The patron saint on atheists...Mother Teresa

The atheists should get on the ball and adopt Mother Teresa as their patron saint.

She is a prime example of what I write about - practicing the virtues that religions can provide even if you do not believe in God.

If you guys can get organized at American Atheists or UK Atheists vote her in as your first patron saint before the Pope gets around to it.

That would give you something to argue about… you can’t have her she is our patron saint…no she is ours, we made her a saint first!

nydailynews.com/news/wn_repo … th_fa.html

In any case, religion can provide much in the form of virtues even for the non believer if they are open to it.

I was discussing ‘spiritual aspects of living’ on various online forums. One group was a dedicated atheists discussion list with most members only offering bitter personal attacks instead of adding anything substantive to the discussion.

But to be fair to these atheists, I’ve known many a religious fellow that are just as bitter, if not more so, than atheists I meet. So just being ‘religious’ is not a guarantee of being at peace.

Each man made religion contains perfection’s as well as imperfections. It is up to the practitioner or end user to use the tools in the right way.

The problem is not the wisdom that is defective.

The problem lies with religious practitioners who are defective in their practice of this wisdom.

The wisdom works - we don’t work the wisdom.

Many times we are too busy for peace. As one atheist list member wrote, 'It took awhile - far too long, really - but I’ve finally found that one can find peace by simply being undisturbed."

Yes, peace is our birthright, if we are not destroying it by our own actions. In order to slow down enough to be able to use peace as a tool I needed to apply simplicity and renunciation to my life.

I am not an acetic or total renunciate by any means, but I did have to let go of many peace destroying habits before making room for inner peace to enter my life. As we get rid of one thing, it make room for another thing to enter.

The online discussions based in bitterness brought up the question of “what guiding light do atheists use to be at peace?”

Not much was offered in reply to my question. I got a few answers here or there.

It seems whenever the discussion turns to ‘inner peace’ many of the people I talk with are silent, this even goes for ‘pious’ Catholic priests.

But, one fellow on the forum mentioned ‘truth and philosophy,’ as his tools - both of these being good answers for peace generation with proper application. Philosophy plays a big role in my life as well for providing tools to live at peace.

I also supplement my spiritual path from many other sources as I will go into below. I am only interested in practical application of philosophy though and not bickering and arguing over the unanswerable. So, I prefer truth based discussions over ego based discussions where the truth gets overshadowed by rhetoric. As someone once wrote … “if you don’t know the answer then just say so.”

see:

jesusneverexisted.org/jne/forum/ … opic=504.0

I was at a philosophy symposium last year and talked with a professor about a teaching / mentor relationship he had with Ayn Rand.

He went on to say how after a year they broke up the mentor relationship on a sour note. After I questioned the professor about Rand’s personal life as well as her state of inner peace and happiness, I could see that with all her talents of ‘smarts’ she was bankrupt when the subject turned to peace smarts, contentment and happiness.

She was ego based and not practice based when it came to peace generation.

Furthermore, she not only destroyed her peace, but from the information that came out of our discussion, the then student’s peace was disturbed at the time and it still sounded disturbed decades later as a distinguished professor and author. Academic smarts are not the same as peace smarts.

The branch of philosophy that deals with the study of ethics and virtue has also helped me along in life.

What is virtue and ethics?

Some authorities define it as ‘excellence of the soul’ or moral excellence. (Although the Greeks thought of ‘soul and form’ in different terms than say Christians think of soul. For example, the soul of an eye would be its ability to ‘see’ and whether this ability was good or bad would decide whether the soul of an eye had ‘virtue’ or excellence.)

The concept for understanding virtue can be told in a story of the ‘Ring of Gyges’ or ‘Myth of Gyges’. This story was taken from Plato’s Republic and recounts how the shepherd Gyges finds a ring on a hand extending from a crack in the earth and removes the ring from the hand and puts it on. Gyges discovers the magic ring gives him powers to be invisible at will and then uses these powers to kill the king, rape the queen and take over the kingdom. As James Allen tells us in “As A Man Thinketh” - “Circumstances does not make the man - it reveals him to himself”

What is virtuous behavior in a flourishing human being?

In readily understandable terms we can help define virtue for us from this story of Gyges and by asking ourselves the question, “What would we do if no one was looking or we knew we would not get caught?”

