Custom Writing Service http://StudyHub.vip/A-Theological-Reflection-On-The-Church- 👈

1. 1
A Theological Reflection on the Church of the Poor
by Kurt Zion V. Pala
Jesus identified himself with the poor from the moment he left his Father's side to the moment he
returned, especially during his passion and death on the cross. He became the poorest of the poor
—the hungry, the thirsty, the naked, the sick, the stranger, the prisoner. Jesus revealed the extent
of true love on the cross. Love to be true has to hurt. The poor are Jesus' Calvary today.
- Mother Teresa of Calcutta
Introduction/Rationale. Every January we find thousands of people men and women, some on
barefoot brave the crowds to be able to touch the image of the Black Nazarene or popularly called
the Nazareno in Quiapo. These people come from all over Metro Manila and many from the
provinces also make their pilgrimage to get a glimpse of the image. A sea of people and not a space
can be found. And all year-round people flock the church at Quiapo to pour their hearts out to the
Nazareno and pray for miracles to happen. Majority of the people find themselves helpless in their
poverty but remain hopeful and faithful. The whole picture demonstrates the faith of the people. Is
it faith or fanaticism? How does the Church see itself against the reality of poverty in the
Philippines in particular? How can the Church respond to their needs? Who are the poor? What is
the Church? These are just some of the questions that this paper will attempt to answer in the light
of the relationship between the Church and the Poor - and the use of the model of the church as
“Church of the Poor.” There is a need to evaluate, to assess and in so many ways “re-constitute” the
Church’s understanding of itself in the Philippines.
This is just what the Second Plenary Council of the Philippines (PCP II) did 20 years ago. It defined
the Church in the Philippines as the “Church of the Poor.” But after all those years, has the
Philippine Church become truly a Church of the Poor? Recently, a nationwide commemorative
conference on the PCP II was spearheaded by Adamson University and St. Vincent School of
Theology in collaboration with the Socio-Pastoral Institute and Mary Mother of the Poor
Foundation last January 13-15, 2011 with the theme, “ The Church of the Poor - PCP II After 20
Years.” At the Conference we heard varying degrees of affirmation and disappointment from the

2. 2
participants. Only a few of the original participants of the historic PCP II were present and most of
those who attended have little or no knowledge of what PCP II was all about. One thing noted at the
event was the lack of information dissemination, education and awareness regarding PCP II in the
span of 20 years. Many priests and parishioners at the local levels were unfamiliar with the
teachings including the decrees of PCP II.
Similarly, at the end of a gathering of representatives of the vicariates, prelatures, dioceses and
archdioceses of the Philippines for the National Pastoral Consultation on Church Renewal
(NPCCR) in 2001 to reflect on how far the Church have fulfilled the vision and mission proposed
by PCP II, they concluded that:
“The Church in the Philippines has, to our shame, ... remained unchanged in some
respects. Due to weakness in formation and education, the lack of defined diocesan
pastoral directions and programs, and deficiencies in structures, many prescriptions of
PCP-II have not been implemented. But beyond these factors, we see that failures in
renewal have come from a deeper source: our hardness of heart and resistance to
conversion. We confess that among those who make up the Church, even among some
in positions of leadership and responsibility, the new attitudes, options, and lifestyles
demanded by a Church that is Community of Disciples and Church of the Poor have all
too often been honored in words but rejected in life. Moreover, largely due to inaction,
uncritical acceptance of values and patterns of behavior of the dominant society, lack of
consistent witnessing, we, as Church have to confess some responsibility for many of
the continuing ills of Philippine society.”1
Is the idea of a Church of the Poor unrealistic, too ambitious for our Church to achieve? Do we
need another 20 years to finally call ourselves truly a Church of the Poor? Before I proceed to
answering those questions, let us examine first the situation of poverty and its major causes in the
Philippines.
Poverty in the Philippines remained unchanged just as how the Church has not changed in the last
20 years since PCP II. The Asian Development Bank (ADB) recently published in 2009 a report
entitled “Poverty in the Philippines - Causes, Constraints and Opportunities”. It reported that
1
Article 5, “'BEHOLD I MAKE ALL THINGS NEW' (Rev 21:5) Message of the National Pastoral Consultation On Church
Renewal,” Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines. Date Accessed: January 21, 2011.
http://www.cbcponline.net/documents/2000s/html/2001-churchrenewal.html

3. 3
poverty in the Philippines remained high despite some improvement in the economy. Further
poverty remains mainly rural phenomenon though urban poverty is rising. Poverty levels were
found to be directly linked to educational attainment. The poor have large families, with six or more
members. Population management is seen to be critical for an effective poverty reduction strategy.
The report also identified the causes of poverty in the country which included a) inequality in terms
of income and land distribution and b) corruption.
Income Inequality. According to the report the inequality in terms of income distribution
contributed to poverty in the Philippines. Inequality was severe in 2006, as the richest 20% of
Filipino families (3.5 million) accounted for 53% of total family income, while the poorest 80%
(13.9 million) had to share the remaining 47%. The income of the richest 10% of Filipino
households was equivalent to 19 times that of the poorest 10%. Although the economy grew, the
number of people who benefitted was only a few. Added to that is the inequitable land
distribution. We hear and read a lot about land disputes like the case of the Sumilao farmers from
Bukidnon and the Hacienda Luisita in Tarlac. A report cited by ADB showed that the poorest in
rural areas tend to be landless farmers, showing the link between access to land resources and
poverty alleviation. Another report cited also found agrarian reform to be a significant factor that
directly impacts the welfare of the poor. But despite years of implementation, the Philippines
agrarian reform program has made little impact in the inequitable distribution of land. 2
Another cause of poverty identified by the report is the prevalent and systemic corruption. The
Philippines ranked 141st out of 180 countries in the 2008 Transparency International corruption
perceptions index. In Southeast Asia, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam have
2
Asian Development Bank (ADB), “Poverty in the Philippines - Causes, Constraints and Opportunities,” 2009, p.46-47.
Date Accessed: January 20, 2011. http://www.adb.org/Documents/Books/Poverty-Philippines-Causes-Constraints-
Opportunities/Poverty-Philippines-Causes-Constraints-Opportunities.pdf

4. 4
higher ratings than the Philippines and only Cambodia, the Lao PDR, and Myanmar are lower
among the ASEAN neighbors. The report cited a United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)
assessment report that estimated in 2004 an amount equal to $1.8 billion a year, or about 13% of the
government’s annual budget, is lost to corruption in the Philippines. Corruption does not only
damage and weaken national institutions and results in inequitable social services, it has also
resulted in judicial “injustice,” economic inefficiencies, and unchecked environmental
exploitations. The poor are the most vulnerable, as victims of corruption. Furthermore, corruption
can also affect the poor’s political choices and participation as votes are bought during elections.3
Poverty is a reality beyond the numbers and statistical analysis presented above. If one begins to
record each and every person’s struggle with poverty, the numbers won’t be able to quantify or
qualify their experience. We have seen how inequality and corruption can cause poverty and drive
people even further down the drain of poverty and suffering. Inequality and corruption are part of
the sinful structures PCP II identified as the causes of poverty. After that discussion on the state of
poverty in the Philippines, let us now look into the understanding of the Church as “Church of the
Poor.” But first let us define the elements of the construct “Church of the Poor” namely: what is the
Church and the Poor?
Church and Poor Defined
The Church. The Dogmatic Constitution on Church or popularly known as Lumen Gentium (LG)
provides us with various images and models in understanding what the Church is including the
following: a) the Kingdom of Christ - already present in Mystery; b) the People of God; c)
Hierarchical; and d) Pilgrim Church. Does it mean the Church is the sum of all these images?
Which is the true Church? Where is the Church?
3
ADB, p.74.

5. 5
I think what LG attempts to do is to give us a picture of what the Church is essentially. But this
picture is not absolutely and totally what the Church is. To advocate the Church “merely” as a
Mystery is to forget the historicity and the various forms that this Church we call us our Church
take on at different periods of history as we have seen examining the history of the Roman Catholic
Church. To say the Church is a mystery affirms the nature of the Church as both divine and human.
It is also divine because it focuses on the mystery of the Incarnation just as the Word becoming
flesh and dwelling among us - the Church is the “incarnation” of the Kingdom of God as
proclaimed by Jesus Christ. That is where the mystery is to be found. To emphasize the hierarchical
nature of the Church strengthens the institutional character of the Church making it more rigid
ecclesiocentric and leads to clericalism. The understanding of the Church as People of God is found
in the statement: “For those who believe in Christ, who are reborn not from a perishable but from an
imperishable seed through the word of the living God, not from the flesh but from water and the
Holy Spirit, are finally established as ‘a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a purchased
people . . . who in times past were not a people, but are now the people of God’”.4
These among the
many descriptions of what the Church is, clearly shows that the Church is a mystery. One cannot
describe or define in absolute terms but only speak of the Church in terms of images, symbols and
models.
The Poor. They always had a special place in the heart of Christ. Jesus was himself one of the
“poor.” He ‘emptied himself’ to share our humanity (Phil.2:7), became a citizen of a despised
village (Jn. 1:46) and was known merely as the carpenter’s son (Mt. 13:55). He also resisted
temptation to carry out his mission using glory and power (Mt.4:5-10). He was an innocent sacrifice
4
Article 9, Dogmatic Constitution of the Church. Date Accessed: January 18, 2011.
http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-
gentium_en.html

6. 6
and victim, executed as a criminal after an unjust trial.5
Who then are the poor? Are we speaking of
the materially poor or the one’s we refer to as the “poor in spirit”?
Scriptures both the Old Testament (OT) and New Testament (NT) identified who the poor are. Dorr
explains that in the OT the term “the poor” refers specifically to groups of people who are
economically deprived, no social status, treated unjustly by foreign rulers or landowners. Cheated
and deprived of their rights, some groups are even doubly oppressed not just because they are
already poor but because they are widows, orphans, immigrants - people who have nobody to
defend themselves. God is their sole defender. Further the NT deepens our understanding of
poverty. As demonstrated earlier, Jesus himself is seen as one of the poor. If the rulers and
landowners were the oppressors in the OT, religious authorities like the Pharisees were the abusers
of power in the NT. Dorr cautions us not to immediately make sharp distinctions between ‘the poor’
and the ‘poor in spirit’. Here we often make the distinction between the poor who are materially
impoverished or the rich and powerful. Dorr explains that both the poor and the rich alike can
become ‘poor in spirit’ when ‘the poor’ turns away from God in bitterness and hopelessness or the
rich who are already ‘poor in spirit’ but could also have the difficulty to be ‘poor in spirit’ when
they rely on their own wealth and power. Dorr adds that we are all in some sense ‘poor before
God’.6
What is then the relationship of the Church and the Poor? We can find in the social teachings
of the Church this basic idea of caring for the poor and the understanding of the Church as “Church
of the Poor”. It would be time consuming to study every document. Yet it is of special interest for
me to look into the Medellin Conference of Latin American bishops and church leaders who faced
the same reality of poverty like the Church in the Philippines. There were a number of topics and
issues discussed but I would like to highlight the following as also emphasized by Dorr: a)
5
Dorr, Donal. Option for the Poor: A Hundred Years of Vatican Social Teaching (New York: Orbis Books, 1983), p. 5.
6
Dorr, p.6.

7. 7
Structural Injustice and b) ‘a Poor Church’. The Conference believes that unjust structures uphold
and foster dependency and poverty so that poverty is not something that just happen but is the
product of human actions. And according to the Conference, a Church that is poor denounces
material poverty caused by injustice and sin; preaches and lives out spiritual poverty and it is itself
bound to material poverty as a commitment. Their preference for the poor is an important element
in what is now called the ‘option for the poor’.7
A ‘Poor Church’ therefore demands that the Church denounces material poverty caused by injustice
and sin but it must also become poor by binding itself to material poverty. This is a radical demand
for conversion and transformation of a Church who has for so long in history lived in wealth and
power at the expense of the poor.
The Second Plenary Council of the Philippines also faced the same reality of poverty. It also
perceived sinful social structures as the causes of poverty and it is God urgently calling us to serve
the poor and the needy. The council adopted the expression “Church of the Poor” to highlight this
urgent call. It further defined the Church of the Poor as a Church where: 1) the evangelical spirit of
poverty is embraced and practiced; 2) its members and leaders have a special love for the poor
which is not an exclusive or excluding love; 3) the poor are not discriminated against because of
their poverty; 4) the poor are given preferential attention and time; 5) there is solidarity with the
poor; 6) the poor who are exploited are defended and protected; 7) its members have no ambition
for titles and honors; 8) the entire community of disciples especially the rich and better off sectors
of the community and its leaders and pastors; and 9) all are willing to follow Jesus Christ through
poverty and oppression in order to carry out the work of salvation. If and when the Church truly
becomes a Church of the Poor, “the poor will feel at home in her, and will participate actively, as
7
Dorr, p.158-159.

