‘Saving African lives’ - Cardinal Ambongo on USAID

"Gratitude is such a powerful aspect of international politics."

Cardinal Fridolin Ambongo is not afraid to call it like he sees it.

Since Pope Francis elevated him to the College of Cardinals in 2019, Ambongo has gained a reputation for speaking directly about the needs of the Church, and the needs of his people.

Cardinal Fridolin Ambongo. Credit: Vatican Media.

And as president of the Symposium of Episcopal Conferences of Africa and Madagascar, Ambongo is acutely aware of the needs felt across his continent.

Earlier this month, Ambongo wrote a column in the Wall Street Journal, urging President Donald Trump to restore U.S. international aid and development funds to African nations.

The cardinal argued that “the end of USAID support will have untold consequences for generations” in Africa.

In an interview conducted by email, Ambongo explained why he thinks American aid to African nations is “literally the difference between life and death for millions of Africans” — and why he hopes that foreign aid programs cut during the Trump administration will be restored.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

What concrete difference does USAID make for people in Africa? How does it improve their lives?

USAID has a very solid reputation for bringing relief where people are suffering.

Especially in times of disaster, crisis or in the aftermath of terrible conflict. Getting help fast is a matter of life and death. U.S. aid improves lives by saving lives. This might be difficult for the typical American to appreciate but U.S. aid is literally the difference between life and death for millions of Africans.

When people are starving, bringing food and other essentials is the only way of making a difference, and the aid from the United States in these situations has saved millions of lives. Our Caritas agencies, such as Catholic Relief Services, have also benefited by empowering local workers to accompany people in difficulty and by bringing expertise where it may be lacking, and providing channels through which the aid flows.

The President Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief — PEPFAR — is well known for saving millions of lives, but there are many other examples of U.S. aid saving African lives.

U.S. foreign aid amounts to less than 1% of the U.S. federal budget but it saves millions of lives. As I noted, the U.S. government should be very careful about how it spends limited resources, but the return on the investment cannot be overstated both morally and strategically, and the African people are grateful for the generosity of the American people.

Other than reestablishing the funding that has been frozen, are there ways in which USAID in Africa can be improved?

While as a pastor I welcome all those efforts that help our people, USAID has not typically worked through the structures of the Church such as congregations of sisters or brothers, or even dioceses or seminaries, even when those Church groups are doing development work. I think this has been a mistake, driven largely by the fear of looking as if USAID was favoring religion. However, it means billions of dollars which have been generously poured into places like Africa have not taken advantage of the significant expertise and efficiency of a network like the Church and its grassroots reach into some of the world’s poorest places.

The Church can make the most effective channel for governments, because her closeness to the people and its institutional network — I think the approach that separates pastoral work and development work could be reenvisioned.

Indeed, the separation of the two may have contributed to the secularization of some of our aid agencies which has created some of the cultural impositions that I have referenced.

When our people come to a priest or sister, they don’t just want a visit for the sick or a prayer for the dying. They want, or rather expect, some help with their rent or a place for their child in school. So the Church similarly should be able to help people based not only on “need” but also on “creed” — even if the Church helps those who express a creed and those who don’t.

I think we need to trust the Church more and refrain from building parallel structures that put distance between the faithful and those whom they seek to serve, and, consequently, are perhaps less efficient.

You note that aid tied to ideology is unhelpful, and that “cultural colonization” can be avoided in the conveyance of aid to Africa.

What programs or approaches would best avoid that?

Do Church-based partnerships for aid distribution make a difference on that front?

This relates to the question above. The more the Church is empowered to be herself, to serve the people in a way that honors the local community, the more effective the programs can be, but also the more the programs will reflect the values of those being served. This is why I think it is so important to find ways for the Church to have the freedom to be herself. Providing aid based on the beliefs of the local people can only help the generosity of the American people be more effective.

There are a number of non-government organizations which want to impose a cultural milieu on those they are serving which is different from what those who are receiving the aid believe.

This actually works against American interests. If your aid is tied to a moral system, say population control and all that entails, that is in conflict with the local community, the aid might actually breed resentment.

We don’t want to breed resentment but gratitude, which will help stabilize all geopolitical situations. Gratitude is such a powerful aspect of international politics. Africans are grateful for the aid provided by the United States, and this opens up opportunities for greater collaboration.

The more the aid is respectful of our own culture, the greater the gratitude will be — and the greater the opportunity for partnership in other areas.

This is why it is very important for the Church to be involved in the architecture of the aid provided to Africa. We know our people, what they need and how to administer the aid better than those who are further removed from the individuals and families who benefit from the aid. There really is no replacement for the place of the Church.

You mention that African nations have relied on USAID funds because of the “severe political and economic instability” in parts of the continent. Critics say that Africa's reliance on foreign aid prevents economic growth, and encourages corruption.

How can that be avoided?

Corruption is certainly not limited to Africa, as we all know.

Indeed, in our own Church, even in the Vatican, we have examples of corruption.

Every country, because countries are made up of flawed individuals, has various levels of corruption — so it may not be wise to point fingers too narrowly at Africa.

This is a serious concern, but not just a concern for Africa.

With respect to the situation in Africa, I’d say two things. When we give money away, it can often be what we can afford to do without. It’s what we have when we have covered all our own costs. That’s why the story of the widow’s mite is so strong; she gave from her essentials not her surplus. We must not forget the spiritual value of giving. But also, it might not always be a sufficiently large amount to achieve whatever is needed.

That is why we need to think more creatively about how to best leverage the limited resources which might be available.

In Africa, we have embraced a new program called Missio Invest, that provides low-interest loans to Church-run agencies that can generate income and repay those loans.

The program is working very well, and many sisters, priests and bishops have used these loans effectively to further the Church’s ministry. They are teaching solidarity at another level; allowing one part of the Church to use the resources of another part so that we can move into the future together as equals and leave any relationship of dependency in the past.

Africans, especially those who have experienced prosperity, should invest in themselves and not think the answer to their problems can only come from far-away countries, with their own difficulties.

I think this will help address concerns of waste or corruption. When the people being helped are involved in how the money is being used then there is more accountability.

Pope Leo XIV has chosen his regnal name to convey the importance of the Church's social justice teaching. What will African bishops look for as the Holy Father develops the Church's social doctrine?

Church teaching, notably expressed by Pope Leo XIII in Rerum novarum in the wake of the industrial revolution, provides a broad framework for a stable and fair society. A core element is the need for people to organize their lives according to the demands of their immediate environment: family, village, town, community, society, at different levels.

Top-down approaches to development or ones brought from another cultural context can be blind to not only local community values but to the strengths inherent in local communities to solve their own problems and provide for themselves.

The balance is never easy but local ownership, local decision-making, albeit with accountability built in, is the safest way. The Church calls this subsidiarity. But it needs the resources to make things work. And while we might have moved resources significantly from the Northern Hemisphere to the Southern Hemisphere over the last 70 years, the risks associated with development remain squarely on the shoulders of vulnerable communities in the south. The risks have not shifted, despite the movement of so much aid, much of which has created a great amount of indebtedness to African nations.

The fastest growing charities in the US are ones which give money directly to local communities — that is good, but the amounts still fall short of what’s needed.

There are new ways to show support that respond adequately not only to the real needs of the Church in Africa, but that might provide some ongoing sustainability to this model. Many are family operations, with the micro-loans or micro-finance phenomenon [making a difference], mainly in reference to small groups of women who borrow small amounts for local craft making or for food preparation and repay them.

At the other end of the spectrum, we see how governments in Africa are offered massive loans from the World Bank, which bring a whole sea of complications and whose consequences normally fall on the most vulnerable.

In our own Church, we are building a new form of financial solidarity that provides loans from $50,000 to $5 million to provide Catholic schools, clinics, hospitals and community banks with the resources they need to become self-reliant.

My diocese recently signed a $1 million loan to provide a necessary boost to our local university, Omnia Omnibus. The loan means that what would have taken us 10 years to build through donations, we can now establish within one year.

That approach is just one of a variety of creative ways to address the needs of local communities.

My hope is that Pope Leo’s emphasis on Catholic social teaching will encourage more people to think creatively about how the local community can take the lead in providing aid.

There is also the deep concern of the ongoing exploitation by wealthy nations that treat rare minerals and the people who mine them as commodities simply for their own benefit. The sense of solidarity simply does not exist that protects the dignity of countries and people who provide these resources. My hope is that Pope Leo can renew a sense of human solidarity that addresses this sort of abuse.

Your column focused on what Africa needs from the U.S. But what can the U.S. — and especially the Church in the U.S. — learn from Africa’s faith and culture?

Many Americans experience our contribution to their Church every Sunday at Mass — since many parishes have an African priest in service, or at least someone from the mission church will come and address them once or twice a year.

It might be helpful for US Catholics to ask themselves: are we enriched by the experience of African clergy or religious, or even our fellow parishioners living and working in our communities? Do we know much about their culture, their country of origin and the way people live and build communities of faith in Africa?

Ecclesia in Africa, an important but not very well-known document, was issued by the Church after the Synod on Africa some 30 years ago by Saint John Paul II.

The text emphasizes the importance of mutual evangelization and the great contribution that Africans can make when they minister in the US or other places far from their countries.

Are we doing the most we can to learn from one another?

Are African clergy in the US just filling gaps or are they truly valued with all their cultural heritage?

It was very encouraging recently that the Holy Father appointed the first African-born priest to be bishop of a mainland US diocese, namely Houma-Thibodaux in Louisiana. We wish Ghanaian-born Bishop Simon Peter Engurait and his new flock the Lord’s enduring blessing, and we hope this wise gift by Pope Leo to his native country can bring with it new insights and graces beyond the particular diocese.

To know Africa, apart from the very few Americans who can travel here, you can read and follow developments in the media which is not always so pleasant. The lives of our saints tell a compelling story of Christian witness. They are a gift for the entire Church. I encourage all Catholics to get to know the lives of African saints.