No heaven, no hell, no God, no karma, no police, nothing but us and our virtue?

Would our actions promote our inner peace as well as the inner peace of others or would our actions destroy our peace and the peace of others?

Virtue is not learned from the classroom, other than memorizing definitions. Remember, a fool can only say what he knows ~ it takes a wise man to know what he says.

How do we become a success at living a virtuous life and really know what we say?

As a lecture on Aristotle mentioned: “We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act but a habit.” We develop it by practice. Practicing ‘excellence of the human soul’ is how.

Beside the philosophical studies of ethics and virtue, a Buddhist or Taoist practice is another good peace developer for anyone to adopt whether atheist, agnostic or believer.

Buddhists are generally not required to believe or not believe in God, so anyone can make use of this philosophy irrespective of their religious beliefs or lack thereof.

But be careful with your Buddhist studies if you decide to head in this direction. For Buddhism is riddled with useless ego based dogma. If you can sift through the useless as a freethinker and find the gems you will do well.

See:

jesusneverexisted.org/jne/forum/ … ?topic=9.0

Personally, I’ve settled on the essence of Buddhism and that is what I work on and find much peace with this type of simplified Buddhist practice.

“The Three Pillars of Buddhism”

1- Practicing mindfulness and meditation to develop peace and self awareness of our own true nature.

2- Accepting the liberating wisdom of impermanence and practicing non-clinging and a lessening of craving and desires.

3- The development of compassion for others.

In addition to the three pillars, we can use the eightfold path to guide us. Within the three pillars and the eightfold path are a lifetime of practice.

No need to get lost in endless debate and spend your precious time in idle talk that only serves to massage one’s ego. Plenty of work to do right here, right now, unless we prefer to keep our minds distracted through our perpetual complexities we are so addicted to.

We do need to give some thought of the ‘right’ way to live as the eightfold path tells us, so we should never try and be devoid of thought in our lives, but instead look for a balance and let thought serve us for once.

“The Eightfold Path”

  1. Right View
  2. Right Intention
  3. Right Speech
  4. Right Action
  5. Right Livelihood
  6. Right Effort
  7. Right Mindfulness
  8. Right Concentration

How can you differentiate right from wrong?

By peace.

You learn what destroys your peace and the peace of others as well as what promotes you inner peace and the inner peace of others. Do you need a teacher for that? Or the Pope to tell you? Or just listen to peace as the best teacher?

The Five precepts are the ‘commandments’ more or less for Buddhists. Although you are not commanded to do a thing. If you wish to live at peace, then proceed the best you can - but it is your choice.

“The Five Precepts”

  1. Refrain from Killing
  2. Refrain from Stealing
  3. Refrain from Sexual Misconduct
  4. Refrain from False Speech
  5. Refrain from the Use of Intoxicants

Once I am at peace, I can share with others about finding peace for themselves, which is the secondary reason I practice.

I have no interest in practicing Buddhism for extinguishing reincarnation. These “fear based” reasons for being a Buddhist are not authentic or natural - the persons actions are based on fear or negative consequences otherwise they would not do them. My actions are based on inner peace and if I stray - there goes my peace - it is my choice.

Remember what I wrote about above with the myth of Gyges?

Take away the fear of pain of karma or hell and you have a different person?

A truly virtuous life remains the same irrespective of such fears and is not based on them.

I enjoy life and realize that due to natural law, suffering comes about as part of the process and I accept it as a fair trade off for the privilege of living.

Buddhism helps makes this trade off of life and pain more in my favor by lending me support to live a life at peace. I do not practice Buddhism to earn merit for the next life - I practice Buddhism for my own peace generation in THIS LIFE.

You see, once a religion requires faith, this is where I leave off with it’s teaching.

I only use the tools that can be applied in this life that can be tested to yield peace.

Otherwise, if I succumb to fantasy notions I start heading towards the road of delusion.

So whether it is heaven, hell, reincarnation or chanting ‘Namo Amitabha Buddha’ for the Buddha to carry me off to the pure land…none of this can be proven as fact and is just based on ego based man and their fantasies.

Still, I am not shy about benefiting from any religious path that offers tools for me to live at peace.

