A HISTORICO-THEOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK OF DEVELOPMENT Introduction.

As a natural process development corresponds, theologically, to creation's movement towards its end goal (telos) through time and history. It is the unfolding of creation's destiny which is none other than God's own mission. Human participation in creation's movement to self-realization is an act of freedom and proper to humanity's nature as originally intended by God. Development work as human participation in God's continuing act of creation must be patterned after the way God relates to creation. Any development enterprise that deviates from God's ways with the world is sinful and inevitably leads to destructiveness. Christ's work in the world exemplifies the way God relates to creation. Christ says that he came to the world to give it life, abundant life (John 10:10). God's outgoing and overflowing love for creation, and all that is in it, is meant to life to creation in its fullest. Development as a process of making the whole of nature realize itself to the fullest is a an act of obedience to God, an act which coincides with humanity's own self-realization. Historically, however, development as a purposive and organized intervention into nature's processes, depicts human freedom under the condition of fallenness/sinfulness. It is, therefore, an object of God's redemptive work for the sanctification of the whole creation at the end of time. Human intervention in nature's processes has made life a trifle less vulnerable to the vagaries of nature and multiplied, many times over, human capability to use nature's resources. At the same time, it has made human existence even more precarious and condemned a large portion of humanity in a state of utter misery and degradation. Development's ambiguous nature defines the church's position vis-a-vis development. Development as a Liberating Process As the word implies, development pictures the free unfolding of hidden potentials, meaning, it is a liberating process. Development may fail to take place because of the presence of certain restraining factors. These factors can be internal, such as a false consciousness, attitudes, habits, and traditional values which need to be overcome or transformed. Or these can be external factors, such as unjust economic and oppressive political relations that are legalized and institutionalized by the status quo.

Contemporary Philippine society is a product of centuries of colonial intervention. Through a combination of violence, deception and superior technology Spanish and then American colonialism drove Philippine society into a kind of development which is detrimental to the people's well-being, restrictive of their potentials, destructive of the environment, and morally and spiritually bankrupt. Even as Philippine society advanced technologically and new productive forces emerged in greater quantity, the nation as a whole got fixated on a backward stage of development. While some got to enjoy the finest fruits of development, the people's living condition and quality of life continued to deteriorate. In the countryside, the forests are a sight of devastation, while the plains show vast greens of export plantations. In the metropolis, squatters' shanties surround high rise condominiums and commercial houses. As a direct result of continuing neocolonial domination and tutelage, Philippine society's development is stunted, restricted, uneven, distorted. Viewed from the perspective of God's revealed will for the whole creation, the Filipino nation and people are being held back from realizing their true end (telos). In this condition, the church has the task of proclaiming the Word of God that affirms those forces that seek to emancipate Philippine society and lead it to the path of genuine development. Such an affirmation may be manifested in terms of development programs which lend support, especially by way of advocacy and solidarity, to the genuine forces of development, and actively negate and oppose those that only tend to preserve the present conditions. The church's participation in genuine people's development is more than an expression of compassion for the suffering ones. For the faithful, it is a matter of faith. That is to say, one's faithfulness to the Lord must include the commitment to participate in the people's struggle for liberation towards realizing genuine development. It is not enough that the church has spent a good portion of its energy and resources for all sorts of development endeavors. The church must learn to discriminate the genuine from the false ones, and to reserve all that it has only for efforts that are truly liberating. Its involvement in undoubtedly non-liberating, even mystifying and domesticating, activities shows a lack of loyalty to the Lord. In addition, that may only confuse the faithful, if not mislead them. The Lord himself has nothing but harse words for those who cause the little ones to stumble in their faith (Matt. 18:6). People as the Subjects of Development

A basic assumption in progressive theories of development is that the people themselves are its motive forces. This is in contrast to elitist theories which credit historic personalities as authors of actions that push society towards certain paths of development. The various documents produced in meetings, conferences and consultations held by the NCCP at various levels show a preponderant preference for a progressive rather than elitist view of development. Development is for, of and by the people. It is intended for them, but to call them "beneficiaries" would render them passive objects of benevolent acts of their benefactors. The people for whom development is done are themselves its real and actual authors. Hence, the idea of development and the processes and methods appropriate to it are the product of the people's collective wisdom and experience. As understood in development theory, the term "people" refers to those who are relatively denied meaningful participation in society's economic processes and access to goods and services necessary for their subsistence and worthy of human dignity. In short, the people are the poor, both in the absolute and relative senses. In most countries of Asia, Africa and Latin America, they constitute the majority of the population. This concept of development rejects the models of development prescribed by developed countries (primarily through the IMF-WB-ADB) which identify foreign economic powers in collaboration with the local elite as the main actors in a poor country's development. The assumption behind the elitist model of development is that, since prosperity is the common goal of all classes and sectors of society, the surest and shortest way to develop the whole society is by activating the segment that is presently occupying the commanding heights of the nation's economy and politics. The thinking that "what is good for the Ayalas and Zobels must be good for the whole country" or "what is good for Japan and the United States must be good for the Philippines" is the rationale of an elitist theory of development. On the other hand, a progressive or pro-people practice of development operates on a premise, proved by experience, that the prosperity of the elite is based on the poverty of the many and that solutions prescribed by the rich countries are actually a means by which their economic hegemony is insured. Genuine development for the people can happen only when it is conceived and carried out by themselves.

