Cooperatives:
A Biblical and Practical Response to Poverty in the Philippines
MA Paper by Lemuel Mag-aso, Asian Theological Seminary
INTRODUCTION
It is an
accepted fact that Asia and the
Third World
countries do have something in common. Seen from the socio-cultural aspect of
this nations, we can discern that poverty and oppression whether economic,
social or political are the dominant issues and concerns. This is an
established fact that we cannot deny this reality. We had already agreed that
the crucial concern for any evangelical theology or particularly Filipino
evangelical theology is its present context. It is imperative then to come up
with an overview of what are the distinct characteristics of our Philippine
context. Here in the
Philippines
the prevalent poverty, along with the other concerns and struggles of the poor
people be given attention and emphasis. Then developing a Òpoor peopleÕsÓ
theology is of paramount importance and relevance.
There is something rather interesting in the issue of
poverty. When we talk of poverty, it cuts across religion and language that is
why it is still the prime target or focus of our theology. Setting aside
religious and cultural backgrounds, poverty is a common denominator among the
most number of Filipinos. More than 75% of the Filipinos fall below the poverty
line which economists and statisticians do agree. There are certainly many
reasons that contributed to this situation. It is during the reign of the
dictator Marcos that the economy of the
Philippines
had gone down to the
dogs. We incurred so much foreign debts that the next future generations have
debts to pay. They are not yet born, but they have debts to settle. Other
factors like corruption, peace and order, population explosion, natural
disasters and calamities, political upheaval, urban migration, etc. all
contributes to this present condition. These are not a very good indication of
our situation.
Since the
majority of our population is poor, it is imperative that we redirect or shift
our emphasis towards the oppressed and the poor. At the outset, it is necessary
that in our theological formulations and more so in our practice we are already
in dynamic participation in the struggles of the poor and the oppressed. These
marginalized sectors of our society needed protection and support that we
should reach them in whatever ways possible, expedient and most importantly,
sanctioned by Scriptures.
IS POVERTY GODÕS
WILL?
Does God desires and will that the
people, Christians or not will be poor? Reading Dt. 15:4 in the OT apparently
teaches that God is scandalized by poverty and wills its abolition. But this is
in the context of the peopleÕs obedience to him. Although GodÕs will is
unequivocal, its fulfillment depends upon GodÕs blessing, which is conditional
upon the obedience of his people (v.5). Since
Israel
is stiff necked and hardheaded people, Òthe poor will never cease out of the
landÓ (v.11) Therefore, as a consequence
Israel
was commanded to respond to
the poor at all times with open hand and heart. They were also warned that to
do anything less than this was sin (vv. 7-11). The abolition of poverty was
further expressed by the proclamation of the year of release. In this year all
debts were to be cancelled (vv. 1f). But sadly GodÕs expressed will for the
poor was never fully realized in history. In the following verses (cf. Ps.
9:18; 132:15) it became the basis for the prayers of the poor and for the hope
that it would become a reality in the future.
Consequently,
GodÕs will that there be no poor in the land continues to be mandated for the
Òew
Israel
as the obedience required by the Kingdom that has been and will be given (Lk.
12:32f). In the NT, Jesus announced the
kingdom
of
God
in the midst of considerable social tension. The announcement of the coming
reign of God brought news of a great reversal: the humble would be exalted and
the poor would be blessed. The great reversal was Ògood news to the poorÓ (Lk.
4:18; cf 7:22 par. Mt. 11:5).
ECONOMIC
RIGHTS OF THE POOR: A BIBLICAL PERSPECTIVE
We have
heard of human rights, womenÕs rights, childrenÕs rights, labor rights etc. But
what is interesting and liberating to know in the discussion of poverty is that
the Bible promulgated the rights of the poor. As can be seen from the OT, these
are economic in nature. These are privileges or mandatory stipulations that
will protect them. And we should not miss this very important truth that will
change our overall perspective in this discussion.
In Isaiah
10:2, it is clear that the poor had certain rights and this is established by
the Mosaic legal code. If we consider the following accounts in the Bible, the
poor were given additional rights. Each year the gleanings of field, orchard
and vineyard belonged to the poor, including the border of the field, and
whatever grew spontaneously in the Sabbatical Year (Lev. 19:10; 23:22; Dt.
24:19; Ex. 23:11). No interest was to be exacted on loans to the poor (Ex.
22:25; Lev. 25:36), nor was the cloak given in pledge to be kept overnight (Dt.
