10 Misconceptions about Mother Teresa; She was no Saint

Top 10 Reasons Mother Teresa Was No Saint: 10 Misconceptions about Mother Teresa

Mother Teresa known and celebrated worldwide as the Albanian Nun who received a calling to work with the poor in the slums of Calcutta.  Even now, many years after her death, her name is synonymous with charity, with love and care of the poor.  She was honored with the Nobel Prize for Peace and, shortly after her death the Vatican started an accelerated process for her canonization.

Significant controversy surrounds her life and her missionary work.  Here we list the top 10 reasons why Mother Teresa was not a saint and why claims about her life and work should be treated with caution.

10Mother Teresa’s Home for the Dying provides abysmal medical care.

Mother Teresa was no saint because her home for the dying provided terrible medical care


Mother Teresa received a vision from God telling her to help the poor while living among them.  Following some very basic medical training Mother Teresa started to look after the ‘poorest among the poor’., those who were dying, destitute on the streets in the slums of Calcutta.  In 1952 her Missionaries of Charity organization started her Kalighat Home for the Dying – a place where people could come to die in dignity and comfort.  She wanted to make it possible for ‘people who lived like animals to die like angels – loved and wanted’.

When qualified doctors visited the home, however they found that the medical care provided was very poor.  Most of the volunteers had no medical knowledge and yet had to make medical decisions because there were no doctors available.  There was no distinction made between those who were suffering from curable and incurable illnesses so people who might have survived had they been given access to treatment were left to die.  Needles were re-used so many times that they became blunt and they were not sterilized between uses.  In 1981 when the state of care in her facilities was challenged she said ‘There is something beautiful in seeing the poor accept their lot, to suffer it like Christ’s Passion.  The world gains much from their suffering’ This shows a very cynical use of the poor to further the ends of others.

There was no proper pain management, meaning people suffered in needless pain while they died.  Mother Teresa promoted this suffering as she felt that it was of benefit to suffer in this world for a better life in heaven.  She is reputed to have once told someone dying in pain ‘you are suffering, that means Jesus is kissing you’.  It is not known whether the sufferer was even Christian but probably not, he screamed back, in pain and distressed ‘tell your Jesus to stop kissing me’.

With regard to her own medical treatment Mother Teresa received only the best.  Although she made public shows of declining free high quality medical treatment she nevertheless had no compunctions about secretly accepting medical care from some of the best institutions in the world including having cataract surgery and having a pace maker installed.  When the time came for her to be ‘kissed by Jesus’ she did not die in one of her own homes for the dying and was not treated with blunt needles.  She passed to meet her maker in the very best of medical facilities.

9Mother Teresa’s goal was missionary work not helping the poor.

Mother Teresa would rather be a missionary rather than help poor people

Despite the extensive donations to Mother Teresa’s homes only a few hundred people are helped at any one time.  At the time she accepted her Nobel Prize for Peace Mother Teresa claimed to have helped about 36,000 people in Calcutta, the reality is that the Missionaries of Charity have helped about 5-700 people.  A survey of charitable organizations operating in Calcutta in 1998 did not even rank her homes in the top 200. Some of the Missionaries of Charity homes are used, not to treat people but to try to persuade them to convert to Catholicism.

There have been well documented cases of people trying to access the services of Mother Teresa’s house for the dying but being turned away.  In one instance in 1979, shortly before the Nobel Peace Prize ceremony, a well-known Calcuttan intellectual, Jyotirmoy Datta, tried to obtain the assistance of the House of the Dying for a destitute he found on the street.  He spoke to Mother Teresa herself who refused to help.

Mother Teresa’s organization received and receives extensive donations which would enable them to transform the homes for the dying into modern, clean hospices that provide a decent level of palliative care.  Mother Teresa was not, however, interested in mitigating suffering so much as celebrating it.  As such she concentrated on opening new Missionaries of Charity convents and homes in many different locations around the world as opposed to channeling its extensive funds into their existing homes for the benefit of the people they claimed to be trying to help.

8Mother Teresa’s Missionaries of Charity baptized the dying without their permission.