I take from ALL spiritual paths without prejudice, my only requirement is that the religious or spiritual tool be one that offers peace. Any tool always has to pass the peace test, this way it speaks of a ‘higher authority’ than just man made dogma - it speaks of universal truth.

See:

jesusneverexisted.org/jne/forum/ … opic=470.0

But, this all has to be done in balance.

For there are many true things that are good - but done in excess they become bad.

For, even though air and water give us life, they will also give us death when in excess.

So always seek balance.

How flexible can you be when it comes to finding tools for living at peace within the worlds spiritual paths?

Even though I am not a Muslim, I borrowed from the Muslim’s prayer schedule to use myself. The Muslims have a practice of praying five times a day to Allah. For those that do not know, Allah is the same God of the Jews and of the Old Testament that the Christians worship.

The Muslims pray at sun up, when the sun is at its zenith at noon, when the sun is part way down in the afternoon, when the sun sets and when they go to bed. Even though I am not a Muslim, I borrowed from the Muslim’s prayer schedule to use as a reminder to be mindful of “gratitude” in my life.

If you do not want to develop a practice of gratitude, then what about using it as a reminder 5 times a day to relax your breath, practice mindfulness and bring your thoughts back to the present moment? When you have come to a point of gratitude for being able to open your eyes in the morning and being able to take a breath of air everything else is just gravy so to speak. Gratitude plays an important part with finding inner peace, just as being mindful of the present moment and being aware of anything that causes this mindfulness to wander.

If I could define the basis of my spiritual practice it would be that of peace and practicality. Inner peace is the foundation of it all, for we cannot have world peace without first being at peace within. I used to be a Catholic for many years of my life as well as a freethinking Buddhist before becoming an agnostic freethinker.

See::

jesusneverexisted.org/jne/forum/ … opic=318.0

A few years ago a lady moderator on a Christian forum banned me for claiming that God is peace, telling me “you don’t know who God is.”

Funny thing about the Christians. I was a Christian as well as a freethinking Buddhist in my earlier life and 100% of the Christian forums have banned me, and 95% of the Buddhist forums have also banned me.

This says something about the Christians and Buddhists and whether they practice what they preach? The Christians chanting the Golden rule of Reciprocity and Charity and Humility? and the Buddhists preaching Compassion, Do No Harm and Egoless Non-Self?

Why am I banned so much?

Is it for getting in fights or flame wars?

No…I get banned for writing about truth.

When someone disagrees with you, apply the law of opposites to get at the truth.

This removes the personalities and focusses on the principles and helps you see the entire picture.

If God is not peace, then God must be the opposite of peace…turmoil and unrest.

I prefer to believe God is peace and God is the authority on the subject of peace.

The difference between an authority and an authoritarian is this. An authority speaks from a place of truth and such speaks as an authority. Whereas an authoritarian rules by fear and not by truth. For the truth stands on it own and the authoritarian stands on their ego.

See:

jesusneverexisted.org/jne/forum/ … opic=343.0

The Buddhists have a set of rules they use to determine what are definitive truths and what are not. This can also be applied to such questions.

  1. Do not rely on just the person but rely on the doctrine.

  2. With respect to the doctrine, do not rely on just the words, but rely on the meaning.

  3. With respect to the meaning, do not rely on just meaning requiring interpretation, but rely on meaning that is definitive.

  4. With respect to definitive meaning, do not rely on just dualistic understanding but rely on the wisdom of the direct perception of the truth.

Bringing this worship business back to the topic of religion, do we worship a higher power out of fear for if we do not worship this higher power we will be killed?

Sounds like the aliens in an old “Superman” movies that came to earth to tell us to bow down to them or else?

If there was a God or a higher power does this entity need us to ‘bow down’ to a ‘big ego’ or does God need us to ‘act right’ to our companions as well as to act right to ourselves?

Bowing down produces no peace, whether in the person that demands it due to an over bloated ego, nor does it foster peace within the person forced to worship against their will. But this is how man made religions work - they are run by fear, greed and ego.

I prefer to be truth and peace based. Many think God is like ‘Santa Claus’ and must come through with their demands, just as we did as greedy children making up a long, impossible list for Santa to fill. This smacks of the ego based practitioner.

See:

jesusneverexisted.org/jne/forum/ … opic=133.0

The ego based person prays thinking they know better than God does.