Christian theology, as the way by which the church makes sense of God's presence and work in creation, has the task of articulating God's word for the poor who are struggling for a better life for themselves and for the whole world. It is the evangelical task of the church to proclaim God's word of judgment and grace for this human struggle to the end that it should mirror, or at least approximate, the Word which became flesh for the redemption of the whole creation. God's condescension and appearance as a humble servant in solidarity with the lowliest of human beings (Phil. 2) reaffirms God's absolute freedom to work out our salvation in profoundly and wonderfully new and unpredictable ways. It is God who chooses his servant -be that a king, a child, a slave people or a noble nation. The poor whose silent suffering for centuries has now turned into a mighty movement for freedom and liberation is an expression of the new reality which God has brought forth in Jesus Christ. Through their collective struggle for change, the poor are the ones responding to God's call to a new life in freedom and wholeness. The elitist view that the poor do not have the intellectual, moral and material means to lead the nation to prosperity is debunked by God's act who came as one with the poor, and founded the church from among the poor to become God's servant for the salvation of the whole world. Whom God chooses, God will give the power and authority to do God's work. The poor now offer to God their sufferings and struggles that God may use them for their own liberation that of the whole society. An idea has emerged that the rapid development of poor countries, particularly in Asia, requires the installation of strong authoritarian governments. A partnership between Western trained technocrats and a ruthless military regime is supposed to provide the engine of development that drives a poor country on a road to development prescribed by transnational financial institutions. In this view, the people have to be restrained and forced to accept certain roles ostensibly for their own good. While it is admitted that the governance of a nation requires some measure of coercion in order to suppress some disruptive elements and to pull others out of a lethargic state, such use of force should not be the general rule. For, in general, people are naturally inclined to participate in activities that will concretely raise their living standards and enhance their

dignity. But, since the fruits of genuine development are often to be paid by hard work and sacrifices, there is the tendency to just settle for the misery of the old. People must be led to recognize their inner servitude and strive to overcome it. Every externally liberating act should be a manifestation of an inner liberation which is, in turn, reinforced by the enjoyment of the concrete fruits of their action in the objective world. Therefore, the principal means of development is genuine self-understanding through patient teaching and persuasion. Development workers are, first and foremost, teachers and moral exemplars. As a liberating process, development allows the resurgence of creative powers which have been submerged through generations of humiliated existence. The restoration of pride and dignity, which can be accomplished only under conditions of freedom, is the engine that is truly capable of driving society to unprecedented heights of achievement. Nowhere is this truth more clearly seen than in the faith of the church. The God of the church is one who gives freedom to creation and seeks to fulfill its destiny in and through that creaturely freedom. God's omnipotence is manifested precisely in the way God fulfills the divine purpose without having to destroy creation's freedom. God liberates creation from a self-imposed captivity not by force but rather by winning its heart and will to submit to the divine way. The cross of Jesus Christ is God's own testimony to this truth: God overcomes our rebelliousness by his own death. Those who believe in this truth will receive the power to become children of God and establish God's realm on earth. Development as Indigenous At the heart of the Christian faith is the incarnation of the Son of God in Jesus of Nazareth. The man whom Christians everywhere regard as Lord was a rural Galilean Jewish worker (most likely the son of a migrant stone cutter or mason) who lived in the first century. He lived, talked, worked and died like a Galilean Jewish person that he truly was. And yet, it was in Jesus' particular racial inheritance that he fulfilled his role as Savior of all humankind. Jesus worked out God's salvation in and through the concrete relationships that he sought with particular men and women. This shows that God's universal salvation touches people in their specific context. Salvation is alien to the world in the sense that it originates from a heavenly source, but its coming enables the receiver to overcome its falsity and realize

its authentic historical self. Salvation is a homecoming, a return from a state of alienation. In Jesus Christ, we find our true selves. "Indigenous" is but a cultural equivalent of the philosophical term, "authentic". Its being different from other, especially, alien cultures, merely reflect the latter's dominant point of view. Development can be different from any Western model, but that does not necessarily make it indigenous. Development is genuinely indigenous if it flows from the wellspring of a people's being and affirms their collective identity. The economic model espoused by the IMF-WB-ADB tandem is based on a restrictive view that reduces all phenomena to the reality of international capital. Various kinds of nations, peoples and cultures are said to move uniformly according to the same laws of motions fixed by the inner dynamic of international capital. Failure in economic "reforms" is attributed to inefficient local leadership and the people's lack of know-how and will to implement them. Thus, the leadership has to be replaced, the people's culture reshaped or the whole nation be totally recast in order to achieve development. In short, a people cannot develop and keep their national identity at the same time. On the contrary, authentic development can only be indigenous. It means the unfettered movement of a people's inner dynamic which, in turn, stimulates the unfolding and realization of their native potentials and genius. Development does not mean "catching up" with the rest of the developed world by following its footsteps; it is rather the wonderful discovery and joyous celebration of a people's unique identity. A developed people is one which has found itself and its place amongst other peoples.