I recommended one book because of its comprehensive documentation. It's far from the only source of information.
I'm not sure why I keep seeing posts that in the time it took to write them or bring them up with spouses who say they never heard of this, many sources could be uncovered and even found worthy of examining.
common sense would dictate she wouldn't have been purposely involved in things that may have damned her soul .
I'm not sure that common sense applies to matters of faith, but MT might arguably be said to have been less concerned about the alleviation of poverty and suffering than in bringing souls to the Roman Catholic church. As for what she may or may not have believed could **bleep** anyones soul - one should always keep this piece of Scripture close-at-hand in my opinion:
Every way of a man is right in his own eyes (Proverbs 21:2)
The rest of that verse adds but the LORD pondereth the hearts
Her letters and journals reflect that she suffered for decades from having lost the sense of connection to God and this caused her much psychological pain and self doubt. Some have accused her of hypocrisy on account of this, but I actually think this is unjust. However, it's not irrelevant.
Her own words are worth reviewing too. For example, at a press conference in 1981 she said:
"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."
She spoke of suffering in similar language, suggesting that suffering is a beautiful thing, like a kiss from Jesus.
Her account with the Vatican Bank amounted to so many billions of $ that it likely would have bankrupted them if she'd ever called in the $. But the $ that did go to her charities, homes, etc to directly help the poor and ill were meager indeed. And many of the trappings were misleading - an example being the ambulances - which were not used to transport the ill or dying but to take nuns from location to location. And food services that did not feed thousands daily as claimed but hundred, and most of which required that the attendees be pre-approved as Roman Catholic poor.
The failure to provide analgesics to suffering and dying patients in her homes was not due to lack of funds and was a topic of concern for many critics including the editor of THE LANCET who commented on the 'haphazard' way the homes were managed, including their failure to distinguish between the treatable and the terminal or to prevent the spread of tuberculosis by even the simplest methods of isolation. He commented harshly, as did others, on the absence of efforts to relieve suffering. Lack of money was never a barrier.
Anyway - the best thing anyone can do when faced with statements contrary to the facts one previously understood to be true is to either:
1. disbelieve it out of hand
2. do some research
I recommend 2. but recognize that it may be unpalatable to many.
THIS SPACE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK
