Jump to content

The Missionary Position: Mother Teresa in Theory and Practice

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 81.136.205.6 (talk) at 19:00, 9 February 2014. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

This article is about the book by Christopher Hitchens. For the sex position, see Missionary position.
The Missionary Position: Mother Teresa in Theory and Practice
AuthorChristopher Hitchens
SpracheEnglisch
SubjectMother Teresa
PublisherVerso
Publication date
1995
Publication placeVereinigtes Königreich
ISBN[[Special:BookSources/%7F%27%22%60UNIQ--templatestyles-00000002-QINU%60%22%27%7F%5B%5BSpecial%3ABookSources%2F1-85984-054-X+%7C1-85984-054-X%5D%5D |1-85984-054-X]] Parameter error in {{ISBNT}}: invalid character
OCLC33358318
271/.97 B 20
LC ClassBX4406.5.Z8 H55 1995

The slim paperback volume entitled The Missionary Position : Mother Teresa in Theory and Practice was first published in 1995 by Verso, the sole imprint of New Left Books launched in 1970 by the New Left Review, a British journal of left-wing theory.[1] Verso claims to be "the largest independent, radical publishing house in the English-speaking world"[2] Its author was the journalist and writer Christopher Hitchens, a convinced atheist Marxist whose first best selling book was God is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything (2007).[3]

The subject of the book is what the author considered were the shortcomings of Mother Teresa. He was not the first to criticise her, for some of his themes had been anticipated by others.[4] Nor was the book Mr. Hitchens' first critique of Mother Teresa. In 1992 he wrote a polemical piece for his regular column in The Nation;[5] in 1993 he aired his views on her in the course of an interview on C-SPAN's Booknotes series;[6] in 1994 there was broadcast on British television a 25 minute television essay;[7] and in early 1995 he wrote a piece in Vanity Fair describing the making of the television essay.[8] These are all noticed in the Foreword where he describes his work as part of "a battle".[9]

Small in compass, the book was promoted as being 98 pages long, but authorial matter occupies no more than 72 pages.[10] It has been likened to a pamphlet.[11] In 2012 it was re-issued in both paperback and ebook form with a foreword by Thomas Mallon.[12] Although the publishers of the 2012 re-issue described it as "a meticulous study of the life and deeds of Mother Teresa" and "a measured critique", the general consensus is that it is polemical.[13] Nor does the book itself make any pretence of being a biography, even in outline.[14]

Summary

Hitchens primarily condemns Mother Teresa for redirecting contributions to open a global network of convents in place of building the teaching hospital she promised donors. He also makes direct claims that Mother Teresa was no "friend to the poor," and that she opposed structural measures to end poverty, particularly those that would raise the status of women. He argues she was a tool by which the Catholic Church furthered its political and theological aims, and the cult of personality that she developed was used by politicians, dictators and bankers to gain credibility and assuage guilt, citing Hillary Clinton, Charles Keating and Michèle Bennett as examples.

Missionaries of Charity

Hitchens portrays Mother Teresa's organization, the Missionaries of Charity, as a cult which promoted the suffering of those under its care rather than helping those in need. He argues that Teresa's own words on poverty proved that her intention was not to actively end suffering, citing a 1981 press conference in which she was asked: "Do you teach the poor to endure their lot?" and responded, "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."

Associates

Hitchens details Mother Teresa's relationships with wealthy and corrupt individuals including Haitian dictator Jean-Claude Duvalier[citation needed] and his wife Michèle Duvalier, enigmatic quasi-religious figure John-Roger, and disgraced former financial executive Charles Keating. Hitchens argues that her support for unscrupulous figures contradicts the alleged humanitarianism of her work.

Charles Keating

The book reproduces a facsimile of a letter written by Mother Teresa on behalf of Charles Keating to Judge Lance Ito, then presiding over Keating's trial for frauds running into hundreds of millions of dollars. The letter urged the judge to consider the fact that Keating "has always been kind and generous to God's poor" and suggested that Judge Ito "look into [his] heart" and "do what Jesus would do."

