Commentary on the Channel Four Documentary Mother Teresa
(October 25, 2003)
It is not easy to be a saint, and least of all in the sinful world of the
21st century - or so one might think. But this opinion is definitely not
shared by Pope John Paul II. In fact, he has already manufactured no fewer than
474 of them during his stint at the Vatican. So there can be no complaints about
his level of productivity. He has become an enthusiastic market leader in the
saint-manufacturing business.
To put this achievement in its context, this Pope has created more saints
than all his predecessors put together, in the course of more than 2000 years.
And, despite his advanced years and delicate state of health, he is not about to
give up on the job. He is currently planning to raise Mother Teresa of Calcutta
to the ranks of the Saints, only six years after she passed away.
Here we have the secret of Pope John Paul II�s impressive productivity
record. Actually it is no secret at all. He merely follows the tried and true
method of capitalist industry - the Speed-Up. You see, in the days before
people had heard of productivity deals and time and motion studies they took
their time over such things. Take Joan of Arc, for instance. She had to wait 600
years for sainthood. Now Mother Teresa is a done deal after just six. This means
an increase of exactly 10,000 percent on the old system! What more could one
ask?
The main reason why things used to take so long was that, in order to qualify
for promotion to the Boardroom in the clouds, one had to satisfy a number of
stringent (and rather old-fashioned) conditions. First, one had to have a good
CV - a good story - one that makes people sit up and pay attention.
Secondly (and here�s the rub) a proven miracle, and, last but not
least, the backing of a Pope.
Now in the old days when the pace of life was a lot slower and people had
never heard of productivity bonuses, the Popes were a stick-in-the-mud lot who
were a bit tardy in elevating people to the sainthood. Production methods were
not at all streamlined. There was a lot of bureaucracy and red tape, all kinds
of unnecessary tests and interviews to say whether the miracles were proven to
the satisfaction of the Vatican or not. This was a serious disincentive to the
enterprise culture and explains why so few promising aspirants ever made it.
Then in comes Karol Wojtyla - a thoroughly modern, no-nonsense, can-do,
hands-on, business-oriented sort of Pope, completely in tune with the enterprise
culture of the 21st century. Brushing aside all the red tape and bureaucracy, he
liberalises and opens up the whole business. Miracles are approved wholesale.
The number of saints increases by leaps and bounds. Sceptics and nay-sayers are
downsized.
Mother Teresa, as everybody knows, is a soul sister of the present occupant
of the Vatican. Both hail from Eastern Europe (the Pope being Polish, and Mother
Teresa Albanian). Both are staunch anti-Communists, both have had intimate
relations with reactionary politicians in Washington, and both are fervent
backers of the most conservative sectors of the Roman Catholic Church,
fanatically opposed to birth control and abortion.
Mother Teresa said "if a mother can murder her own children in her own
womb, what is to stop you and me from murdering each other?" What this
aspiring saint did not say is that in present day India millions of children are
born into a life of misery, ignorance, hunger, disease and squalor that will
send them to an early grave. This, too, is murder, a terrible murder perpetrated
by the capitalist system - which she and her friend Wojtyla always loyally
supported.
There would be no need for abortion if the social conditions that
guarantee
poverty and hunger for the masses were abolished. There would also be
no need
for abortion if free contraception were made available to everyone who
wanted
it. By opposing contraception the Catholic establishment creates the
conditions
that drive desperate women to abortion. But there are two kinds of
abortion - that which has always been available to the daughters of
wealthy families who
have an "accident", and that which is available to women from poor
peasant
and working class families. The first takes place quietly in hygienic
and
well-equipped private hospitals, the second in squalid backrooms down
back
allies where ignorant old women probe with dirty needles, causing pain,
injury
and horrific death to a large number of unfortunate women and girls in
India and
many other countries.
Marxists stand for the rights of the poor and oppressed everywhere. We stand
for the abolition of poverty and exploitation that makes such horrors
inevitable. We also stand for the right of a woman to dispose of her body as she
sees fit. The scientific use of contraception, and a proper sexual education for
the young, free of religious mumbo-jumbo, hypocrisy and prejudice, is a
precondition of a civilized attitude to the relations between men and women and
for the freedom and equality of the female sex. Those who oppose this and place
obstacles in the way of contraception are acting against the interests of women
and above all of the most disadvantaged sections of society. Such reactionary
attitudes are contributing to the perpetuation of poverty, the enslavement of
women and the spread of aids, with all the horrors that means. In the context of
an underdeveloped country like India it is nothing short of criminal.