The truly spiritual based person prays for God’s will and not their own, for if they truly knew better than God…the practitioner would be the God.

Nothing wrong with asking if one is a believer, but always end such requests humbly with accepting Gods or a higher powers will with gratitude.

Can you imagine if everyone’s prayers were answered according to our self centered and conflicting demands? The world would be in real turmoil then.

No, I prefer to make the God of Peace and the God of Nature two Gods I serve and as such my actions can be evaluated in simple terms of bringing me in harmony with these two Gods or not.

See:

jesusneverexisted.org/jne/forum/ … opic=342.0

Many times we violate the three branches of laws that govern us and constantly ask God or a higher power to give us ‘hall passes’ to avoid the consequences of our actions. Such prayer is again ego based, thinking we should have preference over the rest of the world for wishing to be exempt from our actions

We are all governed by these three areas of laws.

1 - Natural Law

2 - Divine or spiritual law (if you believe in spiritual matters)

3 - Manmade laws

I find that sometime spiritual practitioners neglect the natural laws that govern our bodies and suffer in this area from lack of living a balanced life.

Some of us forget we are spiritual beings residing in physical bodies living in physical world and governed my both spiritual and physical or natural laws in addition to man made laws.

We need some effort with spiritual work and some effort in physical work for a good balance. Some of us think we can defy man made laws as well as divine or spiritual laws.

But no matter how defiant the person is…we all answer to natural law. We all bow to nature in the end.

Anyway, you are free to think or not think of God or higher power as you see fit. I am only a ‘minor authority’ on peace and do not wish to be an authoritarian, so I allow freedom for all to think as they wish and only ask the same courtesy be extended to me - reciprocity.

Psychologist William James once said, “A great many people believe they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices.”

This applies to atheists as well as the religious or the pious. To avoid prejudice, we have to be careful of ‘black or white’ absolutes if you claim to truth based and not ego based in your beliefs. I work to keep an open mind for all religions as well as those persons that believe nothing.

When I discussed Christian principles one time an Atheist piped up to say “the Christians have no principles,” and “Jesus was a fabled creation of the Christians.”

When we sperate the personalities from the principles it makes looking at things much easier. When I am referring to Christian principles I speak of such things as charity, works of mercy and the golden rule, where the emphasis is on principles and not on the personalities of the church.

For even if Jesus was just created as a fable, these Christian principles are universal truths in their own right if one desires to live a life at peace and promote the inner peace of others in this world. Is it any different from the Taoists following the legend of Lao Tzu? Always look at what is said and not at who says what this divorces the personalties and prejudice from your search for truth.

“The Corporal Works of Mercy”

To feed the hungry
To give drink to the thirsty
To clothe the naked
To harbour the harbourless
To visit the sick
To ransom the captive
To bury the dead

“The Spiritual Works of Mercy”

To instruct the ignorant
To counsel the doubtful
To admonish sinners
To bear wrongs patiently
To forgive offenses willingly
To comfort the afflicted
To pray for the living and the dead

You see, by applying the rule of reciprocity or rule of opposites we can see if we were in these positions of the needy mentioned above, we would like such charity bestowed on us for the most part. What about our children, parents and loved ones? Wouldn’t we wish the same for them? We have no loved ones? What about our neighbors?

The Christian ethic says to treat one another as we would wish to be treated. As we give ~ so we receive. Even if an atheist, as we give peace - we receive inner peace as many of the tools I mentioned above do not require belief in God, they only requirement is a desire to be at peace and to bring peace to others. This is the Christian doctrine in a nutshell, when we put principles before personalities.

As you instill seeds of peace within others you plant the same seeds and water these seeds within you as well. As James Allen wrote in “As a man Thinketh” ~ To think well of all, to be cheerful with all, to patiently learn to find the good in all - such unselfish thoughts are the very portals of heaven; and to dwell day by day in thoughts of peace toward every creature will bring abounding peace to their possessor."

This is universal truth that transcends man made religions.

Remember, we do not have to do it perfectly. Just look for direction and forget perfection - for perfection or range is of the ego and form is of the soul.