Mother Teresa’s minions baptized people without their permission

The Missionaries of Charity operate in Calcutta where the majority of people are Hindu or Muslim.  Mother Teresa claimed that the Missionaries of Charity gave the dying the rituals of their faith.

However, in 1992, on a visit to the Vatican she claimed that she and her sisters gave the dying a special ‘Ticket to St Peter by baptizing them.  In essence all who were dying (and probably in pain, incoherent and incapable of making a rational decision) were asked if they wanted a blessing, their sins forgiven and to see God.  It is not clear if this offer was worded so as to make it clear that the offer came with regard to the Christian God or if the offer was made at the same time that they were given the comforts of their own faith.  Most people agreed to this forgiveness, their head was then covered in a wet cloth and the formula for adult baptism repeated very quietly

To impose a religion on someone, to convert them covertly is not the actions of a saint.  Surely if someone’s mortal soul is in peril it would be better to arrange for instruction in the religion and allow people to come to their faith naturally.

7Mother Teresa’s Missionaries of Charity Organization has shady finances

Mother Teresa’s finances allegedly were not above board

Under Indian Law all charities are required to publish their accounts but the Missionaries of Charity have never complied with this requirement.  In Germany, when the Missionaries of Charity were asked how much money they had they responded that ‘it’s nobody’s business’.  In New York a former Sister with the Missionaries of Charity said that in one year the organization banked $50million, she thought that the organization’s receipts worldwide would amount to somewhere in the region of $100m annually.

There equally appears to be no record of expenditures made by the Missionaries of Charity, indeed wherever possible they rely on donations – of food, clothing, buildings etc to cover their start up and operating costs.  It appears that a significant portion of the monies were deposited at the Vatican Bank in Rome and not used to improve the houses of the dying, the orphanages or other charitable operations of the order.  Saving not spending money appears to have been a goal in itself even when the money was plentiful and could have been used to ameliorate suffering and improve conditions for those living in the very worst of conditions.  New missions are given start up assistance from the order but are then expected to be completely self –sufficient.

Many philanthropic organizations exist in order to use money to improve the life of others.  The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is a typical example.  It uses its funds to help improve the lives that people lead, regardless of where they are or how they worship – the foundation is predicated on the belief that every life has equal value.  Its finances are properly regulated, transparent and applied effectively.  Unlike the Missionaries of Charity who hide away their money and promote suffering as noble, admirable philanthropic organizations like the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation help people to make the most of the life they have.

6Mother Teresa took money from known fraudsters and refused to refund it – even when this refusal caused real harm to innocent people.

Mother Teresa took money from fraudsters

Mother Teresa was happy to accept donations from any source – even when the source in question was a reprehensible con-man.  She received significant donations from Charles Keating, a leading American catholic and anti-pornography protestor who was convicted and imprisoned for fraud when his Savings and Loan Association collapsed leaving 23,000 investors with worthless bonds and from Robert Maxwell who stole £450m from the pension fund of his employees.  Although it appears that she was not aware of their activities prior to the scandals association with the men she showed little concern for the suffering their actions caused; she believed that the donation of funds could salve the conscience of those who donated them.

Mother Teresa wrote to the judge requesting leniency for Keating because he had made donations to the Missionaries of Charity.  The Deputy District Attorney wrote to her explaining exactly what Keating had done in defrauding small investors of their life savings.  Mother Teresa refused to reply to that letter.  Sadly because of the shady finances of her organization it is impossible to tell whether the money was put to good use which would at least provide some small comfort to the people whose lives were ruined.  From the poor conditions in her House of the Dying and the lack of support given to missions worldwide it would seem these people lost their money for no good reason.

5As well as consorting with fraudsters Mother Teresa was friends with the leaders of some of the most reprehensible political regimes in the world.

Mother Teresa associated with really shady characters. Duvalier regime in Haiti.

Georgios Kollidas / Shutterstock.com

Mother Teresa was an admirer of the Duvalier regime in Haiti.  The rule of ‘Papa’ and ‘Baby’ Doc was known, worldwide, to be brutally oppressive and incredibly cruel to the people of the impoverished country.  Both were known to live a lavish lifestyle at the expense of the people of Haiti, to allow the torture and murder of their detractors and to be involved in the underground trade in both drugs and body parts.  Nevertheless Mother Teresa had no compunctions about accepting an award from Baby Doc and to say of the Duvaliers that they ‘love their poor and their love was reciprocated.’