24:12), nor was food to be sold for a profit to the poor who could not maintain
themselves (Lev. 25:37). If because of poverty an Israelite sold himself, he
was not to be treated harshly as a slave, but was to be treated as a hired
servant who would gain his freedom in the year of release (Dt. 15:12-18) or in
the Year of Jubilee (Lev. 25:39-43). Poor hired servants were to be paid their
wages on the day they earned them (Dt. 24:14). The poor who sold their property
or themselves retained the right of redemption either by another, by
themselves, or by release in the Year of Jubilee (Lev. 25:25-28, 47-55).
These are
stipulations that provided the poor with an economic base necessary to
guarantee a livelihood and personal liberty. While the court was not to be
partial to the poor (Ex. 223:3), it was to see that the justice due to the poor
was not perverted (Ex. 23:6, Lev. 19:15) Finally because the poor had equal
rights with the rich to appear before God (the price of atonement was the same,
Ex. 30:15), they were allowed to present less costly sacrifices (Lev. 14:21f;
27:8). As we can see clearly that God loved and cared for the poor so much that He
provided for this stipulations.
UPHOLDING
THE ECONOMIC RIGHTS OF THE POOR: A BIBLICAL MANDATE
These
rights were given for a very important purpose and most importantly it is and
was meant to be obeyed and strictly followed. It is not only for the nation of
Israel
, but
also for the whole of the created order, especially the Church as GodÕs
agents.Ê It is an integral part of GodÕs
covenant with
Israel
rooted in the Exodus. The refrain Òthey are my servants whom I brought forth
out of the land of Egypt,Ó or Òyou shall remember that you were a slave in the
land of EgyptÓ grounds both the rights of the poor and IsraelÕs obligation to
maintain those rights in GodÕs redemptive act (Lev. 25:38, 42, 55; Dt. 25:18,
22)
The economic rights of the poor were grounded not only in
the Exodus event but also in the goodness and justice that could be discerned
in the order of creation. This perspective is evident especially in the wisdom
literature. Both rich and poor are equal before God because the Lord is the
maker of them all. (Prov. 22:2; cf. 14:31; 17:5; Job 34:19) The righteous
person is one who discerns this creational order and acts in accordance with
it; such a person Òknows the rights of the poorÓ and always seeks to vindicate
those rights (Prov. 29:7; cf. 31:9). Thus the rights of the poor are
established by both the creational and the redemptive acts of God.
The obligation to defend the rights of the poor is an
essential part of the biblical way of righteousness for the individuals and
governments. The righteous individual and the righteous king are expected to
know these rights and defend them (Prov. 29:7; 31:9). The king who judges the
poor with equity is promised that his throne will be established forever
(29:14); likewise, the righteousness of the individual who has distributed
freely and given to the poor will endure forever (Ps. 112:9; cf. Dt. 24:13).
The king (Messiah) who embodies the righteousness of God will be found on the
side of the poor, defending them, judging their cause with justice, crushing
their oppressor, and delivering the Òthe needyÉ the poor and him who has no
helperÓ (Ps. 72:2,4,12; cf. 83:3f). Thus a just and well regulated government
will be distinguished for maintaining the rights of the poor and afflictedÓ.
(Isa. 58:6f) Knowing the Lord is equated with caring for the poor: Òhe (Josiah)
judged the cause of the poor and needy; then it was well. Is not this to know
me? Says the LordÓ (Jer. 22:16).
In the NT, the forgiveness of sins that inaugurates the
Kingdom entails the obligation to begin the Jubilee reversal of poverty. Jesus
instructed His disciples in response to the gift of the Kingdom to sell their
possessions and give alms (Lk. 12:33), and the church in
Jerusalem
did precisely that in order to care
for the poor and needy (Acts 2:44f; 4;34f; cf. Dt. 15:40). Throughout the
ministry of Jesus, he maintained the OT teaching that the way of righteousness
includes caring for the poor, and the disciples assumed this was so (cf. Mk.
14:15; Jn. 13:29). Thus the NT way of righteousness as caring for the poor
fulfills of that the OT, for in the presence of the Kingdom JesusÕ disciples
are called to manifest in their relationship to the poor the grand reversal
that God has promised.
