“He has shown you, O man, what is good. And what does the LORD require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God.” (Micah 6:8)

Following Christ involves a prophetic ministry. We are called to live as faithful witnesses, and that entails empowering the voiceless and loving the vulnerable in our society. The vulnerable are those who face religious, social, economic, and political inequality. They lack power, have limited access to resources, and are discriminated against. They are marginalized people susceptible to injustice and exclusion from societal institutions or sectors. In Mark’s Gospel account, the marginalized people were the poor, lepers, Gentiles, sick, wives, widows, women, and children. They are insignificant and outcasts in society.¹

We love our neighbors, especially the marginalized, because we follow the God who came to live with and serve even the lowest in the social hierarchy at that time: women (Luke 1), shepherds (Luke 2), demon-possessed (Luke 4), a leper (Luke 5:12-16), a paralytic (Luke 5:17-26), a tax collector (Luke 5:27-31), a Gentile (Luke 7:1-10), a widow and her son (Luke 7:11-17), a sinful woman (Luke 7: 36-50), and others. It is necessary to stay receptive to understanding our Lord and what it means to follow him in the context in which we are called to live.² To accomplish the mandate to love our neighbors in Asian contexts, it is appropriate to draw on scholars closest to Asian situatedness. In this essay, I will draw on Filipino evangelicals, particularly Aldrin Peñamora. I will briefly elaborate on his view of the Eucharist or the Lord’s Supper as his lens in challenging Filipino Christians to love their neighbors—the Moros or the Muslim ethnic groups who live in Mindanao,³ and the vulnerable in the Philippines. Eventually, I hope readers will go directly to the primary source (Peñamora’s writings).

Peñamora is a Filipino evangelical scholar and a leading practitioner, particularly in promoting peace and reconciliation. He uses the Eucharist as his lens to encourage Christians to follow Christ and love their neighbors. I believe that the combination of his experience as a minister and a scholar finds expression in two themes in his writings: concern for the Moros and a Eucharistic perspective on the vulnerable. Seminary students and ministers willing to broaden their theological, ethical, and ministerial perspectives concerning the injustice experienced by the Moros and the marginalized in the country would benefit from his writings.

Towards a Eucharistic Community: The Lord’s Supper as a Paradigm of Justice

Christians have various perspectives regarding the nature of the Lord’s Supper.⁴ Some may see it as a purely spiritual tradition, others may perceive it as a mystical activity, and some may think of it as socially irrelevant. Drawing on Peñamora, we can see that the Eucharist reminds us of Jesus’ ministry. Therefore, this ritual (ceremonial act) has inherent political and social significance.⁵ Ronaldo Magpayo writes that the traditional view concerning the Lord’s Supper focuses on the vertical dimension (worship) and individual pietism (personal reflection on what Jesus did on the cross for my sins). These are essential and significantly true, but the Lord’s Supper has moral and ethical components that pertain to our existential struggles.⁶

Peñamora is right that breaking bread challenges the participants to consider others by sharing what they have with those who have less or nothing.⁷ Such a challenge tells of the importance of considering our kapwa.⁸ In the lowland Filipino worldviews, kapwa refers to “the unity of the ‘self’ and ‘others’…. It is a recognition of shared identity, an inner self shared with others.”⁹ It is a value at the core of Filipino psychology.¹⁰ Therefore, the Lord’s Supper is not merely an individual practice in the church. This sacrament is not just about asking for forgiveness and blessings from God but also a “pedagogy” for justice in the here and now. RememberingJesus’ sacrifice tells of Christians’ prophetic calling to act justly, love mercy, and show compassion to the vulnerable. That includes resisting oppressive systems and powers.¹¹

Remembering and Responding Responsibly

Peñamora urges Filipino evangelicals to cherish our Philippine history because we need to recall the events that shaped Christianity in our country.¹² Forgetting can be dangerous, and in a sense, so is remembering, because we are summoned in the Lord’s Supper to imitate the passion of Christ.¹³ For example, forgetting that the Eucharist challenges us to follow Christ can lead to a shallow view of this sacrament. That is a mere tradition without a larger significance in our spirituality and prophetic ministry. Drawing on Peñamora, we see two essential movements: remembering and responding. First, we will delve into the concept of remembrance, focusing on the Eucharist. Second, we will explore the challenge of responding (acting) as an essential answer to God’s call.

What Has the Eucharist to Do with Societal Issues? Remembering as an Act

In his letter to the church in Corinth, Paul reminded them of the Lord’s Supper:

For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.” In the same way, after supper, he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me” (I Cor 11:23-25, NIV).

Since the Eucharist is a commemorative ritual about Jesus’ life and ministry, part of it is enacting (pagsasabuhay) a “political” narrative—political in the sense that we proclaim that Jesus is Lord, not us or Caesar. It is “political” in the way that the Eucharist calls us to follow Christ in proclaiming and liberating, in suffering alongside, and even in confronting societal powers that oppress and abuse the vulnerable. In short, God calls Christians to live out the message of the Eucharist in the public domain, which includes a ministry of justice.¹⁴ Participation in the Lord’s Supper includes incarnating the prayer, “Your Kingdom come, Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven,” as we remember Christ.¹⁵ The Lord’s Supper is closely connected to the Lord’s prayer. The latter tells of aligning our will with God’s. The former shows us that God wills his people to remember and proclaim the good news to all. Part of that is loving the vulnerable and alienated in our society, as Jesus exemplified.

The Lord’s Supper (I Cor 11:17-34) and the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9-13)

For Peñamora, remembrance in the Eucharist also means recalling what Jesus did on the cross for humanity. This shows that God calls everyone into his kingdom, including those abandoned and forsaken in our societies. Like Jesus’ outstretched arms on the cross of Calvary, God’s merciful invitation excludes no one.¹⁶

We participate in the Eucharist because we are part of God’s redeemed people who are called to love the weak, show mercy to the marginalized, serve others, and deny ourselves.¹⁷ The Eucharist is thus not just a ritual for spiritual nourishment but also endeavors to influence our broader spheres and societal systems that become spaces for oppression and exclusion.¹⁸ As Peñamora notes, “This entails perceiving Jesus’ earthly ministry to the poor and his confrontations with oppressive powers that led ultimately to the cross as the very shape of God’s advancing eschatological kingdom.”¹⁹ Here, Peñamora is telling us that God’s kingdom, both now and in the future, is connected to the cross (Christ’s death and resurrection). Therefore, commemorating what Christ did on the cross is not confined to spiritual atonement because, in his suffering, he also faced political powers and addressed societal injustice.²⁰ God’s love creates the divine economy that contains foundational practices exemplified in the Lord’s Supper. For example, the perfect love shared within the Holy Trinity is not detached from the Eucharist. Thus, it reminds us of the danger of “othering” people.²¹ Trinitarian love offers us a model as Christians to love one another and to be compassionate toward our fellow humans.

The Model of a Eucharistic Community: God’s Solidarity with the Vulnerable

Filipino Catholic theologian Anscar Chupungco indicates that Jesus serves as the sacrament of the Father. Although God has been reaching to finite humans in diverse ways and across times (Heb 1:1), in the incarnation, Jesus revealed who God is (Heb 1:2-3; Col 1:15). This is a revelation that was previously unseen by anyone, as the apostle John wrote (John 1:18).²² God’s solidarity with finite humans is possible because Jesus became the way for sinners to be reconciled with God—peace on earth and goodwill to humans (Luke 2:14). Peñamora is correct in his observation that some Filipino evangelicals emphasize the higher realm, which overlooks God’s concern for peace on this earth.²³ According to Peñamora, the neglect (and perhaps ignorance) of the social aspect of the Eucharist and God’s solidarity with the oppressed has sometimes weakened our social engagement and concerns for justice in our society. Therefore, it is worth reflecting on how the gospel is good news to people who are oppressed, alienated, and discriminated against in our country.²⁴

While it is tempting for some evangelicals to see their spirituality as otherworldly and have an eschatology that is dehistoricized or futuristic through and through,²⁵ Asian Christians are called to live and love the alienated and abandoned in Asia, such as the Minjung, Dalits, Rohingyas, Moros, and others who are in similar situations.²⁶ In Peñamora’s words: “Indeed, through the Eucharist, Jesus calls his disciples to be in loving solidarity with the oppressed, marginalized and sinners of our societies.”²⁷ This is part of Christians’ participation in Christ, which reveals that following God and understanding the good life (eudaimonia) are shaped by cruciform practices and virtues geared toward loving others.²⁸

Filipino evangelicals are to be applauded for their passion to evangelize. Nonetheless, it is worth noting that in the ministry of Christ, he showed compassion to the vulnerable and marginalized in society (Matt 10:7-8). The vulnerable often face social, economic, political, and religious inequality. In Mark’s Gospel account, they were the poor, leper, Gentile, sick, widow, woman, and child—²⁹ the friends of the Savior.³⁰ To minister to them effectively, let us listen to Peñamora’s call to the church “to go beyond exclaiming, ‘Conversion alone!’”³¹ I believe his assertion is relevant in the Philippine context; as Filipino historian Zeus Salazar has noted, we have focused on otherworldly spirituality, making us think that well-being (kaginhawaan) can only be found in the afterlife. Thus, we only experience suffering and hardship in this world.³²

The Calling of a Eucharistic Community: Malasakit and Damay

In one session in a doctoral colloquium I led, we discussed the silence of many evangelical churches concerning the killings of the poor during the Duterte Administration’s War on Drugs. The majority of Filipinos, including many evangelicals, supported this campaign. Peñamora laments this seeming apathy of many Filipino evangelicals towards the victims of extra-judicial killings. He reminds Christians of the importance of malasakit (deep concern and compassion).³³ Concern and love toward others are necessary because they can rebuke our selfishness.

