Reason is the need for the Infinite...

As I was doing some research for another project, I stumbled on an interesting article, "My Catholic Faith Pushes Me to Obama," by Kari Lundgren.

In her article, Kari provides a quick sketch of her college experience "as a conservative Catholic single-issue voter":

I quickly joined Students for Life, the campus pro-life group, and began spending Saturday mornings with 6 am mass and an hour drive to Pittsburgh to pray in front of the abortion clinic. That first year I was a bus captain on the trip to Washington, D.C. for the March for Life, as well as head of the Students for Life Prayer Team. I was interviewed on the conservative Catholic TV station EWTN as a young pro-life leader.

...I also volunteered at the local crisis pregnancy center, where we offered free pregnancy tests, infant formula, children's clothing, and other services to help women who were pregnant and needed extra support. I went to daily mass and weekly confession, as I had since high school. I marched in the occasional local abortion protest. I read theology in my free time.

I was, in other words, the perfect Steubenville Catholic student: devoted to my prayer life, diligent in my studies, involved in student life, and passionate about the pro-life cause.

Later, Lundgren experienced a kind of conversion:

...While I prayed for an end to abortion and the conversion of souls, I also saw the depressed ex-steel town in which the university resided, and I felt a disconnect between the spiritual fervency on campus and the poverty surrounding it. I was ashamed to have the money to be a full-time student when the neighborhoods next door to the university were filled with dilapidated houses and people forced out of work when the steel mills closed. Big questions started plaguing me: Was it really enough to make these people observant Catholics, as the general thinking on campus went? Were all of their socioeconomic problems really caused by the fact that they used birth control? Would overturning Roe v. Wade really be enough to solve the poverty, under-education, and chronic unemployment rampant in the town and the world?

These questions led her to reject what we might quickly (if inaccurately) refer to the "Steubenville solution." She found "better" answers to her questions in the rhetoric of the political left.

There are, as of this writing, 168 comments following her article. The commenters split rather cleanly into two camps: Catholics who disapprove of Lundgren's conversion on the one hand and on the other hand, supporters of Obama who cheer her on. Meanwhile, not one person posed the questions that most interest me:

Why, as an undergraduate, did she do all the things she describes herself doing? And why does proclaim the views that she now proclaims?

I am particularly curious about why she was so ardently pro-life as a college student. Because we can work very hard at many righteous and important tasks, but if we lack adequate reasons for doing them, they will eventually exhaust and paralyze us. Do we do them because we feel our efforts will make a positive impact and thus give our lives meaning? Do we do them in order to appear morally or religiously consistent in the eyes of our neighbors? Do we wish to please an authority? Or do we do them in order to find self-fulfillment?

It is the task of educators to propose a positive hypothesis that explains the meaning of everything. The Church provides just such a hypothesis, one that accounts for the questions that Lundgren asks. This hypothesis does not include the explanations that Lundgren lists in her article (that the answer to poverty is to make the unemployed into "ardent Catholics," that socioeconomic problems are caused by people using birth control, that overturning Roe v. Wade is all that is needed" to solve the poverty, under-education, and chronic unemployment rampant in the town and the world"). So, where did she get these inadequate answers to her questions? Why do they remain the only reasons she can give for the Catholic concern for the sanctity of life?

These questions are troubling, especially in light of Lundgren's assertion:

I went to daily Mass and weekly confession, as I had since high school. I marched in the occasional local abortion protest. I read theology in my free time.

In all those daily homilies, in her encounters with priests in the confessional, in the theology she read, did she never encounter reasons other than the ones she listed as the "Catholic" (and unsatisfying) response to poverty and injustice? It is possible. And the fact that it is possible should give us pause.

We can train young people to engage in "correct" behaviors without ever providing them with an education that will adequately give meaning to the whole of life. We can avoid probing their motives when we find ourselves approving of their behavior.

So, now my second question: why does Lundgren write her article? In her opening paragraph, she says, "I'm writing this for my sisters and brothers who still are those kinds of Catholic voters" (that is: "conservative Catholic single-issue voters"). Does she really hope to convince anyone who might disagree with her? In the whole of her article, she never addresses whether there exist Catholic voters who appreciate being called "single-issue" voters (it's actually perceived as an epithet by most ardently pro-life Catholics). And what steps does she take to speak with them about their true concern, that is, the destruction of innocent life?

The assertion that better services for the poor and marginalized will reduce the number of abortions has not been documented with evidence. I can imagine that some anecdotal evidence exists, but there is no hard data to support this claim. It remains on the level of pure speculation and supposition. In fact, abortion cuts across socioeconomic class. It is not merely the desperate choice of the impoverished.

