffering.

I don't buy it. She held women back and was party to denying them their rights as humanbeings.

So by being pro-life she held women back? This is your argument?

Have youthought about the fact that she showed that a WOMAN in a faith dominated by men could take the spot light off all the church 'leaders' and made nuns shine like never before?

Is this crap really what feminism has become? It loosk to me like you are anti-women. This idea that YOU know best and that any woman that thinks different is bad. Pathetic.

Good one.

The Hindi culture is every bit as opposed to birth-control as was MT; condoms are available in India (free in most instances), but it's about like selling ice cream to Eskimos.

Sorry to burst your bubble...

"I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people."- "Mother" Teresa

its Saints, its whatevers.
Posts like this become incendiary and are not conducive to anybody's changing his/her mind or learning anything constructive. Instead, it leads to people insulting each other and... well, I take it back. I have learned some juicy epithets that have been hurled at posters in previous religious-oriented threads.

The deed is done. But so far, no one has hurled an epithet at anyone but the British and Mother Teresa.

I'll try to explain my feelings here cogently, and hope nobody takes it as "catholic-bashing".

MT acted on her faith. She DID in fact provide comfort and solace to thousands of dying people. That is a beautiful thing in and of itself. I, too, have sat with the dying and it's difficult, and beautiful, and transforming.

The problem, though, with MT (IMHO) is that she didn't believe the suffering of her charges was bad. She believed that suffering was the "kiss of jesus" and did precious little to alleviate the suffering. She didn't provide painkillers or other possibly life-saving medicines. She raised millions that could've been used toward providing medicines or hospitals, but instead she focused only on providing places for the dying to go.

I disagree with her vehemently on this issue. Morphine is a blessing - suffering is not. while I believe she acted fully in accordance with her faith, her faith was misplaced. The idea that God WANTS us to suffer is an abomination, imo.

How many people in her care died of dysentery, or cholera, or other treatable diseases? How many suffered in great pain needlessly? How many devout Hindus or Moslems received extreme unction against their wills?

That being said, I know many of these people would've died anyway. I don't fault MT for doing what little she did to help, but I would've much preferred she used her fame and money to actually ALLEVIATE the suffering of these people, rather than celebrate it.

It's so funny to hear some of these posts b/c people have such strong opinions, but before you bash someones reputation like Mother Teresa what have you done for your community? When was the last time you helped someone you didn't know, compare that to how many people she helped?

but that's akin to saying we can't "bash" any Republican office-holders because we didn't run for public office ourselves.

She was a public figure. There's nothing wrong with examining and discussing the TOTALITY of her works, giving credit where it's due, and pointing out the areas in which she fell short.

Many of us do the same thing with Nelson Mandela, Mohandas Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr., FDR, etc. etc.

Being a religious figure should not exempt someone from the same scrutiny.

Being a religious figure should not exempt someone from the same scrutiny.

If she is to be held up to scrutiny, at least examine her within the structure of her beliefs. As a devout Catholic, she would no more counsel birth control than she would support abortion or the death penalty. Significantly, it was pointed out (by SOteric in this thread --> http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=105&topic_id=297800#299146 ) that the people she served did not consider birth control an option either, for both religious and economic reasons.

If the poorest people of India (or anywhere) need to be educated on the benefits of birth control, that can be left to many secular relief NGOs and other agencies.

Now - withholding pain relief? Medicine? I think these are open areas of discussion since the RCC does not proscribe against these...

"There's nothing wrong with examining and discussing..." I agree, but come on when there's a good role model in the world why tear her down? When the kids in the world think a gangster that smokes weed and sings about guns, or a woman that sings about how many guys she's going to use for them to buy stuff for her ARE their role models. A man that cheats on his wife is acceptable and all of them are still role models? Why? Why can't people just have a little respect for the good role models like Mother Teresa?

Before complaining and discussing where Mother Teresa falls short of being human, why not go out and try to be a little more giving? Not all of us are supposed be politicians or know the first thing about the parties in the US, but EVERYONE has the ability to give back to the community, help the elderly and spend time with those less fortunate.