According to the story assiduously cultivated by the media, Mother Teresa was
a real saint walking on the face of the earth. She healed the sick (with the aid
of the odd miracle), comforted the dying and cared for the poor. And all this
was accomplished in that ghastly sea of human misery that is Calcutta. This myth
owes its origins mainly to a BBC TV documentary of 1968 called Mother Teresa of
Calcutta. This was the first recorded instance of a "miracle" performed on
television.
The man responsible for this was the late Malcom Muggeridge - a well-known
arch-Tory reactionary and fanatical Catholic. His interest in spreading the myth
of the "saint" of Calcutta is perfectly clear. His whole demeanour in this
programme was one of superstitious credulity and unctuous servility. This was
wholly characteristic of the man, who is a byword for cheap TV journalism
peppered with pretentious pseudo-philosophical gibberish.
It is not impossible that M.M. may have even believed in this mumbo-jumbo. If
you go to Calcutta looking for saints, the chances are you will find one
or even two. Or he may just have been cynically manipulated by the subject of
his documentary. After all, Mother Teresa was always a shrewd businesswoman, and
the reactionary old fool from London was predisposed to believe just about
anything. Be that as it may, the content of this first documentary was seriously
challenged by subsequent investigations.
The present case for beatification is based on an alleged miracle concerning
a Hindu peasant woman, Monika Besra, who was supposed to have been saved from
certain death by a miracle, There are one or two other cases, but these are of
such a dubious character that even the new streamlined, liberalised procedures
at the Vatican find them hard to swallow.
One such case involves an Englishman, Norman Imms, a paranoid schizophrenic
form the North-East who claims that he was cured of mental illness after seeing
a vision of Mother Teresa. The value of miracles involving mentally ill people
has always been regarded as slight by the Vatican itself, for obvious reasons.
Therefore it does not regard this case as a "bona fide miracle".
We are therefore left with the case of Monika Besra, who in 1997 was
seriously ill, so ill that her family were forced to sell their land, having
spent all their money trying to cure her. Finally, she was admitted to a local
hospital, apparently dying. She had a cyst the size of a melon in her stomach.
Local doctors diagnosed tubercular meningitis. Medicines seemed to be of no
avail. But the sisters found a far more efficient method of dealing with the
problem. They tied a medallion of Mother Teresa with a black string over the
woman�s stomach and prayed. The next morning, if we are to believe M.B.
and the sisters, the cyst had disappeared.
Doctors were incredulous, as well they might be. A tumour of this size does
not disappear between 5pm and 1am. They are also sceptical about the claim,
pointing out that the woman did not have that much faith in the sisters and
their medallions and prayers, since she continued to take the medicines. They
suspect fraud, and say simply that the woman and the sisters are not telling the
truth.
Why should people tell lies about this kind of thing? Well, for a start,
there is a lot of money in the miracles business. Just look at Lourdes! A
miracle can work - well, miracles - for business. A lot of people will come
looking for cures for their illnesses, and that means more sales, more
donations, more investments. In short, a miracle or two never did anyone any
harm!
Or did they? Actually, it is very harmful to preach to poor uneducated people
that what they need is not modern drugs from western pharmaceutical companies at
affordable prices, but miracles and prayers. Such propaganda does not help these
people escape from their poverty, disease and ignorance but, on the contrary,
binds them still more further to their physical and mental slavery.
Sumita Kumar, Mother Teresa�s spokesperson, certainly did not appear to be
living in poverty when she appeared on Channel Four to justify these claims,
sitting in a rather luxurious home in New Delhi. Clearly she herself was in no
need of any miracles to solve her problems. A short drive to the bank would do
just as well. Such well-to-do individuals find the likes of Mother Teresa and
her "miracles" highly convenient, since they make high taxes for the
betterment of the poor quite unnecessary.
But other people have a very different opinion of Mother Teresa. A
documentary on Channel Four in 1994 completely exposed the myths encouraged by
the earlier programme by Muggeridge. It showed how MT was not interested in
alleviating human pain and suffering but only in saving their souls. Although
there were plenty of painkillers available, dying people were left to suffer.
One of the persons interviewed on the programme, an Englishwoman, had been a
great admirer of MT until she saw this with her own eyes. "I was shocked,"
she said. "They were regarded as souls, but not bodies." People were left in
unnecessary pain, this presumably being good for the soul or at least a matter
of secondary importance.
The role of religion in the history of colonialism is well known
historically. The domination of the colonial peoples by imperialism was
everywhere prepared and facilitated by religion. The white man came to Africa,
India and Latin America with the bible under his arm. He took the land and gold
from the natives and gave them the bible in return. Some people might well say
that this was not a good bargain.
Bringing Christianity to these peoples had a clear purpose, to make transform
them into obedient and submissive subjects, to accept their lot. This continues
today in the face if imperialist oppression. And Mother Teresa and her sisters
continued to inculcate this spirit among the oppressed layers of India.
