 |
||
|
||
|
||
Some two years ago, the TV company for which 1 work transmitted a
polemical piece on Mother Teresa which said that she accepted money
for her mission from known fascist totalitarians and which featured
British women who had worked for her saving on camera that they had
left because some of those who came under its care could have been
saved by medical means but were not, because the mission was
concerned with the eternal fife of their souls rather than the
prolongation of the struggling lives of their bodies.
It was a difficult piece of TV polemic, delivered by a journalist
called Christopher Hitchens, whose soul is destined for the eternal
bonfire now, despite the fact that he filmed a fascinating set of
truths.
Some fellow, who wrote for an Indian magazine called Sunday
presumed, quite wrongly, that I had something to do with this
documentary and proceeded to write the most awful stuff about my
sexual morals and financial swindles.
I called my lawyers (not that I had any lawyers, I had to get some)
and sued him about the financial swindles. The magazine published a
grovelling apology and its proprietor paid me several thousand
pounds.
Nevertheless, if I were to commission a documentary in this day and
age on Mother Teresa or Sister Nirmala, the first questions I would
want answered would be: 'Why reconcile your clientele to death?
How close to such reconciliation are you yourself? Would you accept
medical treatment which is beyond the reach of those who come to
your hospice to die?
'Wouldn't your name and a plea from your lips secure from all over
the world, from billionaires who own grocery manufactories and
others, elicit the funds required for a hospital dedicated to life
rather than a dignified death?
'What is so dignified about death anyway?
|
||
|
||
|
||