THE
CHALLENGE OF A BIBLICAL AND PRACTICAL RESPONSE TO POVERTY
We have
proved earlier that the poor have economic rights deeply rooted and promulgated
by Scriptures. Also we are commanded and mandated to uphold and defend these
rights. What shall then be our response to the situation of the poor? For me,
the most important thing in this discussion is to formulate a response against
poverty. Since the Scriptures never merely describe poverty, in fact it
condemns it, what will be our reaction to it. The terminology, the images, and
the messages do not only evoke sympathy for the poor but it summoned protest
against oppression. But more importantly, it is a call for immediate, conscious
and deliberate action. The discussion is meaningless if we cannot have tangible
and concrete steps taken to ensure that we do our share in uplifting the
condition of the poor in our land. First let us take a look at what had been
done in the past as a response to poverty.
Responses to Poverty in First-Century
Palestine
The Rabbis responded to poverty by repeating and
interpreting the teachings of the Torah. They encouraged private generosity and
kindness towards the poor, almsgiving and the Òworks of loveÓ. They denounced
non-compliance with the rights of the poor during harvest (Mish. Aboth v. 9)
and even broadened the regulations that protected the poor (Baraitha Baba Kamma
80b-81a). HillelÕs Prozbul (Mish. Shebith x.4) provided a legal mechanism for
evading the remission of debts in the Sabbatical year, but some of the other
rabbis denounced this along with other evasions. The rabbis began a system of
public assistance for the poor. The tithe for the poor (Dt. 14:28f; 26:12)
provided the basis in Halakah for a welfare system administered by special
officers of the synagogue. A Òpoor basketÓ to which weekly gifts were made,
supported a community chest from which the needs of the poor were met (Mish
Peah vii. 2-9; viii. 7).
The
Qumran
Community
The
community at
Qumran
had its own response to
the social tensions of the times. Their zeal for the law did not lead them into
rebellion but into withdrawal. On the shores of the Dead Sea they established a
congregation of GodÕs elect, a Òcongregation of the poorÓ (4 Qp Ps37 1:5,10),
whose common life stood as a judgment on the priestly aristocracy in Jerusalem
for amassing wealth at the expense of the poor (1 QpHab 12:3,6,10); it also
stood as a promise of GodÕs eschatological renewal of social life by overcoming
the division between rich and poor through community of goods (1QS 1:11;
6:19,22,25; 4QpPs37 1:10). The social tensions of the Hellenistic and Roman
periods nurtured an apocalyptic expectation of the abolition of poverty and an
expectation of judgment against the rich oppressors (e.g. T. jud. 25:4; Jub.
23:18-23). These expectations sustained sometimes a countercultural common life
that is the community at
Qumran
.
COOPERATIVE ECONOMICS: A BIBLICAL & PRACTICAL RESPONSE
TO POVERTY
In terms of our missional and practical efforts, what
have been done in order to uplift the living conditions of our poor Filipinos?
There are many organizations that cater to the mercy-giving and charitable
needs of this people but we cannot just rely on dole-outs. We need a
sustainable and permanent livelihood for the poor. We must create economic
opportunities for them to be part of. This entails a large amount of resources
(money, time, efforts, expertise etc.). There are many NGOÕs and People
Organizations that provided help and assistance to the poor and marginalized
sectors of society. Most of them are non-sectarian in orientation and if
religious, mostly Catholics. Evangelicals and Protestants are lagging way
behind. Since the Filipino evangelical church is poor, what will be our
priority in reaching this people? Is it mainly preaching in words or is it
through tangible assistance? Even if we wanted to help them economically, we
are so limited in our resources. What else can we do? The Church can accomplish
much if we sincerely seek for answers in the Bible and obey what the Bible
teaches us to do. For answers let us look what the New Testament did and try to
appropriate some principles and strategies that the Holy Spirit give to them. I
believe that it is recorded in Scriptures so that we can learn from it.ÊÊ
The
Early
Church
sA
Model
It is
believed that the early Christians came from a broad spectrum of socials levels
and that the early Church was more nearly a cross section of society. The
fellowship (Gk. Koinonia) of the early Church joined rich and poor
together in table fellowship and in the sharing of possessions. Paul rebukes
the Corinthians for allowing social distinctions to disrupt and distort their
table fellowship, i.e. their participation (Gk, koinonia) in the body
and blood of Christ (1 Cor. 10:16; 11:17-34). In the
Jerusalem
church possessions were sold to
meet the needs of the poor (Acts 2:44f; 4:34-37). In contrast to the community
of goods practiced at Qumran, the
Jerusalem
churchÕs sharing was not defined by statutes and protected by sanctions fixed
by community regulations; rather, it was voluntary and spontaneous. The koinonia was the decisive thing, not organization.
