Comment (4)
Email
Print
del.icio.us
TechnoratiMan and Woman God Made Them
A new edition of Jean Vanier's heartfelt reflection on long-lasting friendship with the mentally disabled is timely.
Jean Vanier, a French-Canadian former naval officer and academic, is the founder of L'Arche, a worldwide organisation of small, homely communities where men and women with a learning disability live alongside –- he would rather say "in communion with" -- their carers. This is a new edition of a book that was first published in 1985. Having found it an inspiration when I first came across it, I am glad that it is again seeing the light of day –- the more so because the dignity of a human being and right relations between the sexes are under relentless and increasing assault in our secular society. In an age where everyone is entitled to a sexual relationship and where disabled people, when not aborted before birth, are often vulnerable to the well-meaning abuse of those who care for them, Vanier's is a prophetic voice.
Seen from this perspective, society has an elementary choice: to walk alongside those who are dispossessed of brains and beauty –- or to walk over them.
He describes this book as a meditation and this is precisely what it is: a discursive (occasionally rambling), prayerful and heartfelt reflection on the nature of humanness, particularly in relation to those who cannot speak for themselves. Yet his words, he suggests, are applicable to everyone, for we all need bonds of affection with others and yearn for a "gift relationship" that is the antithesis of selfishness and possessiveness. The mentally handicapped (a useful if politically incorrect expression nowadays) often suffer acutely from the anguish of rejection and the loneliness this entails. The answer, as Vanier sees it, is to create communities where authentic relationships can flourish. "It is possible", he believes, "to open ourselves to one another, to create bonds with one another, to enter the world of love, communion and gift…only as we are gradually liberated from the powers of egoism that keep us closed up in ourselves."
The key, he emphasises, is spiritual friendship. Where genuine, long-lasting friendship occurs, the demand for sexual expression divorced from love is mitigated. Unlike those who would dispense contraceptives to fragile people and then let them flounder as best they may under this supposedly liberated dispensation, L'Arche homes practise loving care and support in a milieu of acceptance, welcome and celebration. Occasionally, although rarely, the possibility of marriage between two residents arises; in such cases Vanier suggests a careful discernment to discover if the appropriate degree of emotional maturity and the capacity to exercise "responsibility and fidelity towards another" are present.
Unlike religious communities, which are vowed to celibacy, L'Arche is a looser, lay organisation, made up of many short-term volunteers and some long-term assistants. Jean Vanier himself has chosen a life of celibacy, in service to the marginalised and rejected. He would like more L'Arche assistants to make a similar commitment, pointing out that it is hard for those with a learning disability, who have no choice in the matter, to watch their carers –- to whom they become emotionally attached –- leave to get married.
As others who care for their disabled loved ones would testify, Vanier affirms that the residents he has known have taught him "the discovery of my own humanity". So often society patronises the poor of mind, or pushes them aside in its emphasis on worldly success. In contrast, Vanier confesses that he feels "far from those who are strong, virtuous and self-willed. I feel more at home with weak and vulnerable people like myself." Seen from this perspective, society has an elementary choice: to walk alongside those who are dispossessed of brains and beauty –- or to walk over them. Writers like Mary Shelley and her creation of Frankenstein, or Victor Hugo with his Quasimodo, the hunchback of Notre Dame, provide an imaginative and dramatic representation of "the outsider", someone rejected by the world as frightening and ugly. In real life these outsiders are often neglected or forgotten. Vanier would bring them into the heart of society –- in order that their unique "spiritual fecundity" as he describes it, might enrich and humanise it.
He asks one question very pertinent for today: "Is there a link between sterilization and death?" adding "I am deeply disturbed by the number of parents who seek sterilization for their child with a disability. Isn't it a serious injustice to mutilate someone [without their consent]?" Although he does not refer to them, the question Vanier raises here has poignant relevance to two recent cases that have attracted widespread media attention and predictable controversy: those of Ashley X in the United States, who underwent invasive and radical surgery to keep her body childlike, and Katie Thorpe in the UK, whose mother has applied for her daughter to be given a hysterectomy. Many voices have been raised in clamorous and emotional support for the families of these two severely disabled girls; too few have articulated the prayerful and eloquent views of Jean Vanier, with his conviction that men and women already traumatised by their afflicted circumstances, require tenderness, loving friendship and respect for their bodily integrity, rather than medical mutilation done for the convenience of others.
Francis Phillips writes from Bucks in the UK.
Sound off! Our guidelines: be concise; stay on-topic; and don't lose your temper. Comments close after 7 days, or sooner if the thread strays too far from the topic. So far there have been 4 comments
That is precisely what Jean Vanier has devoted his life to. The L'Arche communities are small and in 'normal' communities, urban, suburban and rural. They are an alternative to the kind of huge half-hidden away institutions that used to be so common.
I don't think Jean Vanier sees the marriage of L'Arche assistants as a 'tragedy'. He is simply stating a fact that, for some, it is difficult to accept the reality of a loved one leaving them. The L'Arche communities grew from Vanier inviting two adult men who lived in a large institution to live with him. One of them eventually chose to live on his own, a choice he could not have made had he stayed in the large institution.
Part of Vanier's passion is to enable each person to develop their ability to take responsibility. He has also chosen to live in so many ares of 'ambiguity', eg, having some ecumenical L'Arche communities and some interfaith ones while living out of his own Catholic faith.
Two websites that you may find helpful are http://www.larche.org/home.en-gb.1.0.index.htm, that of L'Arche International, and http://www.foietlumiere.org/site/english/ , that of Faith and Light International, the sister-movement of L'Arche that creates communities of friendship for persons with mental disabilities who are living with their families.
Happy Christmas!
I don't think they're traumatized by their afflictions at all. I think they are traumatized by our reactions to their afflictions. When I lived in London I had a workmate who was 'mentally challenged'. His siblings treated him badly but he was as kind a person as I have ever met. When my wife was in the hospital after having our first child he took me to the movies. All he required for happiness, I think, was friendship and kindness. It was because of him that I came to believe that intelligence without honesty is without value.
But there is another side to this issue, one that I myself grapple with; and it would appear best encapsulated within this piece of text:
"it is hard for those with a learning disability, who have no choice in the matter, to watch their carers –- to whom they become emotionally attached –- leave to get married."
One of the only times I've heard of this event - someone falling in love, experiencing the connection that comes out of truly loving another human being, and going off to create a new life with that person- described as a tragic event.
In this situation, self-sacrifice becomes everything, unless you are in some way already adjusted and inclined to serve the mentally or physically disabled.
In short, to bring the disabled to the heart of society, that we may become 'more human' for it, is a marvelous idea; but one that, unfortunately, conflicts with human nature.
I may be called some nasty things for that remark, but the proof is in the pudding.
Unless we already truly desired the disabled to live amongst us, we would not send them away to homes such as the one described, to be out of our sight and sphere of interaction.
Lamentable it may be, but it's still the way the world turns, and if one conspires to change a major facet of human nature - who we choose to interact with - then I wish them to best of luck.
It isn't that the disabled are so greatly flawed, but it is rather the flaw of 'normal' people not to see them as possessing the unique and often remarkable characteristics that they do.
But, as lamentable as this flaw is, I cannot realistically see it going away. It's a major feat in itself to change one's own ingrained attitude towards another, and to include the disabled within the rest of society would require that major feat on a massive scale.
I hope you have a nice day.
Page 1 of 1 :