There are many tools for peace within the worlds spiritual paths, no one said these paths are perfect, in fact, it was once said that walking the spiritual path is akin to walking on a razors edge. But if we bother to be honest, non prejudicial and to look, we can find tools that can help us be at peace whether atheist, agnostic or believer.

In the Gnostic gospel of Thomas, it was reported:

“The disciples asked Jesus, when will the kingdom come? Jesus replied, 'The kingdom will not come by watching for it. It will not be said - look here or look there. Rather, the kingdom of heaven is spread out upon the earth and men do not see it.”

What does this quote mean for the atheist as well as the religious minded person?

For the atheist or as a nonbeliever of an afterlife:

THIS LIFE IS IT - This life is either heaven or hell as you make it. Just grabbing all the gusto you can will not give you peace.

It requires much more than that - for greed is never satisfied by attainment, it is only satisfied by contentment. We are reminded to be mindful of each moment given to us and to be grateful for this life. Being of service to others and charitable actions help lead us to contentment and peace.

There are 3 components for a happy life: Contentment, love or compassion and gratitude. When we realize that happiness and contentment are there for the taking and that they are independent from our circumstances it sometimes can sink in that there is nothing stopping us from being content and happy this very instant.

It is your choice alone as to whether you make this life one of peace for yourself and others or not, but in either case you will reap what you sow. “Just as a life of virtue yields its own reward, a life of vice yields its own punishment” - Plutarch

For the religious minded person and believer in an afterlife:

Jesus’ saying will foreshadow things to come. For if we make this earthly life hell for ourselves and others, we have a slim chance of doing better in an afterlife. Just paying lip service to religious principles and doing the opposite will not do it.

Again mindfulness of our actions is most important. An old Buddhist saying sheds some light on our journey “when one eye is kept on the destination, it only leaves one eye left for the journey.” If we keep fixated on the after life, and can’t find peace in the present life, we can lose sight of the fact that our actions can turn the present moment in a living hell for us as well as others.

Actions speak louder than words and this especially applies to such religious beliefs. By applying the rule of reciprocity and Christian ethics and charity we have better chance at entering any afterlife and in the interim help make this life a peaceful one for all that dwell on earth.

So, whether you are on either end of this spectrum of beliefs, the choices are the same as to the direction we take when it comes to inner peace.

The seeds of enlightenment are all around us - we only have to seek the truth and come to peace within to realize this.

A quote on finding peace from Thich Nhat Hanh

"There is no way to peace, peace is the way.

This means that we can realize peace right here in the present moment with our look, our smile, our words and our actions.

Peace work in not a means, each step we take should be peace.

Every step we take should be joy.

Every step we take should be happiness.

Are you massaging Mother Earth every time your foot touches her?

Are you planting seeds of joy and peace?

Enlightenment, peace and joy will not be granted by someone else.

The well is within us and if we dig deeply in the present moment the water will spring forth.

If we are determined, we can do it.

We don’t need the future.

We can smile, breath fully and relax Everything we want is here in the present moment.

Peace is every step.

Shall we continue our journey?"

Take care,

V (Male)

Agnostic Freethinker
Practical Philosopher
AA#2

Little do you know, Mother Teresa lied and stole. She would have her victims suffer and die instead of giving them medical treatment because that was “god’s will.” Watch this video: http://youtube.com/watch?v=8q1m-8npkJ4

As for the rest of your post, I’m not going to bother reading it because it’s the same religious rant I’ve read hundreds of times. I’ll just say this, religion is not necessary for moral standards. Morals are innate human instincts that have existed long before religion was even created. Secondly, it is neither necessary to provide us with so called role models (such as Mother Teresa). This video lists numerous atheists (mostly scientists) who have done more for the human race than Mother Teresa or any other religious figure ever have. Watch it: http://youtube.com/watch?v=fdVucvo-kDU

Mother Theresa was merely compensating for the faults of all the athiests.
If you did your part she wouldn’t of had to work so hard.

Just like all those stoners who did nothing but hate big corp for poluting. They should have went to school for their beliefs. Nothing like a bunch of over opinionated democrates.

Now look what scientists have done. They created the potential of solar panels as cheap as newspaper. How much sooner could we have had that if people weren’t stoned.

The dark night of the soul and the negative way have a long history in the inner life of spiritual persons. Faith is unnecessary where doubt is unknown. Mother Teresa did not identify herself as an atheist did she? Shall we refer to you as a closet Christian?