It was a fellowship that transcended and broke down the
hierarchical, ÒverticalÓ patterns of Roman society and constituted a new
Israel, a new covenanted community in which Òthere was not a needy person among
themÓ (Acts 4:34, cf. Dt. 15:4, 11) The voluntary and spontaneous sharing moved
toward institutionalized forms of concern for the poor as the Church grew and
needs persisted. When the needs of the widows among the Hellenists were not
being met, the Church appointed seven men to the duty of caring for them (Acts
6:1-6).
This koinonia in spiritual things, for which the
Jews must give and the Gentiles receive, leads in turn to a koinonia in
material goods, for which the Gentiles must give and the poor of the saints in
Jerusalem receive (Rom. 12:13; 15:26; 2 Cor. 8:4; 9:13). In contexts such as
these koinonia comes nearly to mean ÒgiveÓ or ÒreceiveÓ a share, PaulÕs
insistence on the principle of equality (isotes) of participation shows that
the basic idea of koinonia remains the common sharing, rather than the
incidental giving or receiving that may be necessary to secure such fellowship
(2 Cor. 8:14).
Is
Community of Goods Still Applicable?
In Acts 2:44 it is said that in the infant church at
Jerusalem Òall who believe were together and had all things in commonÓ (Gk. Eichon
hapanta koina) and (4:34f) Òas many as possessors of lands or houses sold
them, and brought the proceeds of what was sold and laid it at the apostles
feet.Ó It can be inferred from this passage that there was an absolute disposal
of all the property of all the members of the church, and that its proceeds
were contributed to a common fund. This position has been disputed upon the
ground that the example of Barnabas in selling Òa fieldÓ for this purpose (4:37)
would not have been mentioned if this had been the universal rule. For them,
the thought conveyed is that all believers in that church held their property
as a trust from the Lord, for the benefit of the entire brotherhood, and as
there was need, did as Barnabas. There has been no commandment of which record
has been preserved prescribed any such course.
Personally,
I believe there is nothing wrong with community of goods. The church of today
can still apply it today more than ever, especially here in the
Philippines
. If
they can do it and be sincere about it, whatÕs stopping them? In fact it is a
radical step towards the true essence of fellowship and brotherhood. Since, the
church has not yet reached that level of maturity or degree of fellowship, it
is not also beneficial and feasible to force such scheme. I would rather that
we focus on what the Church can do without much opposition and controversy.
After all what we want is a united and harmonious relationships among the
churches. But at the same time we should encourage the spontaneous impulse of
the sense of brotherhood and fellowship in Christ among the churches. We should
strive to foster a sense of being one family when our brothers are under the
external constraint of extreme want and persecution.
Cooperatives:
A Contextualized Response to Poverty in the
Philippines
Cooperatives are not only biblical but it is also
imbedded in the socio-cultural context of the Filipinos. In order for a
strategy or an approach to be effective and successful it must not only be
sanctioned by the word of God but also it must be rooted in the culture of the
Filipinos. According to Rev. Dr. Zosimo Jadloc, an expert and authority in
cooperativism in the
Philippines
,
cooperativism is indigenous in the
Philippines
. Filipinos in the past
had learned to work collectively for their own benefit. This idea was supported
by leading historians and anthropologists, which I myself as a Filipino would
strongly agree. The evidence for this can be seen in how we treat and work with
each other. Even in our social activities will prove this. Among them are the
ammoyo, the bayanihan, or the palusong in Tagalog; gamal in Ilokano; patanim in
Bicol; pahapit or alayon in Cebuano; and tiklos, pintakase or binoligay in
Waray. All of these are collective action by clan or village folks to help
kinsmen or neighbors physically transfer a house from one site to another.
There are other manifestations of cooperation among Filipinos such as kin-group
members caring for the old; relatives helping in life cycle events like baptism
or wedding of children, death in the family, and workbees in the farms and in
cottage industries.
Because of its remarkable
significance and impact among the people, in succeeding years, cooperatives in
the
Philippines
became a part of the government program, primarily to help the farmers and the
people in the countryside. The government helped in organizing, development and
promotion of cooperatives in the
Philippines
. Filipino leaders,
imbued with the spirit of altruism, pursued the cooperative movement in the
halls of Philippine Congress. In recognition of the positive ands facilitative
role of cooperatives in the countryside economic development, the Philippine
Assembly in 1940 passed Commonwealth Act no. 565, which granted the
cooperatives exemption from taxation. It also institutionalized cooperatives.