It just feels like she's being written off like some criminal or something.

but again, she's one of the most famous women in the world, and her beatification this week puts her in the news, and therefore, we're discussing her.

I have repeatedly said she acted in good faith. But I also believe the Taliban acted in good faith, and Christian evangelicals are acting in good faith when they protest abortion clinics. Southern Baptists are acting in good faith when they say women should "submit" to their husbands. African muslims are acting in good faith when they stone adulterers or circumcize young girls.

This is why it's difficult to argue about religion. The people involved are doing exactly what they think their god wants them to do. I just don't see how NOT talking about these things because they're faith-based is helpful. It's like the lousy bumpersticker that says "God said it, I believe it, end of story." It simply shuts down useful communication.

Religious forces of ALL types are among the most powerful forces in the world keeping down the poor, women and minorities. These ARE political topics. I truly understand that people get offended when it's THEIR religion being discussed, but I wish they'd not be so easily offended.

questioning Mother Teresa's life is no more catholic-bashing than criticizing Ayatollah Khomeini is muslim-bashing. I'm not saying those two people are equal in their virtues or vices - I'm simply saying that discussing one Catholic in less-than-positive light is NOT bashing of the entire religion, as so many here seem to believe.

Admit it, what we know about Mother Teresa is from the news, which is hardly always trustworthy. She had a reputation for doing good, butonce someone has a reputation, it's hard to distinguish fact from PR.

An example--most people believe Barbara Bush is a nice old lday--she's worked the press for years and people just have that impression.

In reality, she a spiteful, vindictive bitch, and that's where Dumbo gets his short fuse.

My concern about Mother teresa is that NO ONE lined the streets for her funeral in Calcutta--they didn't even know who she was--she had the reputation outside of India, not inside. Makes me a little skeptical of what actual good she did, or whether she was more concerned with PR.

Join in--give me concrete examples. I'd welcome them--I don't really have a strong opinion of her either way.

Are you feeling guilty about Catholic bashing? You keep saying it. I said "before you bash someones reputation" Anyways, your point can be made over and over about how this is just discussing a topic...

MY POINT:
BEFORE CONDEMNING SOMEONE TRY TO GO OUT AND DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.

Like in the other post below ours..stop bitching. IF anyone wants to help solve these world wide problems, then you should lend a hand in helping instead of complaining how evil Mother Teresa was, what is that really going to accomplish?

That's all I'm trying to say.

but it never works. People have opinions. They're free to express them.

I can understand the frustration of someone who has a high opinion of Mother Teresa, seeing her name being dragged through the mud. I'm totally agnostic about her myself. I haven't read Hitchen's book. I was not much interested in her when she was alive except as a cultural curiosity and icon of charitableness. She was never very real to me. But I can sort of imagine what it must feel like for defenders of Mother Teresa because I used to be almost a knee-jerk defender of Bill Clinton and Al Gore. I didn't believe either one was a saint, but I could barely stop myself from engaging with people who were having too much fun slicing them down to size.

But in the end what's best for society? People who gripe about those who try, or those who see flaws in current solutions and go out and try to improve upon it.

If we as a people start accepting attacks on those trying to make the world a better place, we must also accept the FACT that we are discouraging others from trying.

You are trying SO HARD to be sensible and fair and reasonable, even when it appears to be so hopeless!

like it is a bad thing. I do it, am I bad person? Well I guess so because I don't feel that anybody, even Teresa is above critism. I do good things in my life and smoke weed at the same time believe it or not, I don't rap about shooting up a neighborhood or whatever misconception you have. I just think NO ONE is above critism and to dismiss critism of her by comparing her to the Manson family is not going to convince me.

I said ganster, smoking weed...people that are mastered by drugs and try to hook others on them thru the media by showing there "coolness" aren't the best role models for children, there's other adults in the real world that they should look up to.

Ganster, purposely trying to hurt other people is evil.

Smoking weed isn't really evil, BUT if you are mastered by it, you have to have it, it controls your life and you have show everyone you do it and put it in your songs, put it on your cloths are you really yourself or did you get over taken by the drug....that's just not a good habit is it? Not that great when you look about it that way is it? I mean smoking in general does hurt your body, so compare a person smoking weed that's fine and a person who gave her life to help people and teach others to help people that shows goodness and that's more what our children should look up to.

We can talk all we want about good and bad and evil, but who's out there trying to help people? I try to help my community, I try to find the time, I try and that's all I can do b/c I don't have the resource of time I am just trying to get by myself. But at least I try to get involved and don't just sit back and complain.

most rappers with big name record labels aren't supposed to rap about weed or guns which is why they end up rapping about jewelry and sleeping with multiple women which is unmoral in your book but not illegal.

Marijuana is not addicting which is a very common myth, people may enjoy the high but they can quit easily if they tried. I didn't say it wasn't evil I said it wasn't bad. It doesn't kill, harm, or injure anyone in any way but if that isn't your taste then don't do it. I personally find nothing wrong with it on clothes, I see Marboro and Budweiser shirts all the time and quit with role models. It's the parents that really have a much more influence on the kids life more then a rapper ever could hope to be. It's a rappers right to sing about whatever he wants to and shouldn't expect people to harp about how he is a bad role model, 6 year old kids are likely not his target audience. Who said I didn't try to do any good? I don't know enough about Teresa to complain but you are not going to make your point by saying what are you doing? I can't stand conservatives telling me what would I do when I complain about Bush's handling of Post War Iraq, he is the fucking(oops!) President.

"aren't supposed to rap about weed or guns "
- Nothing has changed, they do but not in a good way.

"rapping about jewelry and sleeping with multiple women which is unmoral in your book but not illegal"
- You don't know what's immoral in my book.

"Marijuana is not addicting which is a very common myth"
-Didn't say it was, I said if you are mastered/controlled by a drug and it's your life then it's not really the best thing for a role model to portray to others, the whole "coolness" factor comes in and children want to be like that.

"It's the parents that really have a much more influence on the kids life more then a rapper ever could hope to be."
-This could be argued, you don't dress like your parents growing up, you dress like your role models, celebrities, icons..who you like. You listen to music you like not your parents...etc

"It's a rappers right to sing about whatever he wants to and shouldn't expect people to harp about how he is a bad role model, 6 year old kids are likely not his target audience."
-Just like Mother Teresa a public figure, a role model, once you are in the public you have somewhat of a responsibility to be responsible, to be good, to open people's eyes to the problems and help with the solutions. Ok and to be critized, but I'll keep asking people what are you doing to help b/c poverty, world hunger it needs to be solved, we all have enough money and food collectively to take care of everyone. So everyone has a responsibility to help each other and look out for each other, you don't have to care, but the only way to solve these problems is helping ... not backing away and thinking you have no affect on anything b/c you do.

You hate when repugs complain when you have an opinion on Bush? Me too, but once again what are you doing about it?

Are you protesting about the war?
Are you sending letters to government?
Are you signing petitions?
...

Are you trying to get your opinion across to solve the problem, if you are great, complain all you want. But if you haven't done any of these things then why complain about the way Bush handles the war you aren't helping find a solution, are you? You would just be considered a complainer.

Got it, my point? If you sit on you* butt and complain about everyone else trying to solve the problems, you may affect other people's thinking that it's ok to complain without trying to help.

*when I say the word you, not you specifically if you didn't notice, people in general doing these actions

The big labels such as Bad Boy don't allow rappers to rap about weed and guns, I challenge you to find one rapper who is under that label to do that. Plus rappers can rap about weed all they want, it is their right.

