Was Mother Teresa of Calcutta a saint?

Anyone here read "Missionary Position" by Hitchens? Any thoughts?
http://www.slate.com/id/2090083/

Who's a POS, in my opinion. A drunken POS who joined the pig-pile on Clinton. Some of his other opuses include "The Worst Family," on the Clintons. And then he stands up and gives his full support to Bush's slaughter of Iraqis. According to Juan Cole's blog, he hacked into a closed message board used by Islamic scholars and others around the world who must keep their comments in a confidential environment lest their lives be endangered. AND he publishes some of what he's read!!!
POS, pure and simple. And that's too kind a term for him.

That said, there have been rumblings about Mother Theresa for years. Some didn't like her fraternization with dictators like Baby Doc and Missus Baby Doc. Others in her order were not too fond of her and her methods. However, the church has certain standards for sainthood, and if she meets them, well . . .
One more thing about ol' Hitch. I guess he went on Penn Gillette's (of Penn & Teller fame) radio show and said that she got sadistic sexual satisfaction from her work with the poor. HOW WOULD HE KNOW?? WAS HE THERE???

I guess you can tell I don't have much use for Hitchens.

donations to take care of the poor. Also she did not use the best equipment.

But anyone looking for a good bio of Mother Theresa should turn to an author who's sober a greater part of the time.

Hitchens has a major axe to grind -- for whatever reasons -- against the Church. Not exactly the most credible outside source on Catholicism, IMO.

and he's as much into self-promotion as anyone. I think the alcohol has long ago pickled his brain.

I think Mother Teresa was sincere in what she did, but her faith was a hardline, old-fashioned,
dogmatic pre-Vatican II faith. She did the best she could given the constraints of her beliefs,
and I suspect, limited intellect, but it's doubtful that she actually achieved anything beyond
giving the poor a pallet to die on (which in the slums of India is something, I suppose).

What I really object to is the way that Pope John Paul II politicized the canonisation process -
anyone he liked and related to was fast-tracked to sainthood. Hence we have Jose Maria Escriva of
Opus Dei catapulted to the ranks of saints, and Mother Teresa beatified in double-quick time, while
Blessed John XXIII languishes on the back-burner because John Paul personally didn't agree with
much of Vatican II. I think JP even abolished the office of Devil's Advocate, so arguments against
beatification and sainthood aren't even examined in the painstaking way they used to be. I think
JP made a mockery of the concept of sainthood, and has made it too easy for non-believers to mock
the whole thing, because his bias was so transparent.

I know very little about Mother Theresa, but she was a controversial figure even during her lifetime. As I noted in my above post, she was criticized for keeping company with the likes of Baby and Missus Doc, of Haiti.
I thought her beatification was ridiculously swift, and I think it is sad that the process has been politicized this much.

I gave my third graders a challenge:

Person 1: cheats on his wife, steals, lies, drinks too much, sells shoddy goods: does he end up in Heaven or Hell?

Person 2: risks his life over and over to the point of entering Auschwitz in order to save the lives of Jews; Heaven or Hell?












Answer: It's the same person; Oscar Schindler