.... and traveled first class ... and was treated and behaved in many ways like the CEO of any large organization....
Much has been written, questioning the "purity" of her motives and actions......  There are those who say that her help to the poor was not equally distributed, sometimes mean-spirited, and, at best, merely palliative.
I do know, from having heard her, that she supported women's "traditional" roles, ie buying into the male construct of the supportive, compliant helpmeet (I use that particular word purposefully, for all of its antiquated connotations) and rejected feminism (ie equal opportunities and rights for women).  Perhaps that is why she was seen by the Church powers-that-be as such a good role model ....