-This could be argued, you don't dress like your parents growing up, you dress like your role models, celebrities, icons..who you like. You listen to music you like not your parents...etc

So? That is trends kids go through like yo-yo's and skateboarding but a parent has much more influence on a kid's life then ANY public figure. A public figure will have somewhat of an influence but Parents are the ones that told a kid what to do or not to do since he/she was born.

once you are in the public you have somewhat of a responsibility to be responsible, to be good, to open people's eyes to the problems and help with the solutions.

No public figures don't have a responsibility to apear like an angel to the public. I haven't critized Mother Teresa but please, can't people critize her without donating to the United Way or whatever? Do you have to be a Priest to critize the pope? Do you have to be an elected official to critize the President? Do you have to be a teacher to critize another teacher's teaching methods.

I give up, you have the right to ignor the problems of the world so it makes it ok to ignor them.

Damn.

But my point, why do you have to be a saint in order to critize a saint. There are obviously people who do live in India who don't like her, but I am sure there are people in India that do like her, I don't know enough to critize her which I AM NOT. By the way I give away old clothes, donate canned food, and do other things, they are problems and would like to something about it like you can't even imagine. But don't prove your point by comparing Teresa to child rapists.

You have every right to critize and I have every right to defend her reputation. Why complain, if you can do something about the problem? Why not turn the complaining into something positive to help others?

Oh well I get it, who wants to help others when everyone has the right not to?

either. I am only complaining that whenever someone critizes her you just say 'What have you done?' my point is you don't have to be in her shoes to critize her.

Let's all praise those that do nothing but attack those the try. I'm sure this way of thinking will be great for society!

while fetishizing the suffering of the dying, so I guess you're right...I never have walked a mile in that witch's shoes.

what you relaly mean is that you haven't don't shit for others but enjoying bitching about those who do.

thanks for sharing.

How else would you know what I have or haven't done?

Thanks for reading.

:eyes:

that is truly stunning. Thanks anyway

What did you do for the poor of calcutta? anything? anything at all?

quit yer bitchin and do something first

Is that seriously a legitimate requisite for a person to criticize Mother Teresa? It sounds more like an appeal to emotion to me.

Cold discussions of theories that may or may not work changes nothing. Outrage and love change EVERYTHING.

I distrust anyone that uses the 'take emotion out of it' argument.

unless you want more heat than light.

The we hate MT crowds almighty argument? There attempts to deny she ever did anything even though all evidence barring those from fellow religion haters points otherwise?

Let's face it the entire 'hate MT' crowd is making emotion based arguments. They seek to discredit her work because they hate the church.

but I haven't read his book. Have you?

but people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones and such. One book lays claim to this evil reputation for her, and the man is one who has other very conservative and whacky beliefs.

The comments made by the poster I was replying to are disgusting, nearly no matter whom the topic of conversation is...let alone someone who has done much good in the world.

I personally could care less about MT, but to see someone who did many good works attacked so stupidly and disgustingly makes me sick

He wrote about a dozen words. Mother and Teresa weren't among them. I'm guessing you're carrying an argument started elsewhere over to here. It sounds like it's gotten sort of personal, so I'll just back out quietly.

I'm not carrying this on from anywhere else. no personal involved, but when someone acts so boorishly there isn't much to be said about half-truths and opinions. so...

as for the other he says "the witch" in a thread about Mother Teresa...I don't think he's talking about Laura Bush

Not wanting to get into anything with you, but I'm kind of fond of Mitchum, and I don't understand your visceral reaction to him and global dismissal of him because he called Mother Teresa a witch. He could have used much stronger language. That's all I hope to say on the subject. I'm sorry you were offended, but I don't understand the reaction.

and I am generally fond of mitchum as well. The post wasn't so much directed at them specifically as the general attitude towards her and Catholics I see on the board. That just happened to be one last straw of annoyance. It was not just the witch comment, the rest of his posts were similarly gross.

People can say whatever they wish, but if they're rude or obnoxious I also have the right of free expression to call them on it, no? It's their opinion and they're rntitled to it, but there are slightly more civilized and less rude ways of saying things.