Mother Teresa's successor Sister Nirmala has explained that, "poverty
will always exist. We want the poor to see poverty in the right way � to
accept it and believe that the Lord will provide." If this were accepted by
the workers and poor then they would never fight back against the bosses, they
would never organise in a trade union or political party. So while presenting
themselves as helpers of the poor in reality they contribute to keeping them
prisoners of this system which oppresses and exploits them.
One example helps to highlight this. In 1983, the US multinational Union
Carbide's plant in India exploded, causing terrible deaths and injuring many
others. This was clearly due to the company�s policy of saving on safety
measures. Mother Teresa�s comment was: "This could have been an accident,
it's like a fire [that] could break out anywhere. That is why it is important to
forgive. Forgiveness offers us a clean heart and people will be a hundred times
better after it." So instead of organising to fight back against Union
Carbide the victims of this terrible crime of capitalism should merely accept
their lot. That conveniently leaves the profits of Union Carbide intact and lets
its owners off the hook. Of course, the victims could remain happy at having
received aluminium medals of St. Mary� from Mother Teresa.
Of course, people should have the right to adopt any religion they
wish - or none at all. But what is objectionable is the spreading of
the idea among
poor, ignorant people that they can be cured by miracles, by prayers
and by the
tying on of medallions with black string. Even more objectionable - and
dangerous - is the propagation of the idea that the use of
contraceptive
devices is sinful in countries where millions are menaced by poverty,
starvation
and Aids. This does not contain an atom of progressive content but is
purely
reactionary and directed against the interests of the poorest and most
vulnerable sections of society.
Even if we leave aside these elements, the reactionary essence of MT and her
like may be summed up as following: it is an outlook that would encourage people
to leave the existing society intact, to leave the landlords, capitalists,
moneylenders and other oppressors in possession of their power and privileges,
and instead to look forward to future happiness beyond the grave.
The reactionary character of MT�s philosophy and works has naturally earned
her the enthusiastic support of the ruling class, and especially its most
unsavoury representatives. She enjoyed close friendships with all kinds of
characters, right wing regimes and dictatorships: not only Ronald Reagan and
Robert Maxwell, but also "Papa Doc" Duvalier, the bloodthirsty dictator of
Haiti. What matter if they were crooks, dictators, or even murderers - as long
as they were rich!
All this is true also of her good friend Karol Wojlyla, who all his life has
fought for the most reactionary causes and won the plaudits of the wealthy and
powerful of this world. This hardened reactionary has a particular reason for
promoting saints and miracles.
Superstition has always been present in the dark recesses of human
consciousness from the Stone Age down to the present. All the marvellous
discoveries of science have not succeeded in dislodging these age-old prejudices
from the human psyche. Not only in the slums of Calcutta but in the
well-furnished flats of the middle class in California and London, and even in
university lecture halls, religion and mysticism is alive and well in the first
decade of the 21st century.
Admittedly, organised religion has been having a hard time lately, especially
in the developed capitalist countries. Fewer and fewer people go to church in
Europe. In Catholic Spain the Church is finding it difficult to find a
sufficient number of young men prepared to train as priests. In France the
number of professional astrologers vastly exceeds that of Catholic priests. In
the USA the Catholic Church has been rocked by sex scandals. Nor is the crisis
confined to the Catholic Church. The Anglican Communion has also been torn
asunder by the appointment of a self-confessed homosexual bishop in the USA.
As in the period of decadence in ancient Rome, not many people believe in the
old gods, but instead there is a huge and growing number of sects from the East.
These display a certain vitality that is lacking in modern western Christianity.
Their mystical creeds appeal to the jaded palate of men and women who do not
suffer from material privation but who feel that their lives are empty and
meaningless, an endless drudgery of work and toil, a cultural poverty and a
spiritual void.
Alienation and vicious egotism have turned "civilised" western society
into a nightmare of crime, violence and insecurity in which people increasingly
question the value of life itself. But they do not look to the traditional
churches for succour and salvation. Organised religion in countries like Britain
is withering on the vine. The attitude of most people to the scandals that rock
the Churches resembles that of their ancestors in the 14th century, in the
period of the decline of feudalism - cynicism, indifference and contempt.
As a militant religious reactionary, Wojtyla has no intention of giving up
without a fight. Unfortunately, he lacks some of the most effective methods of
persuasion used by his forebears: fire, the rack and other pleasant little items
in the arsenal of the Holy Inquisition. But superstition is always a useful
weapon. This explains the single-minded determination with which this pope has
pursued the business of saint-manufacture.