Aside from its indigenous origin,
the socio-political climate also makes cooperatives the most fitting enterprise
in the country. During the February 1986 EDSA revolution, the cooperative
movement was able to ride on the new socio-eco-political environment. The
situation facilitated the resurgence or rebirth of the
Rochdale
brand of cooperativism based on the peopleÕs initiative. EDSA revolution was
considered to be the most significant turning point in the history of the
Filipinos. The EDSA revolution demonstrated the potent force of organized
people power as an instrument for resolving a common societal problem, which
can be handled by people-oriented cooperatives. The EDSA revolution legitimized
the economic role of cooperatives in the economic recovery of the nation.
Cooperatives had been and are
continuing to be the most powerful tool in uplifting the economic situation of
not only the poor but also the marginalized sectors of society. As of December
1993, there were 27,318 registered cooperatives nationwide. We can see
cooperatives in almost every area of the archipelago. The prospects for
cooperatives in the
Philippines
are very optimistic, and each year cooperatives are growing not only in terms
of numbers but more so in resources and services offered to the underprivileged
and marginalized. Cooperatives grew into viable and competitive businesses as
they draw the collective resources of low-income workers. Since members of
cooperatives own, organize and control their operations, they can now create a
nurturing and conducive environment where its self-attained development
furthers empowers its constituents.
Basic
Cooperative Principles, Values and Characteristics
As I have
said earlier, a cooperative is the most biblical in its outlook and approach.
Basic cooperative principles, values and their characteristics were originally
formulated and applied by the Rochdale Society of Equitable Pioneers in
England
, which
made their cooperatives activities successful. Moreover, the Rochdale Society
became famous for these principles and values. The cooperatives in the
Philippines
as
they apply these principles benefited much.
Cooperatives conduct their
activities and programs in accordance with accepted and time-tested cooperative
principles and values. In fact, successful cooperatives in many countries have
proven the importance of these principles and values as they applied them in
their cooperatives. The first principle is the open and voluntary membership.
Anybody can join and it depends upon the free volition of the member. It
exercises democratic control. Decisions are arrived at on a one-member one-vote
basis, regardless of the amount of capital invested in the cooperative by a
member. The general assembly has the final say on major issues and concerns.
Since it observes political and religious neutrality, no pressure and influence
can be expected from people who have selfish agenda. Most of all, it gives emphasis
on continuous in-service education and training of members and staff.
In the 29th International Cooperative
Congress held in
Stockholm
in 1988, ICA President Lara Marucs, emphasized the following values:
1.
Self-help values (activity, creativity, responsibility,
independence)
2.
Mutual-help values (cooperation, unity, collective
action, solidarity, peace)
3.
Non-profit interest values (resource conservation,
elimination of profit as a driving force, social responsibility, Ònet profiting
from otherÕs workÓ)
4.
Democratic values (equity, equality, participation,
conscious decisions based on free will)
5.
Voluntary effort values (commitment, creative power,
pluralism)
6.
Universal values (global perspectives, openness)
7.
Education values (knowledge, understanding, insight,
etc.)
8.
Purposeful values (benefit to members)
9.
Participation in share capital, management,
deposits, business
10.
Honesty (in
business, management, including personal management, etc.)
11.
Caring for
members, community at large.
Nature of
Organized Cooperatives
Cooperatives are service-oriented.
2.
Cooperatives are people and community-centered
3.
Cooperatives are owned, managed and patronized by
their members
4.
Cooperatives are business enterprise; they are
created first and foremost to make money.
5.
Cooperative advanced through self-help and mutual
help.
6.
Cooperatives achieve more for themselves and address
the needs of their members.
7.
Cooperatives are best organized when the members are
recruited from the different sectors of society, like farmers, fishermen, wage
earners, self-employed, professionals and the like.
Cooperatives: A Biblical and
Practical Response to Poverty in the
Philippines
ÊÊÊÊÊ
Our study of the OT and especially
the NT provided us some valuable insights as how to respond to poverty in the
Church and community, especially in the Philippine setting. I would like to
propose that a more viable and biblical response to poverty is through
cooperativism. Cooperativism is deeply rooted in Scriptures. What the NT Church
practiced was cooperativism at its finest or we can say that the idea of
cooperativism was very consistent to the biblical witness. Although, Scriptures
does not directly provide the organizational mechanism in cooperativism, but
the values, principles and nature of cooperatives are founded in Scriptures.