:shrug:

I could very well be guilty of being a caustic and flippant jackass, but I have never engaged in wholesale Catholic-bashing on this board (or anywhere else). "Witch" was harsh (and completely unnecessary), but I have only made two posts about MT and my conclusions were merely my opinions

which is why the comments seemed so odd coming from you. my response were the product of reading straight through several other nasty threads about catholics and MT, and that was the final straw. I apologize for jumping on you more than was necessary.

Peace

:shrug:

as in 100% good. We all have good and bad.

MT was a very complex person. That she wanted to spend time with the homeless and dying is highly admirable. Not something I could do day in and day out. So my props to her on that. And she did follow what she understood to be the tenets of her faith.

Was she a little too much in love with the idea of suffering as a way to enlightenment? Even to the point of suffering for suffering's sake? Perhaps.

Nevertheless, it's right that the CC pay homage to her for following their doctrines so faithfully.

Hot breath : An Indian activist of the Science and Rationalists' Association of India performs a fire-breathing act as she demonstrates against claims that Mother Teresa performed a miracle in Calcutta. (AFP/Deshakalyan Chowdhury)

Oh sorry she already rained on Mother Teresa's testimonial once huh?

... that everyone gets a vote, but I doubt that 1:10 could name the requirements for sainthood in the RCC. :eyes:

and I admire her devotion to society's outcasts.

I also think her mind was trapped within the confines of a religion which refuses to evolve. As a result, she's at least partially responsible for the spread of STDs and overpopulation by not encouraging people to use condoms and birth control.

She lived her life as capably as she could, and was an excellent Roman Catholic in the orthodox sense of the religion.
But she was human just like the rest of us.

I think JPII is taking a cue from Dumbya's camp by creating a saint who lived within our lifetime to take public focus off the recent scandals that have erupted from the church.

but I don't think her beatification is political. It's been discussed dating back to when she was still alive, she's just now becoming eligible and they've decided to do it.