But let no-one say that it is all a question of quantity. No! Pope John Paul
II is very concerned about quality. Not everyone is accepted as good material
for sainthood. The Pope scrutinises the list with the greatest care and
attention, weeding out any candidate who lacks the necessary qualifications.
Saints-to-be must have impeccable right wing references. Archbishop Oscar Romero
of San Salvador, a progressive who was brutally murdered by right wing death
squads and whose name has been repeatedly submitted by Catholics in Central
America, has been unceremoniously rejected. Modern saints must be right-wingers.
Anybody on the left need not apply!
On the other hand, Pope Pius XII, that friend of Hitler and Mussolini who
maintained a complicit silence over the Holocaust, about which he was well
informed, and who helped numerous Nazi criminals to escape to Latin America
after the Second World War - is high on the list of those whom Wojtyla wants
to make into saints. So is the founder of the right wing Catholic mafia the Opus
Dei, Escriva, who was an active collaborator of the fascist dictator Franco.
The hidden agenda of the present Pope is all too clear. He wishes to
reinforce right wing reaction everywhere, presenting these reactionary
scoundrels as first-rate candidates for sainthood. No doubt he also hopes that
he himself will then be seen as a priority case, to be fast-tracked to sainthood
soon after he has gone to a Better Place.
But there is an even better reason for Wojtyla�s enthusiasm for
saint-manufacturing. The decline of organised religion in the West plays a role
in the Churches analogous to that of overproduction in world markets. If there
is a decline in purchasing power in Europe, one must look for an expanding
market elsewhere. One must find an emerging market for religion!
Such an emerging market exists. It exists in poor countries in Africa, Asia
and Latin America. In these areas the universal poverty makes people desperate.
The message of the Church, which promises the poor of this world a future of
heavenly bliss in the next life plays the role of a powerful drug, the more
attractive because it costs rather less than the other drugs offered for sale on
the high street, is freely available and, in most places, not illegal.
For many people in what is known for some reason or another as the "developing
world" Christianity has the kind of exotic appeal that in Europe and America
is usually associated with religious cults imported from the East. Here the
usual rules of global trading apply: there is an interchange of imports between
the "third world" and the "first world" - usually to the disadvantage
of the former. The import of crazy cults into the west affect only the mental
state of a tiny handful of eccentrics. But the import of Christianity to Asia,
Africa and Latin America spelled the ruin of whole peoples, who were plundered
and robbed not only of their wealth but also of their soul, their traditions and
cultures.
The Pope, as a shrewd businessman, keeps an attentive eye on these emerging
markets. In order to ensure that the Church of Rome maintains its market share
(for there is keen competition from rivals like Islam and Protestant
evangelists) the Pope has stepped up the production of saints from the
aforementioned countries. It would seem that the procedure is approximately as
follows:
The Pope goes to African/Asian/Latin America country x. Before departure, he
is informed by the Vatican bureaucrats that in country x there is such-and-such
a person (y - deceased) who meets the current criteria for beatification (right
wing, reactionary, anti-birth control etc.). Upon arrival (or shortly before
departure) the Supreme Pontiff announces to a rapturous crowd that y is up for
sainthood. This is the way in which they try to influence millions of poor
people to join them. It is not that the number of saints has increased but that
the most reactionary wing of the Vatican, led by Wojtyla, is striving to lure a
large number of people into the fold, and simultaneously to encourage a
reactionary ideology.
These manoeuvres have an entirely cynical character. Many honest Catholics
can see through them. How does it come about that more saints have been made in
the last few years than in 2,000 years? This world has not become a more saintly
place since the present Pope took office, but quite the opposite. The living
standards of the masses have been cut, poverty has increased, there is one war
after another. The root cause of this human catastrophe is the capitalist system
that the Pope defends.
The founder of Christianity lived and worked among the poor. His followers
had to give up all their worldly wealth as a condition for joining the movement.
Today many Catholics, particularly in South and Central America, but also in
places like the Philippines, are fighting against injustice and oppression. They
want to defend the interests of the poor workers and peasants. These people have
all our sympathy. But the princes of the Church (not just the Catholic Church)
have long ago abandoned the creed of the early Christians. They have joined the
ranks of the rich and powerful. They have handed the Church over to the same
moneychangers that Jesus drove out.
They preach obedience and servility to the poor in order to guarantee the
continuation of this ghastly system of exploitation and oppression. The "consolation"
that they offer the victims of this system is a poor consolation that must wait
until the grave. Of them it is truly said: "I asked you for bread and you gave
me a stone." We say: let us unite to fight against exploitation and
oppression. Let the working class take power and put an end to the rule of the
overlords - material and spiritual. Let us build a paradise in this world.
London, November 3, 2003.
|