Mother Teresa did not confine her controversial actions to Haiti.  When she returned to her homeland of Albania in 1989 she visited the widow of the former communist Dictator Enver Hoxha and laid flowers on his grave.  She spent time with many communist party officials and at no time used her visit to condemn the human rights abuses of the communist regime or their brutal suppression of religion.  Even if the reality was that she could not make any negative comments during her visit she could have used her position to make comments and condemnations from abroad.

4Mother Teresa had a hard line stance on abortion, contraception and divorce, except where her Friends were concerned.

Mother Teresa was a hard-line pro-lifer

Mother Teresa did not believe in supporting those deciding whether or not they had to terminate their pregnancies – she wanted only to condemn them whatever their circumstances.  When she accepted her Nobel Prize for Peace she said ‘Abortion is the worst evil and the greatest enemy of peace…If a mother can kill her own child, what will prevent us from killing ourselves or one another?  Nothing.’

Her stance was completely hardline with no exceptions even in the most mitigating of circumstances.  In 1971 the Indo-Pakistan War led to many atrocities including the rape of over 450,000 Hindu women by Pakistani soldiers.  Rather than supporting them in coming to terms with the abuse they had suffered or condemning the atrocities perpetrated against them she chose to speak only on the question of abortion.  For Mother Teresa felt that there should be no choice of whether or not to keep the babies of such a crime she called, very publicly for the victims to keep the babies.    She held fast to this belief her entire life; in 1993 she condemned a 14 year old rape victim in Ireland for seeking an abortion.  Indeed she had no problems travelling around the world specifically to prevent individual cases of abortion and to help anti-abortion campaigns to influence the government policy on abortion in many countries around the world.

While no one could question her personal feelings on the sanctity of life she was not the person suffering in these circumstances, she was not the person facing the choice and, in the case of the Hindu women was speaking from a religious view point that was not applicable to them.  Her views were not, however, immutable.  When her close friend Indira Ghandi imposed a state of emergency in India, suspending the constitution and instituting a reign of terror against her detractors Mother Teresa publicly supported her.  This support did not waiver even when Indira Ghandi’s regime started a campaign for the forced sterilization of the poor.

Mother Teresa was as passionately anti divorce as she was anti-abortion.  She believed that marriages were sanctified by God.  At the time the country was considering legalizing divorce Mother Teresa wrote to the people of Ireland telling them that ‘If a father and mother are not willing to give until it hurts to be faithful to each other, and to their children they are not showing their children what it means to love…These children will grow up to be spiritually poor’.   However, when her good friend Princess Diana obtained her divorce from Prince Charles Mother Teresa praised the divorce as a good thing because the love had left the marriage, there was no thought given to the spiritual poverty in which her children would grow up.  No condemnation as there would have been for an ordinary Irish couple looking for a divorce.

3Mother Teresa was rarely in Calcutta preferring to fly around the world to promote her opinions. 

Mother Teresa the real Flying Nun. She’d rather be up in the air than on the ground in Calcutta helping the poor

Whether it was anti-abortion campaigning in the US or Japan or convincing the people of Ireland to vote against the legalization of divorce Mother Teresa spent a lot of time traveling around the world to promote her beliefs and the work of her Missionaries of Charity.

She was not well known in Calcutta, she used the poverty of the city as a background to her work and media image but she spent very little time interacting with other social or cultural institutions.  Even her spiritual advisor Edward Le Jolly confirmed in his book on Mother Teresa that she was in Calcutta only infrequently.  While away she would often say she was unhappy to be absent from Calcutta but she typically would spent time in Rome following a trip abroad instead of returning directly to India.

2Mother Teresa liked to be seen to help but provided very little actual help.