For me it is the most biblical and practical approach to alleviating the
economic status of the poor and needy.
The early
Christians were practicing community and fellowship in spiritual and material
things. They even reached to the point of community of goods. They shared in
each otherÕs blessings including their possessions. If we understood the sense
of fellowship and community very well we are very much inclined to argue that
cooperativism is its parallel or equivalent in our modern setting. We can
understand this fully when it has been explained further what cooperatives are
and how they function. We reached an undeniable conclusion that in order to
respond according to poverty we must apply the principles of cooperatives as
warranted and supported by Scriptures here in the
Philippines
.ÊÊ
THE CHURCH
OF AND WITH THE POOR
With the deep involvement of the Christians or the
Church in the struggles and challenges of the poor and oppressed, they can
reflect and articulate their hopes and aspirations with us. The commitment to
share with the life of the poor should be the ultimate objective of the Church
and it is an important component of our faith. In the process there might be
obstacles to arrive at these goals. But we must boldly neutralize every human
obstacle. This may include the abolition of evil and unjust social structures.
As Christians we cannot play blind, deaf and mute to the cry for help of our
fellow poor Filipinos. The call to be involved in the struggle of the poor is
really a call for action. It can be seen in the way we wanted to see results
and outcomes of our efforts. By these words it is implied that we are to be
involved directly in the struggles of the marginalized and poor. It challenges
our stance on biblical discipleship, meaning to say what kind of believers we
want to produce. The injustices, corruption and unrighteousness happen right
before our very eyes and to shun away and pretend that it did not happen added
insult to the present injuries of the poor and oppressed.
More Christians are rather poor and also suffer
injustice and persecution. We suffer the impact of corruption in the
government. We also share the same concern for immorality, violence, peace and
order situation in the land. In a nutshell there are so many things that we
have in common. We also recognize that these problems needed to be overcome and
somehow done away with.
Genuine
salvation must be manifested in the corporate lives of the poor and oppressed
and must challenge the existing evil structures of society, including the
complacent and apathetic attitude of the Church towards the poor and oppressed.
But I personally ascribe to a non-violent approach in dealing these issues. The
emancipation from both social and physical structures of the poor should be
also the desire and aspiration of the Church. It is true that when Scriptures
talked about ÒsalvationÓ it does not only mean forgiveness from sin. More
importantly, it was expressed and manifested in the concrete and present
social, physical, political and economic context of
Israel
in the OT. In the New
Testament the
Kingdom
of
God
(both spiritual
and physical, present and future) is also the major theme, if not the most
important theme in the Gospels.
So what do
we make up of these then? Being faithful to the biblical material reaches a
very convincing and critical conclusion that salvation is not only spiritual
and individual but also physical and communal. More importantly, my main
concern is that the Church will exercise and function as a prophetic community
called to champion and rally for justice, righteousness and equal rights in
economic growth of the poor and needy. This calls for commitment and passion
that is unparalleled and unswerving. As evangelicals these are the character
and attitudes of true believers in Jesus Christ. If the non-believers, or other
non-evangelicals can do these without reservation and fading, why canÕt we, the
true believers of God? We must act now!
CONCLUSION
I was challenge and confounded with this question; can
we really reach a point in our lives in
Asia
or in other parts of the Third world, where we can truly have social and
economic emancipation? I believe we cannot take the posture of success in the
struggle for emancipation from poverty, injustice and unrighteousness but we
can only have obedience as our driving motivation for our endeavors. The
believers are called to trust and obey God no matter what will be the outcome
of our efforts. After all, our commendation from God is not that we are
successful in all our endeavors but that we will be faithful in our calling as
God is faithful to his promises to us. Faithfulness means that we will do
whatever is in our capacity and resources to fulfill the mandate that is
entrusted to us. Our love for God and His creation will compel us to be
steadfast in our efforts towards the upliftment of the lives of the poor and
the oppressed and the promulgation of justice and righteousness in our land. It
might be sad and desperate to say that poverty and injustice will remain the reality
for most of the people in their lifetimes. But this will not discourage us,
instead the more we should be burdened, committed and act decisively until
Jesus comes and renew and restore all things. I am looking forward to a day
when all sufferings, pain and sorrows will be gone and perfect peace and
harmony in GodÕs presence will be realized. God be with us as we embark on this
glorious journey.Ê