I don’t think we even need to call her a closet Christian. I’d say she was a full-blown Christian. Sure, her journal states that she occasionally had some doubts, well, I can’t think of anybody whose faith is unwavering. Also, given the situation that she lived in, I think that occasionally questioning the notion of God is called being human.

Also, many of her actions make zero sense outside of a Christian justification. She gave succor to the dying, which is admirable, but no (expert) treatments, no pain medication, and so on. From a salvation point-of-view those actions make sense and are consistent. From an atheistic point-of-view, it can really only be viewed as a form of sadism. Her greatness is contingent upon her theism.

Xunxian–

It was a rhetorical question. I was asking VFR if he refers to Mother Teresa as an atheist, if would be acceptable if we referred to him as a closet Christian. I agree with much what you are saying. However, I did have limited contact with Mother Teresa’s order when I lived in Miami Florida. They were helping people who could find no help from anyone else. Their aid wasn’t limited to people in the last stages of death. Since these were people who could find NO help elsewhere it seemed like they were doing unambiguously good work. Some of the recent accusations come as news to me.

Giving succor to the dying makes no sense outside of Christian justification?!?!

Bold words. Untrue, but bold nonetheless.

From what I’ve read about this, it’s rather difficult to categorize Mother Teresa’s doubts as “occasional” and to pooh-pooh them the way you try to do here. In fact, they were deep, serious, and persistent.

vfr is less of a closet Christian than you are, felix. He seems to be pretty open about his Christianity.

Giving succor to the dying is good; withholding actual treatment when you have the capacity to offer such treatment is bad. Very bad. Unless you are doing it for some reason like saving their soul. It remains bad, but at least it has a justified reason for being so.

I disagree. Unless it can be shown that there is a reason to believe that humans have souls, this is no justification for withholding needed medical treatment from them if such treatment is available.

To believe otherwise is tantamount to believing that it’s justified to kill an infant by stuffing the infant into an oven if one sincerely believes that the infant is possessed by demons.

Further, in what way does giving medical treatment to the dying put their souls at risk?

On a different topic, here’s a quote from one of Mother Teresa’s letters:

"Lord, my God, who am I that You should forsake me? The Child of your Love — and now become as the most hated one — the one — You have thrown away as unwanted — unloved. I call, I cling, I want — and there is no One to answer — no One on Whom I can cling — no, No One. — Alone … Where is my Faith — even deep down right in there is nothing, but emptiness & darkness — My God — how painful is this unknown pain — I have no Faith — I dare not utter the words & thoughts that crowd in my heart — & make me suffer untold agony.

“So many unanswered questions live within me afraid to uncover them — because of the blasphemy — If there be God — please forgive me — When I try to raise my thoughts to Heaven — there is such convicting emptiness that those very thoughts return like sharp knives & hurt my very soul. — I am told God loves me — and yet the reality of darkness & coldness & emptiness is so great that nothing touches my soul. Did I make a mistake in surrendering blindly to the Call of the Sacred Heart?”

It seems that Mother Teresa, who by all accounts was a rather simple woman, was at least honest. She, unlike so many other Christians, apparently was able to draw the correct conclusion from the awesome, devastating silence of her God.

I would generally have to agree with you but MT doubts seemed like more than just a bit of doubt. It sounds like she had this spiritual crisis for 40 years

Here’s some quotes I saw at http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/sam_harris/2007/08/the_sacrifice_of_reason.html

While I would hesitate to call Mother Theresa an atheist, to be honest it doesn’t look much better than that she took pascals wager, but never really believed. She expected to feel the warm fussy glow that told her that god existed, but felt nothing.

This seems a bit strange to me. If she had convinced herself that god existed you’d think she would force herself to feel it (I think that is what my mother does :slight_smile:). She didn’t though but could not “come out”. Maybe she thought her “good works” would be threatened so she kept schtum (sp?).

“Justification” from the subjective point of view of the individual. For theist, there is a justification for withholding treatments, though as I said, from my perspective (and – dare I say it, most people’s) it remains “bad”. However, it is an understandable bad, as opposed to a completely illogical one. As for the idea of why treatment endangers people, well, here is the essence of why MT was a theist (albeit one who had her doubts) is because of the idea that suffering brings us closer to God.