Mother Teresa like to promote a certain image

catwalker / Shutterstock.com
As mentioned above Mother Teresa helped only a fraction of the people she claimed to have taken from the streets of Calcutta.  She liked to be seen to be present at huge disasters.  When the Union Carbide plant in Bhopal became the site of the largest ever industrial accident in the world Mother Teresa lost no time in flying down there to be photographed. On seeing the carnage she exhorted the victims to forgiveness before starting a tour of the hospitals to ‘help’.  She visited some of the survivors but the Missionaries of Charity failed to direct any of their extensive funds to the local mission which would have enabled them to engage in and provide concrete assistance to the afflicted.

When the 1993 earthquake of Latur killed 8,000 people and left 5m people homeless Mother Teresa  failed to direct any of her Missionaries of Charity nun or volunteers to help nor did she make any funds available for re-building although many other charities in India, of many religious denominations and non, did participate in the relief effort.  Nevertheless Mother Teresa had no difficulty in posing for photographs showing her presenting the deeds of new houses to some of the people of Latur.  That same year India was struck with an outbreak of Bubonic Plague.  Despite having no involvement in treating the victims Mother Teresa was photographed entering ‘quarantine’ on arrival in Rome, the photographs were then sent worldwide to promote the belief that she had been struggling to help deal with the outbreak.

1There have been no miracles attributed to Mother Teresa

Mother Teresa did not perform any miracles.

There is a very strict process that he Catholic Church has to follow in order to declare someone a saint.  Typically investigations cannot start until five years after a person’s death in order for any hysteria surrounding a  much loved person to die down.  The Catholic Church fast-tracked the process of canonization, starting the process within less than two years of Mother Teresa’s death and she was beatified in 2003.

Beatification, the first step to full sainthood requires the performance of a miracle.  In 2002 the Catholic Church recognized that Mother Teresa had cured an Indian woman of an abdominal tumor a year after her death after Missionaries of Charity prayed for Mother Teresa’s help and applied a locket with her picture in it to the site of the tumor.

While the woman believed that Mother Teresa cured her it appears that her doctors say that she was not suffering from a tumor but from a cyst which was cured by the medicines prescribed by the local hospital.  The woman’s medical notes are in the possession of the Missionaries of Charity who refuse to release them.  Doctors at the local hospital have claimed to have been subjected to pressure from the Catholic Church to declare the cure a ‘miracle’.

So was Mother Teresa a Saint or was she a hard-nosed public relations specialist who used her status as a charitable icon to travel the world, rubbing shoulders with a dubious elite and  pushing her own beliefs on abortion, contraception and divorce (extreme even for the Catholic Church).  Was she an angel of mercy providing tender care to the poorest of the poor in their last moments of suffering or did she glorify that suffering and see it as a benefit in and of itself.  Did she help tens of thousands of poor around the world or provide assistance to a few hundred as a front to her missionary organization?  Has she performed miracles or are ordinary events being manipulated to make us think she has?  What is indisputable is that, in stark contrast to properly managed and transparent philanthropic institutions, despite the extensive donations to the Missionaries of Charity, the assistance they provide is as limited in terms of care and medical aid as it was when Mother Teresa started her organization.   Whatever the truth, questions should be asked and answers given.


  • Katia Winnicka

    Any evidence?

    • Check out all the links within the text of the post (now in bold).

    • OsoBossHogg

      don’t need any evidence. this is my faith.

      • Nicolet Foster

        My faith is in the fairy princess riding a unicorn in space, now disprove it, or it’s real… that is your logic and that is exactly how crazy you people sound.

      • hypatiab7

        That’s the problem with people who believe as you do. You don’t think; you just accept what you’re to to accept (with a big helping of hell threat) to keep you
        that way.

  • CumExApostolatus

    This woman was simply part of the false ecumenical scam perpetrated on the world, by the elite, in order to help bring about the new world religion. That’s why she never actively converted anyone. She didn’t have the Catholic faith and therefore felt no urgency to teach the faith and convert those willing to be converted. I can’t understand why the adulation for this woman. In this ‘media age’ people are so easily duped.

  • PaulMurrayCbr

    Mother Teresa was farming the poor for the “grace” that their suffering produced. The people writhing in pain in her “hospitals” were basically dairy cows. The grace milked from these people was used to fill her beatification vat in heaven, as well as for paying bribes to various – shall we say – entities.

    The money was incidental. The only issue was that it was important that it not go to updating her so-called hospitals. And pain relief or medical treatment would have impacted the quality and quantity of grace she was getting .

  • practical intellectual

    Seems slated to me. Most of what you say is anti catholic or unsustainable.

    • Do you mean slanted and unsubstantiated? There are plenty of sources in the body of the article.

  • Shanti-Ananda

    Being a child that came from her orphanage and was blessed by her, you have stepped way out of line!

    • How? Do you disagree with our author’s post? About what exactly?

  • Laurie Mitchell

    Great article, thank you. I’ve been reading the same thing elsewhere on the internet and am shocked and disappointed with MT. It all makes sense, and I’m just sorry for her victims. You lay out the facts with sources (plus many other reputable sources agree), so why is she still so revered???

    • hypatiab7

      Because the RCC needs ‘good’ publicity to bring in new converts and more donations.
      If people stop converting, the Church will have to live off of what they have stashed away.

  • fufhertoo .

    This article and everything in it is a complete sham perpetuated by your atheistic hatred of God and religion. How do you attack a woman who gave her whole life, spent her whole life serving the poorest of the poor. She was not called to convert the hindus, she was not called to cure. She was called to love and to let people that were considered the lowest of the caste system, those deemed wretched, that were literally left to die in the streets, she picked those people up and cleaned their wounds and let them die in a bed with dignity. She was the first, the very first person to open a hospice in New York City for Aids patients, at a time when no one would care for them or touch them out of fear for their own well being. She did not judge these people. She loved these people as children of God. And if she took money from anyone who you view as sleazy, then so be it. The money was going to the poor and may have been the only redeeming act of good will from those of questionable character that you list. Many of her detractors like you may be quick to point to her faults, but your kind is never able to really accomplish anything but stir anger, hatred and division. Countless charities with no religious affiliation aimed at working with the poor in Kolkata have come and gone, but the missionaries of charity remain. Do you wonder why your efforts seem so fruitless, its because you can’t give what you don’t have. Without love, cannit accomplish the miraculous. You are the poorest of the poor spiritually and blind at that.

    • Barbara Fitzgerald

      I agree with you. Mother Teresa never called herself a saint. In fact she admitted she doubted her faith often. How wonderful to hear that – a real human – like the rest of us. We are all called to be like her. Perhaps not perfect, but through our struggles always trying to be the person God wants us to be.

    • Adi

      Not providing adequate “medical” attention and treatment to people who could have been cured is criminal abuse. That is what she did.

      • veritas101

        Yeah, your right. I suppose she should have just left all of those people to die in the street abandoned and alone, according to your logic. We are talking about India, a third world country with a caste system that has a far different reality that what we have in the United States. People in the slums have zero access to clinical treatment, nor are there enough medical practitioners to treat all of the ill and dying in these areas. The demand is greater than what is available and the upper classes do not mix with the poorest of the poor.

        • Adi

          I am from India, lived in kolkata, place of theresa. Half of what you said is factually wrong. Other half can’t justify running natural death camps like theresa did. She could have atleast given them free medicines that govt distribute. but no, her “faith” didn’t allow for that. What is the good in bringing in a curable patient from the streets and then let him die by not giving medical treatment? Lot of other NGOs are treating the poor patients…

        • Scipio Americanus

          Sounds just like America with its upper crust elite and it’s lower class common people who cannot afford the health care that the wealthy believe is there for them exclusively. Just because the caste system in India has existed longer does not mean that the entitled of America do not look upon the lower classes as beneath them .

    • Rudolph

      Well written. Thank you.

  • Lee

    Not only was Mother Teresa the worlds biggest con artist ,she was an atheist who lost her faith in religion thirty years before her death. She lived in luxury except when taking fund raising photos.

    • lorriman

      An atheist isn’t someone who is either merely doubting or being tempted to doubt.

      It’s not even a non-believer, since they can be simply agnostic.

      • Yenski

        Truthfully though, there can never really be a TRUE atheist either then, as you can never KNOW that there is no god, scientifically speaking.

        • lorriman

          For that reason you can’t be a reasonable atheist. There are plenty of atheists claiming mere ‘lack of belief’ but then indulging in that gigantic and inexcusable presumption of labelling religious belief a delusion, betraying that they do indeed believe there is no god.