The most intelligent and succint argument in response to the charge that pro-life Catholics are "single-issue" voters appeared in The Herald Star, our local newspaper, in a letter to the editor by Patrick Lee, professor of bioethics at (coincidence?) Franciscan University:

To the editor:

Some suggest pro-lifers should consider life as just one issue among others and not engage in single-issue voting.

But this makes no sense. The differences between the two presidential tickets on taxes, health care, etc., concern means to the same ends (neither side advocates solving such problems by killing poor or sick people). By contrast, the difference between them on abortion is a difference about basic ends.

At stake in this debate is the principle of the fundamental equal dignity of every human being, regardless of inessential differences, the same principle at stake in the 19th century regarding slavery. It was intrinsically unjust to reduce black human beings to the status of mere things for use. Likewise, it is inherently unjust to reduce unborn human beings to the status of mere inconvenient burdens that can be ripped to pieces or disposed of in trash cans.

It is unjust to vote for, or promote, a pro-abortion candidate if another candidate who is not worse on fundamental life issues, is an option - even if that candidate is inferior on other issues. This violates the basic moral principle of the Golden Rule - do unto others as you would have them do unto you. If a candidate was in favor of killing professors, I would expect my fellow citizens to vote against him even if his positions on health care or economics were superior to those of his rival candidate. Likewise, it is unjust to vote for those who promote killing unborn human beings - indeed, energetically, even to the point of advocating the clearly barbarous practices of partial-birth abortion and killing babies born alive from botched abortions (as Obama has done) - when their rivals do not.

Some object that Obama does not actually endorse abortion because he promises to work to decrease there number. But this argument is fallacious. Obama has consistently supported funding for abortions, and his governmental health care plan would mandate such funding. Since in political office, Obama has done everything he could possibly do to assist the abortion industry, and has even proclaimed his defense of the alleged right to abortion a priority in his presidency.

If a politician in the 19th century took an analogous position on slavery, his claim that he is "pro-choice" would not fly. Imagine a candidate saying, "I do not endorse slavery. Rather, I am pro-choice. But I have been a consistent champion of the right to slavery for the last 10 years. And I will make defense of that fundamental right a priority in my presidency. Of course, I hope fewer people will feel the need to resort to that choice, and so as president I will introduce measures aimed at keeping slavery safe, legal and rare. But, to ensure that slavery remains an option for white men who should, after all, control their own property, I am in favor of funding slavery for those poor whites who cannot afford it." (Patrick Lee, Steubenville)

Lundgren should be crafting an argument to respond to Lee's position, not working to knock down straw men she herself has invented.

So, I'm still left with a question. Why did she write her article? I suspect, in the end, it was for the same reason she went to daily Mass and worked so ardently to put an end to abortion while in college. Perhaps she has a strong desire for justice? If so, she could begin her quest by accurately understanding and representing the Catholic understanding of social justice and the sanctity of life. This exercise would represent a great step toward justice.

Or, perhaps she has other reasons.

Our Valuable Children. -- III

OVC Progetto AVSI in Kenya



For more information, go to The Association of Volunteers in International Service

Our Valuable Children. -- II

AVSI project: Our valuable children - Rwanda



For more information, go to The Association of Volunteers in International Service

Our Valuable Children. -- I

AVSI Progetto OVC in Uganda



For more on AVSI, go to the AVSI USA website.

Who do you belong to?

"I went through a time of panic and fear, like I had never known before, during the Ebola epidemic. The fright came to me when Dr. Matthew died (cf. Traces, 2001, No. 2, p. 19). I felt my life and the lives of those in my house to be in danger. Even the problems at work increased. I began to “argue” with Jesus. I found myself repeating the phrase from the Psalms, “From the end of the earth I call to you with fainting heart.” This was the right phrase to describe the state of my soul. I saw myself destroyed by my weakness, by my nothingness. I saw the house [of Memores Domini] become, again, the locus of the covenant, of the promise that everything that is in me is made secure, saved. I saw the tenderness of Jesus who forgives me in the face of Clara, of Corrado, when I returned home, and this gave me peace. Through that gaze I realized my imperfection, I realized that I am wanted precisely for this reason, because Jesus came to fulfill me. I belong to this tenderness because He has a plan for me. And I felt strong because of this. If there were not this certainty that continues in our houses, everything that is in me and in the world would truly be nothingness, ashes. Instead, when I come home there is a smile waiting for me; I find a smile. At times I wonder, “Why do they smile, truly? Why do I see so many people who have nice jobs, beautiful children, husbands, wives, but no one is truly content with what he does and what he has?” It is an attraction that moves us, this is the condition for happiness, for smiles. I absolutely agree with Father Giussani on everything he is teaching us. I have seen people destroyed by ideology, destroyed by exalting a particular, but in the end nobody is satisfied with this either and they are too afraid to cry out. We are lucky, because even I saw myself drowning in this ideology, but with humility I cry out in that place where I belong, I cry out to God with secure certainty.
For me, this is not feeling or being greater than they are, but being moved by the fact that my nothingness is not lost. Moved before the mercy that generates me. There is nothing that corresponds to me more than this."