This is a theme that has been reiterated in many religions, the idea that the world that we are living in now is a temporary one and that the pleasures of this world drive us to revel in this world whereas suffering drives us away from this world and towards the greater cosmological truth. That is why providing treatment would be “wrong” from that perspective, since it is actually causing people to move away from God.

Now, if one sincerely believes in a system like this and begins to practice it (as MT did), how isn’t that going to make you think that God is a, err, less than good option. I mean, it pretty much goes against every human instinct of what righteousness is. Now, that she kept doing this sort of thing suggests to me that her belief in God remained despite her questioning. After all, I do think that understanding demands action, so if she truly understood that there was no God, she would have stopped doing that sort of thing.

Anyone with experience of Catholic thought, literature, and culture would understand that this woman and her letters of lamentation are Catholic through and through. She believes she is undergoing a dark night of the soul, in which one’s own sufferings are united to those of Jesus on the cross. It is supposed to be agonizing. It is supposed to produce anguished uncertainty. It is supposed to make her wonder if God has forsaken her, just as Jesus felt on the cross. This is ancient Christian mysticism, going all the way back to Paul’s letters. Indeed Paul emphasizes the concept of uniting one’s sufferings to those of Jesus as essential to Christianity.

That Sam Harris and his ilk think they indicate she was an atheist just goes to show how little they understand of Christianity.

Anyone – theist or atheist – can justify any belief subjectively. So from that standpoint, an atheist just like a theist can justify to himself or to herself that by withholding medical treatment to a dying person he or she is actually doing a good thing. He or she can do so by appealing to a virtually unlimited number of subjective reasons.

Subjective justification, however, cannot make a belief rational and I think it is to this (i.e., rational belief) that you refer when you write “it is an understandable bad.” You seem to mean that, in some regard, it is rational to hold such a belief.

It is this with which I disagree.

To be rational a belief must have more than the trait of its merely being believed to be reasonable. For a belief to be rational requires that there be good epistemic reason to believe what it is that is believed. This is where justification comes in.

To believe that to withhold medical treatment from an innocent person who will probably die without the treatment is a good thing is a fairly obvious irrational belief whether the belief is held by Mother Teresa, by snake handlers in East Tennessee, by sadists, or by almost anyone else.

That would make sense except for one thing. Mother Teresa apparently wasn’t attempting to unite her sufferings with those of Jesus. Instead, she doubted even Jesus’ existence.

In one letter she writes: “What do I labor for? If there be no God, there can be no soul. If there be no soul then, Jesus, You also are not true.”

As far as is known Mother Teresa stopped praying years before she died and carried her doubts about the existence of God with her to her grave.

In order for that to work there would have to be some sort of objective morality. That is a bit of a slippery slope, IMHO.

Now, there are moral systems that are universal and I would agree that she violated one of those, but that is not the same thing as what you are saying. As for rationality, well, rationality is contingent upon morality so I think that trying to argue morality is rational is putting the cart before the horse!

RC,

The people close to MT suggest that she was undergoing a dark night of the soul as well. MT does not talk about it that way, but neither did Jesus. Jesus expressed feelings of intense suffering and abandonment, but resolved to do God’s will to the end anyway. As Xunzian observed, MT follows this pattern. She did what she believed to be God’s will to the end even though she felt forsaken.

In the letter where she says she has stopped praying, she speaks of a separation from God but does not deny his existence:

"I want God with all power of my soul – and yet between us there is terrible separation. I don’t pray any longer. "

When she says she has no faith, she’s not necessarily saying she doesn’t believe that God exists. She is talking about how she can’t feel God’s presence or trust in him as an active present force in her life. It’s another way of saying she feels forsaken.

Now I am an atheist and have no attachment to Mother Teresa as a Catholic icon. But I was raised Catholic and read lives of the saints and spiritual tradition of the church. Many saints had terrible doubts yet did not deny God. The church only has a problem with the denial of God, not doubting his presence. I see no indication in MT’s writings that she ever denied God’s existence. She certainly never thought of leaving the Catholic faith.

I bet it’ll be the Church that ends up naming MT the patron saint of atheists…

Just to piss us off :smiley: