On the occasion of the canonization of Mother Teresa I read and listened to many testimonies of her life that was anchored onto a faith that transformed itself into total charity towards the poorest of the poor and the most excluded giving life to a series of extraordinary institutions of assistance throughout the world run by her religious members. I was not particularly surprised at the reports that pointed out the aspect of her life described as “nights of faith” or rather “voids” that she suffered from to the point of making her doubt herself and her own mission. In fact I have read, in the biographies of other saints and mystics, that a similar thing had happened to them. But the fact that really upset and hurt me was that some qualified journalists had the impudence to question all of Mother Teresa’s work, discrediting all of her choice towards the poor as a mania of protagonism or proselytism, indicating her work in her hospitals as being by no means sure, efficient or hygienic, even throwing mud on her finances to the point of stating that she had pocketed the financing and offers.... Here, I ask: how is it possible to come to all of this before all the evidence? Why are there these extreme and distorted judgements? When speaking to a friend, a priest, he gave me this simple, but efficient answer: “...also Jesus when he sat at table with the last, was accused of being a greedy man and a heavy drinker”.