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 “poor people’s” 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 GOD’S WILL?

            Does God desires and willed 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 people’s obedience to him. Although God’s will is unequivocal, its fulfillment depends upon God’s blessing, which is conditional upon the obedience of his people (v.5). Since Israel is stiff necked and hardheaded people, “the poor will never cease out of the land” (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 God’s 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.[1]

Consequently, God’s will that there be no poor in the land continues to be mandated for the “new 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 “good news to the poor” (Lk. 4:18; cf 7:22 par. Mt. 11:5).[2]

 ECONOMIC RIGHTS OF THE POOR: A BIBLICAL PERSPECTIVE

            We have heard of human rights, women’s rights, children’s 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).[3]

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).[4] 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 God’s agents.  It is an integral part of God’s covenant with Israel rooted in the Exodus. The refrain “they are my servants whom I brought forth out of the land of Egypt,” or “you shall remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt” grounds both the rights of the poor and Israel’s obligation to maintain those rights in God’s 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 “knows the rights of the poor” 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.[5]

            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 “the needy… the poor and him who has no helper” (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 afflicted”. (Isa. 58:6f) Knowing the Lord is equated with caring for the poor: “he (Josiah) judged the cause of the poor and needy; then it was well. Is not this to know me? Says the Lord” (Jer. 22:16).[6]

            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 Jesus’ disciples are called to manifest in their relationship to the poor the grand reversal that God has promised.[7]

 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 “works of love”. 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). Hillel’s 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 “poor basket” 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).[8]

 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 God’s elect, a “congregation of the poor” (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 God’s 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.[9]

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 NGO’s 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.  

 The Early Church’s 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 church’s 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.[10]

            It was a fellowship that transcended and broke down the hierarchical, “vertical” patterns of Roman society and constituted a new Israel, a new covenanted community in which “there was not a needy person among them” (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).[11]

            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 “give” or “receive” a share, Paul’s 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).[12]

Is Community of Goods Still Applicable?

            In Acts 2:44 it is said that in the infant church at Jerusalem “all who believe were together and had all things in common” (Gk. Eichon hapanta koina) and (4:34f) “as many as possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the proceeds of what was sold and laid it at the apostles feet.” 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 “a field” 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.[13]

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, what’s 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.[14]

            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.[15]

            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 people’s 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.[16]

            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.[17]          

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.[18]

            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.[19]   

In the 29^th International Cooperative Congress held in Stockholm in 1988, ICA President Lara Marucs, emphasized the following values:[20]

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, “net profiting from other’s work”)

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[21]

1.   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     

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 other’s 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.  

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 “salvation” 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 can’t 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 God’s presence will be realized. God be with us as we embark on this glorious journey.