This testimony from Rose was published in 2001 in Traces. Rose is the director of Meeting Point, an NGO working with AIDS patients and their families. I was able to hear She talk about her experience at the last International Assembly at La Thuile, in a presentation on Vocation and Charity. One of the thing that touched me most was her saying that (I am paraphrasing here) she was just responding to need. Not just a general need, but concrete need of persons. But, ultimately, you have to come from a place where you can answer the question "who do you belong to?" You have to belong to someone who says that "even the hairs on your head are all numbered." It is hard for us to belong to someone. When growing up one of the questions I was asked, to see who I was, was "who's (child) are you?" If you are not coming from 'belonging', its all just work, just futile.

Belonging is a funny thing: it is hard to do, but we do belong. Also, if you belong to someone who thwarts our freedom, life becomes unbearable.

The latest issue of Traces has a letter from Vicki, who is a member of Meeting Point. Fontanavivace has the text in Italian. I will update the link when it becomes available in English.

In the mean time, here is a write up about Meeting Point.

You can Support MP through AVSI. You can also support MP by going to a concert. So, what are you doing on January 19th?

And Lastly, Rose's speech at Vatican:

ROSE'S SPEECH BEFORE THE VATICAN'S PRESS-GALLERY

Friday February 9, 2001

I would like to begin by thanking the Holy Father. Allow me to say that he is also the Father of everything that I have been doing from the very beginning. Throughout my life no one has ever shown me such a way of giving witness to human value, the value of the person. I have learned from his untiring and constant insistence on the conscience of what man is. I would like to thank You Holy Father, not so much because You are helping us with funding, but rather because You allow my own person to be whole.

If faith determines my work, then the unity of my person is safeguarded. Faith, that is to say the sense of responsibility in the face of something much larger than myself.

As all my work pivots on the human being, it is necessary that faith permeate the way I act, thus generating the correct subject so that you know how to treat the other person well.

At present, it is popular to undertake various projects and it is quite easy to confuse or substitute man with that which we must or can do for him. And then when things do not go as expected, we become violent to him and to ourselves as well.

What really matters is positive value, which technical development has utilised, so that man is not a mechanical object, a cog in the machine.

Man is a composition of needs. If we cannot perceive that, if we do not possess this sensitivity, it is like passing him by with indifference.

In Uganda many have undertaken projects to distribute condoms, defend human rights, overcome poverty, defend women and children, etc. However, these simply pertain to projects and never to the person. The person is nobody, reduced to his problems.

For example, a person has AIDS or a headache, I am dealing with AIDS, not with the person suffering from AIDS. It is not possible to cure a piece of a human being, you have to cure the person. Touching only a part of the person implies touching whole of his body.

I work with the AIDS victims, children, adults and orphans. It is an adventure and it is even entertaining, since I face wishes, characters, needs, traditions and attitudes which are totally different. It is interesting to work with what is called "man and his needs".

Why help people? Who are they to us? And who am I?

"Meeting Point" is the concrete experience of a group of friends who have found themselves in the position of facing the HIV/AIDS issue, either because they are personally suffering or someone in their family or amongst their close friends is affected by AIDS and they desire to discover a sense of suffering and death.

The purpose of "Meeting Point" is not to allow AIDS victims to face alone their sickness and death. This is possible only through a mature and daily companionship which takes all needs into account.

First of all we offer a human relationship, a friendship which with time deepens and whereby the children and the sick discover how to face reality with liberty and joy unknown before and along with them we grow.

Alice, 46 years of age and suffering from AIDS for 10 years, was desperate, looking for drugs to hasten her death. I did not know what to do about her. Before going to work, I would go visit her and sometimes stayed there without saying a word, I could not even comfort her. After a week, crying she told me: "You know, I had my husband, I have six children, the relationship with my husband was the only relationship which meant something to me, it filled me with meaning. Now he is no longer there, it is as if everything has lost its meaning, I lack consistency, I feel lost, I just want to die, help me die now. I will not tell anyone." That was eight years ago. Many people accuse me of having given her some special medicine, she now weighs around 90 kilos and she says: "You simply have to look up to someone having a sense of life, and you also will live." Now she is a volunteer at "Meeting Point", since she wants to do what I do.

Our friendship with the sick and their families is a school where we learn how to realistically and truly love the life of others and their destiny. Condoms and fear are a negative approach, proposing no solutions to cope with the challenge of the epidemic.