8. 8
equal to others, in her life and mission. The Church will then become truly a communion, a sign and
instrument for the unity of the whole Filipino nation.”8
Has the poor truly felt at home in the Church and participated in the life of the Church? The Church
and the Poor as the title of this paper suggests shows that there is still an understanding of the
Church and the Poor as two different elements. The Church finds itself “superior” and “savior” of
the Poor but unlike Christ, she is not “one of the poor”. The Church alienates the Poor. The Poor
continues to be usually the recipient and not an active participant in the Church today. Some would
even say that the Church is the main culprit why the poor remains poor. The Church somehow
teaches them to be contented with their situation for reward awaits them in the next life in paradise.
In poverty, they share in the suffering of Christ. We observed the phenomenon of the great devotion
to the Black Nazarene of Quiapo. Is it possible that people relate more to the image of the Nazareno
as the Suffering Christ but not the Church itself? Many criticize the practice and devotion and some
even label it as idolatry and fanaticism. Is the Church exploiting the poor? In some ways does the
Church only exist for the poor, what happens to the Church if there are no poor? Do we cease to
exist? Is the relationship of the Church and the Poor merely a benefactor - beneficiary relationship?
Final Reflection and Conclusion. The devotion to the Black Nazarene is an expression of the poor
man’s immense faith and love for God. It affirms the Biblical image of the poor having no one else
to depend on but on God alone and in the Incarnated Word, Jesus Christ himself. The suffering
Black Nazarene becomes the object of their faith, the symbol of their hope. Central to Jesus’
teaching is the Kingdom of God. In some sense the Church in one way or another as the “Church of
the Poor” should make present today the Kingdom of God as proclaimed by Christ.
8
Articles 122-136, The Conciliar Document “Go I Am With You Always!, ” Acts and Decrees of the Second Plenary
Council of the Philippines (20 January – 17 February 1991).

9. 9
But what we have seen so far is the reverse. We see in some instances the Church succumbing to
the temptations of wealth, honor and power forgetting its very essence as a Church of the Poor. In
other cases we find the Church merely a dispenser of grace through the sacraments and sometimes
even depriving the poor from receiving them because of excessive fees and requirements. But Jesus
remind us when he was reminded by a disciple to send them (a great crowd) away so they may be
able to buy food for themselves. Jesus responded, “You give them something to eat” yourselves.9
We are called therefore to respond to the needs of the ‘great crowd of people’ Jesus clearly and
publicly identified himself with the poor from the moment he left his Father’s side to the moment
he returned, especially during his passion and death on the Cross. He became poorest of the poor –
the hungry, the thirsty, the naked, the sick, the stranger, and the prisoner. Jesus revealed the extent
of true love on the Cross. Love to be true has to hurt. The poor are Jesus’ Calvary today.10
The Church therefore as the Church of the Poor must radically live out the demands that comes with
it to become a “Poor Church”. Further the Church of the Poor is beyond the Vatican II universalistic
claim as “People of God”. It is also beyond the image of the Church as a “charitable institution” –
showing special concern for the poor because as Sobrino puts it “such interest remains ethical, not
an ecclesial concern for the poor”. And he adds that it is not the collective poor and oppressed.11
The Church of the Poor as asserted by Sobrino is the “true church” as it provides the means of being
a Church in Jesus representing “on one hand a conversion of the historical Church and on the other
its resurrection”.12
9
Mark 6:34-37
10
Mother Teresa of Calcutta, “Charity: the soul of missionary activity” taken from the April 8, 1991 issue of
“L’Osservatore Romano”. Editorial and Management Offices, Via del Pellegrino, 00120, Vatican City, Europe. Date
Accessed: January 19, 2011. http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id
=185&repos=1&subrepos=0&searchid=707600
11
Sobrino, Jon. The True Church and the Poor (Quezon City: Claretian Publications, 1985), p.134-135.
12
Sobrino, p.124.