OPTING FOR THE POOR: EDUCATE TOWARDS JUSTICE BUT LIVE IN CHRISTIAN LOVE.
+Gaudencio B. Cardinal Rosales
Notwithstanding the efforts exerted to eradicate poverty and underdevelopment, and I do not mean that there ever will be in the near future any successful effort to relieve people of the misery wrought by sin or human mismanagement, all things said about poverty eradication or alleviation, poverty or near destitution, will be around us both as a reminder and as a challenge to live up to our human dignity and responsibility. Our Lord Jesus Christ expressed this truth in a surprisingly disturbing manner when confronted with the excessive outpouring of precious ointment before His Passion; He said, “You have the poor with you always, and you can be kind to them whenever you wish, but you will not always have me.” (Mark 14:7).
By simply relying on human dispensation there will never be enough, even in a world of great abundance. Some will enjoy sufficiency, other will be hungry. Others will have plenty and yet there remain more people who would barely have any.
In this paper read on the occasion of the 40 th Lecture in honor of ST. THOMAS MORE, I propose that we treat poverty, especially its extreme expressions existing in the country today; then look at the challenges of poverty to education and evangelization in the Republic of the Philippines; and thirdly, reflect on what poverty ultimately demands of us as Christian Citizens.
Poverty in the Philippines Today.
The socio-economic survey conducted by ICSI (2003) with inputs from Pulse Asia and the Assisi Development Foundation reported 52% of Metro Manila is poor, while the national figures shows that nearly 64% of the country live in poverty. The majority (54%) of poor families have six or more members. It has been recorded that poverty incidence increased with family size. Ninety three (93%) per cent of poor families have household heads who have work or hold on to some job. Fifty (50%) per cent of poor families have heads who are engaged in some self-employed work. The Poverty Lines/Thresholds in the Philippines (2006): the minimum income/expenditure required for a person per day is: Philippines --- P40.83/day or P14,906/year; Urban --- P46.70/day or P17,035/year; Rural --- P38.70/day or P14, 123/year. The rest of the figures came from NEDA.
The reality behind these figures lies in the grim shanties of pasted cardboard hugging the esteros, lean-tos under bridges, the meager food in the poor families’ dinner plates, the inability to send poor children to school or helplessness to extricate the youth from substance abuse and other vices. In not a few cases the issue is not simply poverty, but destitution, a situation that negates the dignity that belongs to a human person who instead of living in human homes, as decent images and likeness of God, live by the thousands in hovels, tunnels and under bridges or are simply homeless.
As we continue to survey both data and the reality of near destitution among the millions of our people who still struggle to survive in the margins of society in conditions we already described earlier, I can think of no better statement to begin our lecture with than the words of His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI when he said in his first Encyclical Letter “within the community of believers there can never be room for a poverty that denies anyone what is needed for a dignified life.” (Deus Caritas Est, 20). Admitting the serious existence of massive and near dehumanizing poverty in the country, the words of the Holy Father turn to us in an accusatory stance, leaving us with the disturbing whispered question: “Are we still Christians? Are we believers? (In what?).
Educating Towards Justice.
God loves the just person. And Jesus included among those who are blessed by God persons who hunger and thirst for justice (uprightness), for they shall have their full. (Matthew 5:6). If God blesses the just, so are people happy when their neighbors and friends are just to those around them. But injustice had been around since the time of humans on earth. Sins selfishness, greed and pride had been repeated so often that they left for mankind a structure of injustice so difficult to undo.
But according to the providence of God there has always been enough for all in the resources of this earth; enough water, enough land, enough air, trees, minerals, etc. To humans are given the mastery of creation. No person is destined to live an inhuman life for there will be just enough for everyone and for every generation. Assuring the first humans of the life supports that the earth provides Yahweh said, “Look, to you I give all the seed-bearing plants everywhere on the surface of the earth, and all the trees with seed bearing fruit; these will be your food.” (Genesis 1:29). Humans are therefore destined to be the prudent consumers and provident stewards of the resources of this earth.
Furthermore, the dominion of humans over creation, its resources whether animate or inanimate is not absolute. Man’s dominion over creation “is limited by concern for the quality of life of his neighbor, including generations to come; it requires a religious respect for the integrity of creation.” (CCC, 2415). There are no absolutes in a person’s use of even personal possessions, for quoting St. Thomas Aquinas, Pope John Paul II wrote in the Encyclical Centesimus Annus, “…if the question be asked how must one’s possession be used? The Church replies without hesitation that man should not consider his material possession as his own, but as common to all…’, because above all the laws and judgments of men stands the law, the judgment of Christ.” (Centesimus Annus, 30). It must never be forgotten that the above nature of private property or ownership is the unbending purpose of goods. (GS, 69).
The created world was entrusted to the entire human race for the sustenance of all without particularly favoring any one or excluding others. And this is the solid foundation of the doctrine of the universal destination of the earth’s good. (CA, 31). If rendering to God what is due to Him is Religion, then giving to another what is its due, respecting sound relationship is called justice --- which could be person and person/s and society and even person/s and the created world and its resources (ecological justice).
Justice cannot mean equality for the obvious reason that even from birth the Creator did not make individuals of the same ability, height, strength and talents. But based on the dignity of every human being, equally made in the image of the Divine, what was obviously intended is equal access to the use of created goods, despite differences in abilities. There must be in, in this world, equality in opportunities towards the exploitation and use of created resources. Injustice could be inflicted, when through special maneuverings motivated by selfishness and greed, whether exercised by a single person or a group of powerful individuals organized as a body (corporation), the poor and the weak are helplessly excluded. Worst, if through assiduous research and massive investment, the development of products is such that it excludes the weaker members of the society, and yet it rapidly consumes in their generation the world’s limited and slowly renewable and non-renewable resources, then the injustice is done not just against a group of persons or against society, but against the entire human race including generations yet to come, who, by birth, have a right to enjoy the created planet’s wealth and resources.
The social teaching of the Church points toward an integral form of humanism which is the liberation from everything that oppresses man (Evangelii Nuntiandi, 9) and the development of whole man and of every man (Populorum Progressio, 42). The first task of education towards Justice is to liberate the individual person from the enslavement imposed by ignorance, selfish attitudes and the greed that seek oneself first (“ako muna”) in everything. The second duty is to free the person from selfish values (“ako lamang”) and ultimately from sin which is the root of all enslavements and vices. Freed from these subjugations the enlightened person can reach out to others in respect and fairness.
When systems (capitalism or communism), structures (laws, ordinances, economies and markets etc.) become unjust in practice, instead of developing people, they become oppressive of people and society. Thus the censure or guidance of these systems and structures become urgent concerns of the Church.
The practice of justice in some places has its own definition (i.e. limits) imposed by culture and tradition. Debates and negation may ensue, but when one loves or does an act of mercy or compassion it is hardly possible to err, cause harm or commit sin. It appears that more than mere justice is needed to solve the needs of the poor.
Love, the Ultimate Option for the Christian.
The words of Pope Paul VI in the Encyclical Populorum Progressio suggest that justice and money are not enough to bring the hungry to the table if abundance, or simply to serve the poor person a plate of sufficiency. “But neither all this nor the private and public funds that have been invested, nor the gifts and loans that have been made, can suffice. It is not just a matter of eliminating hunger, nor even of reducing poverty. The struggle against destitution, though urgent and necessary, is not enough. It is a question, rather, of building a world where every man, no matter what his race, religion or nationality, can live a fully human life, freed from servitude imposed on him by other men or by natural forces over which he has not sufficient control; a world where freedom is not an empty word and where the poor man Lazarus can sit down at the same table with the rich man. This demands great generosity, much sacrifice and unceasing effort on the part of the rich man”. (PP, 47). The only holiness or virtue that can make this vision a reality is love. Justice may be able to place the rich man and the poor seated around the same table, perhaps sharing the same food, but the two may only tolerate the situation and still be ill at ease with each other’s presence. But let love draw them to the same cabin, sit along the same table, they will not only exchange stories, eat the same food, they will both drink from the same cup. Only charity can achieve this. Thus the phrase Preferential Love for the Poor may transit to become a Love of Preference for the Poor, and still all it really reveals is the tendency to side with the poor, or to simply tolerate the poor or choose the poor person first. In real life we have to live as inspire by love. Ours then is not just a preferential love for the poor, nor love of preference for the poor. As Christians, OUR ULTIMATE OPTION IS LOVE FOR THE POOR.
To sit in peace with the poor, to bring them friendship together with food, to strive to be brothers and sisters with all: these efforts at unity are not enough; we must love them.
What the Lord Jesus said about the Coming of the Son of Man on Judgment day needs retelling. “Come, you who are blessed by my Father. Inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, a stranger and you welcomed me, naked and you clothed me, sick and you cared for me, in prison and you visited me…Amen, I say to you, whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me. Come…” (Matthew 25:34-40).
Only because of our love for the poor, will the poor usher us one day to Heaven, to the Kingdom of God. “Come, enter, and inherit the Kingdom prepared for you.” The poor will confirm the love and the Charity you and I live and practice in our life. From the Lord’s description of the last day judgment it is clear that not justice alone that will save us and bring us to heaven. They are the works of mercy we give to the poor that will bring us to the gate of the Kingdom. St. Matthew’s narrative (Matt. Chap. 25) on Judgment day was so beautifully restated by the Carmelite Mystic, St. John of the Cross when he wrote: “At the twilight if life, we are all going to be judged by love.”
Today’s demanding conditions of people’s near the inhuman subsistence challenge the Church to re-define or re-express the love it has learned in Jesus. This is the reason why the continuing presence of Jesus Christ’ love has to take the form of the Theology of the Crumbs or the Philosophy of the Little, and will have to be given a locally “friendly or acceptable” name, Pondo ng Pinoy, for the critics a gimmick, for the believing Christian the continuing activity of love. From hereon, charity is within practice of everyone and not the exclusive realm of the better off. Through its Catechesis --- (and the serious bystander needs to be familiar with or read its teachings in Catechesis form --- Pondo ng Pinoy has democratized Charity. From the teaching one gets today, we leave this auditorium believing and hoping to change the little community or world we visit and live in. Charity is not a word we keep in our shelves of our rooms. For the Christian, LOVE is a way of life.
The 40 th St. Tomas More Lecture
University of Santo Tomas
February 7, 2008
|