          • Yenski


            I am an atheist, because I do not believe in a god. There is no scientific way to PROVE this, so I have to go with the best science there is, which shows that it is extremely unlikely. Science can prove things, but you can’t prove something DOESN’T exist. There’s always a shadow of a doubt.

            • lorriman

              Sure, but the proper definition of an atheist is “To deny the gods/god”, which is a belief that there isn’t a god. So you’re not really an atheist, unless you believe the muddle of definitions in Wikipedia, of course. 🙂 The OED also recently inserted ‘to disbelieve’ in to their definition so its a bit of a screw up. Historically, and atheist was defined as positively believing there was no god. Since there are only three states in respect of a god – belief that there is one, lack of belief, belief that there isn’t one -that made sense. Else there is no functional word for those who believe that there is no god.

              • Yenski

                noun: atheist; plural noun: atheists
                a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods.

                I see nothing about the need to PROVE that there isn’t a god.

                • lorriman

                  That definition is a corruption of the original which is “To deny the gods/God”. And that is a positive belief that there isn’t one, which requires proof to be rational. The corrupted definition confuses atheism with a form of agnosticism.

                • lorriman

                  It’s actually ‘denies’ in the proper definition. That requires proof.

  • lorriman

    Judging people by standards they don’t recognise and would, indeed, reject, and that retrospectively, is pretty silly.

    Or simple presumption: “Mother Teresa had a hard line stance on abortion, contraception and divorce, except where her Friends were concerned.”

    ….with a slur using Indira Ghandi and presuming on the facts and details, none supplied, that is highly presumptive.

  • stargazeman

    More Hillary Clinton, Left Wing rooted Hate towards all things Mother Teresa…they hate the good Mother because she hated abortion and preached Christianity…the two no no’s of all things Left and Loony…that bunch is evil, awful and I have unfriended, in person, all who are of that persuassion…they’re just that far gone, like Jesse Jackson says “No Hope with the Dope”…go away you evil people. btw, leftists give very very little of their own money, time, or energy towards anyone or thing outside of their own domains. Remember that when you read these kinds of stories….

    • Canis Dirus

      I’m an Independent, and I invite you to disprove what the article says. It’s pretty accurate.

  • Noelle Obcarskas

    why is there a picture of a medic covered in blood smiling and rubbing his hands together ? is this just a picture intending us to think that is how mother teresa thought and acted ? seems the picture is just a strong reminder of the MOTIVE of the article…to discredit and make out someone who spoke out for the poor to make us all more aware since we all live in comforts ourselves in comparison..was actually someone who CREATED and promoted suffering rather than givving dying people a loving hand to hold..in circumstances that not even that was on offer otherwise. to me…that picture is horrible..a medic covered in blood rubbing their hands and madly smiling…a picture tells a thousand words…

    • Yankie

      Come on, it’s just a picture, stick to the FACTS and stop trying to defend Agnes Gonxha Bojaxhiu!

  • Bindu Puthur Simon

    haha.. funny article and captions.. just focused only on creating defaming news based on imagination. I would add one more.. she used to kill people at midnight. why dont you add?

  • Tath_Ngui

    Misogyny acquires so many forms. None of these critics ever lifted a hand to help a soul in need. These idiots, mostly men are intimidated by a ferocious four feet five little lady whose vision transformed and still transforms the lives of millions. She lived by her values, her faith, her bold courage and capacity to speak truth to power in the kindest most gentle ways. The worst form of bullies also wait for their target to die. How pathetic!

    • Yenski

      Actually, if you can read before judging, you will see that OFTEN, people donated time and money to these natural disasters through Mother Teresa’s charity, only to have little of it actually used. All she did was embezzle. Her charity didn’t MAKE money. How would it? People in the area weren’t even Christians for the most part.

      The church is canonizing her because they too gain from promoting her image. That, and she spread Christianity like a cancer into India, despite their earlier implied resistance.