We offer our patients and young people psychological support, along with

advice on basic health and proper sexual behaviour. I have already told you that it is an adventure working with adults, youth and children. There is a lot to discover and it cannot all be said today: "I have understood what man needs".

It so happens that I was happy about the time, the money, the food and the medicines that I gave my patients. Then, the opposite occurred. In spite of everything, at a certain time the children, instead of going to school began spending their time in the trash, they refused to talk or pretended they were sick so as not to go to school, or they would hide under their beds or behind the house, or they would not eat. The sick refused medicine, nor did they want to eat. I felt like leaving everything and running away. That is how the question came to me: "But who are these people to me?" and "But who am I to them?"

Up until a short time ago everybody in Uganda knew that they belonged to a tribe, a clan, a family: one knew that he was someone. Now that has lost meaning: families have disintegrated, tribes no longer are concerned with the general interest, but only for their particular interests. Once a child used to belong to the whole tribe, to a whole people, and that gave him consistency and dignity.

Now children and women find themselves without defences, without dignity, and they become melancholy, without any will to live and without expectations.

They do not have a value for their families, after all this wives do not have value for their husbands, nor husbands for their wives. For whom do we live? For whom do we get married? For whom do we procreate?

Losing the very idea of ourselves has made us lose the sense of everything. Having lost the point which gave meaning to them, they no longer know why they must go to school or why they must take medicine, or talk, or whatever. In the end, they do not trust anyone.

What we have tried to do is basically enter into a relationship with them. It is apparent that we are not there to replace their parents, but it is apparent that we love them, that they are important and that they are valued by us. It is not possible to give the idea of the dignity expressed by the formula "being someone" if not one within a relationship.

"Meeting Point" is present in the suburbs of Kampala, Hoima and Kitgum. Kampala is a town built upon seven hills and there is a slum at the foot of each one of these hills. We go through the slums every morning. In the city many people suffer from AIDS. As a result the problem of orphans continually grows. If orphans are not cared for, they will end up living in the streets.

As the population grows, so also the more the disease spreads and this causes great confusion about judgements and feelings, among which are dominant fear, shame and rejection by relatives for their sickness. This adds up to great difficulty. There are no families welcoming orphans, whose numbers are growing.

Women and men between the ages of 20 and 45, that is to say the most active section of population, are the most affected by the sickness. Most of them die in great poverty after long suffering, with a sense of helplessness and having had to give up their employment.

At present we are giving assistance to about 600 sick registered at "Meeting Point" and nearly 1,000 orphans throughout Kampala.

We care for the sick from a medical viewpoint visiting them at home and taking medicine to those who cannot afford the costs of hospitalisation. Of major assistance to orphans is the paying of their school fees, so that they can at least attend primary school. We distribute food and other goods of primary importance: blankets, soap, pans, etc.

We also care for widows and the sick also from the legal point of view - (problems pertaining to heritage, adoptions, etc.).

I am not here to describe all that we do. But what I do want to tell you and that is really close to my heart is the human person, that which concerns man. I know that you know this but as I work with them in Africa, my frailty appears more vividly before my eyes. Since I cannot stand alone, it is much easier to have an intuition of man's greatness and of how much the human being is worth, an absolutely unassailable value.

The human person is something which internally contains a complexity or mixture of emotion, wrath, reaction and tenderness which is inconceivable in any other natural phenomenon. Therefore the things we use such as time, money, food, medicines are but a tool an expression for telling the person that they are worth more than the whole world is worth and that they are responsible for this and for their own lives. It is not a collective responsibility. If it is not belonging to every single man, then it is not necessary, but completely useless. That is why we need responsible people to look up to. To be precise when using instruments on a person you need to love that person, and have consideration for that person.

In the face of the drama of the life we lead in Africa - diseases, wars, conflicts - to be part of our happiness, we need someone having passion for our dignity, and respect for our person.

My teacher used to tell me that the novelty in the world is when man belongs to something, for it is within the experience of belonging that everything changes. From this a new society, a new civilisation can be generated.

This is what I have seen happen in my life and in the lives of the people I care for. It seemed something abstract, but then I saw people change, I saw the sick that I thought would never change, change - and they have changed me, too.

The children who call me Mum - because they have found life. The prostitute Vicky who says, "I do not know what 'Meeting Point' is, but what I do know is that there are people who care for me, and that I want to live for them - Akello's children, a woman at the refugees' camp.

Well, I have already said that belonging to someone appears as something abstract, instead it is the awareness of what the human person is. The responsibility toward the dignity of that person can change the face of the world and go as far as tearing down the structures that frame it. What I wish is that the object of my work is One, that is to say the relationship with a friend. It is this position that can make me change and create something new within the existing structures.

Thank you.