Hitchens also reproduces a letter written to Mother Teresa by one of the team who had prosecuted Keating, Deputy District Attorney for Los Angeles Paul Turley. In it, Mr. Turley pointed out that Keating had been convicted for stealing more than $250 million from over 17,000 investors in his business, and expressed the opinion that "[n]o church, no charity, no organization should allow itself to be used as a salve for the conscience of the criminal". He suggested to Mother Teresa:

"Ask yourself what Jesus would do if he were given the fruits of a crime; what Jesus would do if he were in possession of money that had been stolen; what Jesus would do if he were being exploited by a thief to ease his conscience? I submit that Jesus would promptly and unhesitatingly return the stolen property to its rightful owners. You should do the same. You have been given money by Mr. Keating that he has been convicted of stealing by fraud. Do not permit him the 'indulgence' he desires. Do not keep the money. Return it to those who worked for it and earned it! If you contact me I will put you in direct contact with the rightful owners of the property now in your possession."

To the letter, Hitchens appended the note: "Mr. Turley has received no reply to his letter. Nor can anyone account for the missing money: saints, it seems, are immune to audit."

Bewertungen

In The London Review of Books Amit Chaudhuri praised the book: "Hitchens’s investigations have been a solitary and courageous endeavour. The book is extremely well-written, with a sanity and sympathy that tempers its irony." However, he commented that the portrait "is in danger of assuming the one-dimensionality of the Mother Teresa of her admirers", and that he finished the book without much more of an idea of the character and motivations of Mother Teresa.[15]

The San Francisco Bay Guardian says: "Anyone with ambivalent feelings about the influence of Catholic dogma (especially concerning sex and procreation); about the media's manufacture of images; or about what one can, should or shouldn't do for someone less fortunate, should read this book."[16] In 1996, The New York Times published a favourable review by Bruno Maddox in which he says: "Mr. Hitchens, a columnist at Vanity Fair and The Nation, is rather convincing" and "Hitchens argues his case with consummate style".[17]

The Sunday Times says: "A dirty job but someone had to do it. By the end of this elegantly written, brilliantly argued piece of polemic, it is not looking good for Mother Teresa."[16] Also in 1996, a critical review of the book was penned by William A. Donohue, president of The Catholic League, who comments: "If this sounds like nonsense, well, it is."[18]

Replying to a positive review of Hitchens' book in the New York Review of Books by Murray Kempton, Jesuit author James Martin offered a defense of Mother Teresa against the criticisms brought against her. Noting the difficulties involved with offering aid to the destitute in the developing world, he concluded by writing, "[R]egarding the 'poorest of the poor,' those who today die neglected, there would seem to be two choices. First, to cluck one’s tongue that such a group of people should even exist. Second, to act: to provide comfort and solace to these individuals as they face death. Mr. Kempton chooses the former. Mother Teresa, for all of her faults, chooses the latter."[19] In another letter in the same issue, literary critic and sinologist Simon Leys criticised Hitchens' portrayal of Mother Teresa, stating, "Bashing an elderly nun under an obscene label does not seem to be a particularly brave or stylish thing to do. Besides, it appears that the attacks which are being directed at Mother Teresa all boil down to one single crime: she endeavors to be a Christian, in the most literal sense of the word—which is (and always was, and will always remain) a most improper and unacceptable undertaking in this world."[19] Hitchens replied to Leys' letter in a subsequent issue,"[19] and Leys in turn defended his original stance, writing that Hitchens' book "contain[ed] a remarkable number of howlers on elementary aspects of Christianity" and accusing Hitchens of "a complete ignorance of the position of the Catholic Church on the issues of marriage, divorce, and remarriage" and a "strong and vehement distaste for Mother Teresa."[20]