Padraig18, since you complain that "non-Catholics" don't know what it takes to be declared a Catholic saint, would you explain what it takes to be considered Christ's Vicar on earth, since it appears that the ONLY requirement is that one be the legitimate successor of Peter as the Bishop of Rome. Doesn't this mean that
1) The Catholic interpretation of Jesus' words requires you to believe that when Stephen VII was the current successor to Peter, the words of Jesus meant :
"Thou, Stephen, art the rock upon which I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."
"Stephen VII, was completely mad. He dug up a Corsican predecessor, Pope Formosus (891-6) when he had been dead for over nine months. In what came to be known as the Cadaveric Synod, he dressed the stinking corpse in full pontificals, placed him on the throne in the Lateran and proceeded to interrogate him personally. Formosus was charged with becoming pope under false pretences; he was bishop of another place, hence ineligible for Rome. According to Pope Stephen, it made all his acts invalid, especially his ordinations. A chattering teenaged deacon replied on Formosus' behalf. After being found guilty, the corpse was condemned as an antipope, stripped of all but a hair-shirt clinging to the withered flesh and, minus the two fingers with which he had given his fake apostolic blessing, was thrown into the Tiber. The body, held together by the hair-shirt like a carcass of meat, was recovered by some of Formosus' admirers and given a quiet burial. Later, it was returned to its tomb in St Peter's. Stephen himself was soon strangled.
Popes maimed and were maimed, killed and were killed. Their lives bore no resemblance to the gospels. They had more in common with modern rich kids turned hooligans and junkies who haunt beach cafés and nightclubs than with Roman pontiffs as the world now sees them. Some owed their preferment to ambitious parents, some to the sword, some to the influence of high-born and beautiful mistresses in what became known as `The Reign of the Harlots'." (p. 48)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
2) The Catholic interpretation of Jesus' words requires you to believe that when John XII was the current successor to Peter, the words of Jesus meant :
"Thou, John XII, art the rock upon which I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."
(John XII's) "youth may explain in part his irreligious behaviour - since he was only sixteen when he assumed the burdens of office (in 955). Whole monasteries spent their days and nights praying for his decease. Even for a pope of that period he was so bad that the citizens were out for his blood. He had invented sins, they said, not known since the beginning of the world, including sleeping with his mother. He ran a harem in the Lateran Palace He kept a stud of two thousand horses which he fed on almonds and figs steeped in wine. He rewarded the companions of his nights of love with golden chalices from St Peter's.. He gambled with pilgrims' offerings. He did nothing for the most profitable tourist trade of the day, namely, pilgrimages. Women in particular were warned not to enter St John Lateran if they prized their honour; the pope was always on the prowl. In front of the high altar of the mother church of christendom, he even toasted the Devil.
Pope John aroused such wrath that, fearing for his life, he plundered St. Peter's and fled to Tivoli.
A synod was called to sort things out. Present were sixteen cardinals, all the numerous Italian bishops and many others who were conscripted from Germany. The Bishop of Cremona left a precise record of the charges brought against the pope. He had said mass without communicating. He had ordained a deacon in a stable. He had charged for ordinations. He had copulated with a long list of ladies, including his father's old flame and his own niece. He had blinded his spiritual director. He had castrated a cardinal, causing his death. All these accusations were confirmed under oath.
Otto then wrote John a letter that must rank among the great curiosities of all time.
'Everyone, clergy as well as laity, accuses you, Holiness, of homicide, perjury, sacrilege, incest with your relatives, including two of your sisters, and with having, like a pagan, invoked Jupiter, Venus and other demons.'
John's family raised an army to give him safe passage home. In Rome he resumed the Petrine office. Not satisfied with anything as mild as excommunication, he maimed or executed all who had contributed to his exile.
No pope ever went to God in a more embarrassing position. One night, a jealous husband, one of many, caught his Holiness with his wife in flagrante delicto and gave him the last rites with one hammer blow on the back of the head. He was twenty-four. The Romans, noted for their savage wit, said that this was the climax of his career. At least he was lucky to die in bed, even if it was someone else's. (p. 51-2)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
3) The Catholic interpretation of Jesus' words requires you to believe that when Benedict IX was the current successor to Peter, the words of Jesus meant :
"Thou, Benedict IX, art the rock upon which I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."
The Boy-Pope
In 1032, Count Alberic III paid a fortune to keep the job (papacy) in the family. Who better to fill the vacancy than his own son Theophylactus? Raoul Glaber, a monk from Cluny, reports that at his election in October of 1032 his Holiness was eleven years old. . .
It was an odd spectacle: a boy not yet in his teens, his voice not yet broken, was chief legislator and ruler of the Catholic church, called upon to wear the tiara, celebrate high mass in St Peter's, grant livings, appoint bishops and excommunicate heretics. His Holiness's exploits with the ladies prove that the boy-pope reached the age of puberty very early. By the time he was fourteen, a chronicler said, he had surpassed in profligacy and extravagance all who had preceded him. St Peter Damian, a fine judge of sin, exclaimed: `That wretch, from the beginning of his pontificate to the end of his life, feasted on immorality.' Another observer wrote: `A demon from hell in the disguise of a priest has occupied the Chair of Peter.' ( p. 53-54)

=======================
See much MORE about a whole slew of such popes, ALL OF WHOM had to be considered "Vicars of Christ" in order for ANY of them to be: http://www.LiberalsLikeChrist.Org/PopesvsChrist .

:hi:

:hi:
What does the pope have to with Mother Teresa If I may ask?

I thought I was looking at a Fox poll where every answer was the wrong one.. I have followed this thread since last night and I thought it was a flame from the get-go. As a parent I don't feel that we have enough figureheads to show to our children who they should try to asprire to. Cripes, she isn't Bush, Rommy, Bin Ladin or Sadaam, she was just someone who tried to make the world a better place in her small piece of it. Anyone who tries to do that is a saint to me.
Edited third sentence.