      • The Whalens

        Actually, if YOU can read before judging, you would KNOW that if everyone followed the TEN COMMANDMENTS, and aimed to live their lives like that of Christ, this world would have very few problems. But, you’re not interested in solving the world’s problems are you, Yenski? In your twisted mind, doing such a thing would mean an end to your freedom. To live like Christ is to be FREE FROM SIN, not the other way around.

        • BunnyLuv Mac

          To live like the Christ would be to be a vegan animal rights activist. Read Genesis regarding diet and all the old books not in the Bible to see His love for animals. Are YOU a vegan animal rights activist?

          • CP

            The old testament had eating restrictions, but if you read the new you would know Jesus changed that. So your statement is wrong.

        • Yenski

          To “live like Christ” as you put it, would mean following a lot of laws that you yourself don’t follow. Because they are stupid, outdated, and ill-conceived.

          What example of following the ten-commandments do you have that would lead us to a better world? There is no mention that rape, slavery, torture or kidnapping are bad in this first of ten commandments. They also say nothing of love or charity. Remember that they are shown TWICE in the bible, but are different each time, unless you believe Matthew (Matthew 19:18-Matthew 19:19 6 commandments) Mark (Mark 10:19 6 commandments) or Luke (Luke 18:20 5 commandments). Either way, the second set of tablets is, while described as identical, completely different.

          Assuming the most well-known is correct, let’s presume my grandparents were Christians, but my parents were atheists. Where would that put me in God’s plan? Am I one of the thousands of generations to be praised, or one of the four generations to be shunned?

          Keeping the Sabbath holy… how is this to be taken into account for leap years and such? Am I to eat only unleavened bread during this time or not?

          Lastly, the church you pray in. Do you use unhewn stones? I thought the use of tooled stone would make it a defilement when you burned your sheep goats and cattle, which were prescribed as the ONLY good offerings to the lord.

          • Matt Oldham

            you won’t get a reply to this because you used facts instead of fairy tales

      • pbehnke

        Embezzled? Is that why she has such a fancy life style? Pro aborts will say anything.

        • Yenski

          Just because she dressed plainly didn’t make her poor. She was rarely at her missions, and spent much of her time jet-setting around the world to give speeches to people that are holier-than-thou. She took people off the street, sometimes against their will, and kept them in what is essentially a prison, with no pain medication nor any real help- all for the fame and recognition.


    if she accepted Jesus christ as her saviour she was doing what her part of the body of christ was suppose to be as same as the guy who cleans the bathrooms in the buliding where the church meets.Its the body of christ ,with many different parts

    • Scipio Americanus


      • MYSAY

        its the body of Christ.if you accept jesus Christ as your savior he has a purpose for you as he does fro every human born that accepts him .we all have purpose to the purpose of Christ to lead others to know him as savior .It may be anything like the person who keeps the church building clean so we can worship together .Or something big in the worlds eyes like billy grahm its all the same to God we each have a purpose in the body many parts but one purpose .Like the
        human body from the big toe for balance to the brain to make it move small and great we need them all to operate.

  • pbehnke

    This is an attack by pro abortion . The little sisters of the poor did work all over the world, not just Calcutta, and poor medical care is better than lying in the streets and filth alone.

  • God’s Kid

    Read the Bible:

    Your good works are as filthy rags! Catholic anti-Christ. Watch the Pope people. Jesus was God! He is the ONLY one to pray to.

  • Seekander Ahmed

    On another note, the 1971 war was not another Indo-Pak war like its written in point 4. It was the liberation war of Bangladesh, which was under Pakistan regime between 1947-1971. India aided Bangladesh in this war in many ways. But the genocide and mass raping were suffered by Bangladeshi People on the soil of Bangladesh. Though the exact number can’t be confirmed, but it’s estimated that between 0.2-0.4 million Bangladeshi women were brutally raped, tortured and many were killed regardless of their religious belief and practice. In fact most of them were Muslim. They suffered this horrible fate in the hand of Pakistani Army in order to save oppressive regime of Pakistan.

  • Love of Jesus

    This is all a Lie!!!!!!!!

  • Master Atheistic

    Such a wonderful, caring, loving, psychotic, poisonous, repulsive and mentally impaired religiotard is surely happily sitting at the right hand of her equally psychotic and murderous war god, yahweh the destroyer now and forever more, lol.