References

  1. ^ See the entry in the online summary of publishers maintained by Penguin Books, accessed 27 January, 2014
  2. ^ See the "about" page of the publisher's website, accessed 27 January, 2014
  3. ^ Michael Wolff, GQ Magazine", 3 April, 2013, The damnation of St Christopher, accessed 2 February, 2014
  4. ^ Barbara Smoker, ex-President of the UK National Secular Society, wrote a piece in 1980 entitled "Mother Teresa-Sacred Cow?" The Freethinker, February, 1980, deriding her stance on abortion and contraception. Nevertheless (and despite the demeaning title of her piece), she conceded Mother Teresa's "obvious sincerity" and called her "an amazing woman, a warm human being . .". Germaine Greer chose Mother Teresa as her "villain" in a "Heroes and Villains" feature in the Saturday magazine of The Independent, 22 September, 1990, claiming she was a "religious imperialist" who used her charity to foist Catholicism on the vulnerable
  5. ^ "Mother Teresa: Ghoul of Calcutta", The Nation, April, 1992, reprinted in a collection of essays entitled For the Sake of Argument: Essays and Minority Reports, Verso, (August, 1994)
  6. ^ Interview by Brian Lamb, broadcast 17 October, 1993
  7. ^ "Hell's Angel", shown on 8 November, 1994 on Channel Four in its arts series "Without Walls"
  8. ^ Christopher Hitchens, "Mother Teresa and Me", Vanity Fair, February, 1995
  9. ^ Foreword, page xii, where he calls the articles "early polemics" which he expected would evoke "a hostile response" (the TV essay did, but according to him, he was surprised that the articles did not); he cites at pages xii-xiii "an unending argument between those who know they are right . . and those who suspect that the human race has nothing but the poor candle of reason by which to light its way", and acknowledges (p. xiii) support he received "in this battle"
  10. ^ It was promoted by Verso as a 98 page book, but, leaving aside the Foreword and Acknowledgements section (pp. xi-xiii), and taking account of blank pages, the pages of quotes, those places where text occupies less than half the page, and the two letters on pages 67-70, the authorial material extends over no more than 72 pages.
  11. ^ See Bruno Maddox's review, The New York Times, 14 January, 1996: "Like all good pamphlets . . it is very short, zealously over-written and rails wildly . . "; Scott Stephens called it a "scandalous pamphlet", in a feature posted on the website of ABC (the Australian Broadcasting Corporation), accessed 27 January 2014; Michael Wolff called it a "pamphlet-like book" in a piece for GQ Magazine", dated 3 April, 2013, The damnation of St Christopher, accessed 2 February, 2014
  12. ^ In the United States of America, by Little, Brown & Company under its imprint Grand Central Publishing. See the product details on, e.g., the Barnes & Noble website, accessed 27 January, 2014
  13. ^ See the "overview" and extracts from the contemporary reviews in Publishers Weekly, The New York Times, Library Journal, and The Sunday Times (London) all as gathered on the Barnes and Noble website, accessed 2 February, 2014
  14. ^ One page (p. 79) is dedicated to the "little enough [known] of [her] early life" (down to age 18); the attention given to Mother Teresa begins with events in 1969 when she was 59 years old (pp. 21f.). The book reports nothing of her life or work in the intervening 40 years and says little about her activities before 1979
  15. ^ Chaudhuri, Amit. "Why Calcutta?". London Review of Books. Archived from the original on 2012-03-15. Retrieved 15 March 2012.
  16. ^ a b ""The Missionary Position: Mother Teresa in Theory and Practice," Verso Books".
  17. ^ Bruno Maddox (1996-01-14). "New York Times book review". Nytimes.com. Retrieved 2013-01-30.
  18. ^ William Donohue (1996-03-19). "Hating Mother Theresa". Catholicleague.org. Retrieved 2013-01-30.
  19. ^ a b c Christopher Hitchens. "Mother Teresa". Nybooks.com. Retrieved 2013-01-30.
  20. ^ Simon Leys. "On Mother Teresa". Nybooks.com. Retrieved 2013-01-30.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Missionary_Position:_Mother_Teresa_in_Theory_and_Practice&oldid=594707103"