Another concern, especially when talking about injustice, is the Moro issue in the Philippines. The Muslims in the Mindanao region of the southern Philippines are a marginalized community.³⁴ Since the arrival of the Spanish colonizers carrying both swords and the cross on the Philippine Islands, peace has been elusive for the Moros of Mindanao.³⁵ As Peñamora explains: “The roots of the Moro-Christian Problem can be traced to the Spanish conquest of the Philippines, wherein the propagation of Catholicism and the economic exploitation of the country were important motivations.”³⁶ More Filipinos went to Mindanao during American colonialism, which continued rapidly when the country gained independence. Foreign investors arrived, and together with migrants, Mindanao became a promised land for them.³⁷

The migration to Mindanao after World War II contributed to the tension between Moros and Christians (non-Muslims in this context).³⁸ The former have lived far longer on the southern island of Mindanao.³⁹ However, they have become a minority and are destitute in their native land.⁴⁰ Many of them suffered and were displaced because of the unending conflict in their homeland.⁴¹ Mindanao turned from the land of promise to the place of broken dreams.⁴² In the words of Peñamora: “[A]s history bears out, the Christian migration turned the land of promise into a land of blood and broken dreams for the Moros.”⁴³ In short, Filipino Christians need to understand that the poverty and suffering of the Muslims in Mindanao are connected to their ancestral lands. Injustices occurred when the colonial government gave these ancestral domains to foreign corporations and migrants.⁴⁴

Injustice to the Muslims continues. Mario Joyo Aguja states that the mass media plays a major part in the misrepresentation of and biases against the Moro people. Headlines that contain the qualifiers “Moro” or “Muslims” are added in criminal activities such as “Muslim killers,” “Muslim rapists” and “Moro kidnappers.” This prejudice is ubiquitous in both print and broadcast media. However, we do not generally see such labels for Christians who have broken laws (e.g., “Christian criminals,” “Christian addicts,” or “Christian killers”).⁴⁵

The conflict in Mindanao is complex, and it is a blunder to say that the struggle of the Moros for independence is composed of a monolithic group against the Philippine state because there are multiple groups and identities at play.⁴⁶ Nonetheless, this essay’s purpose is to make us aware of the Moro’s struggle and for Christians to love their Muslim neighbors by drawing on Peñamora’s Eucharistic view. From a wider perspective, this is a reminder of our calling as Christians to love God and our neighbors, particularly the voiceless and oppressed.

Embracing the Moros as Vital Community Members

Going back to Peñamora’s Eucharistic lens, we would do well to remember that the Lord’s Supper is a Christocentric ecclesiological tradition. This means that without the presence of Christ, there is no authentic remembrance, celebration, and anticipation during the ritual. Christ’s presence enables the participants to follow their Savior by living their spirituality in messy and concrete struggles in life.⁴⁷ Filipino evangelicals, then, are called to live in harmony with the Moros in the country, reflecting God’s damay (to suffer with others) and malasakit (deep concern).⁴⁸ Integral to malasakit is the Filipino value of kapwa, in which we see our fellow humans as created in God’s image.⁴⁹

The words of Peñamora are worth quoting:

If Christians are truly to be a kapwa to the Moros and to foster a eucharistic Moro-Christian community, it is vital to consider what community means not only for Christians, but also for Moros to be members of the Philippine nation. The past colonization of the Moroland by Christians must always be a reminder that the injustice of exclusion and domination can never be the bedrock of a genuine eucharistic community, for just and peaceful solidarity—and not exclusion – is its norm.⁵⁰

Certainly, there are differences between Filipino Moros and Christians. Both have different ethnicities, histories, and religions. Nonetheless, these are not hindrances in treating each other as fellow humans because both are created in the image of God.⁵¹

According to Peñamora, authentic dialogue is a significant way to show God’s love to Muslims.⁵² I salute Peñamora because his proposal is seen in his actions. Together with other evangelical leaders, they have mingled and dialogued with high officials of the Moro people.⁵³ After their journey to Midsayap, North Cotabato, in 2015, he concluded: “God blessed our journey, for we certainly experienced a good thing—the goodness of friendship.”⁵⁴

For Peñamora, there are practical and significant steps to show our love for the Moros. As mentioned above, equality is important. They should be included in career opportunities, education, government projects, and others. These are necessary because Peñamora writes that the Philippine government’s development projects are usually directed to the places or settlements of the Christian majority.⁵⁵ Concerning education, Milligan proposes that the pedagogy or the system at large should be inclusive and not just focused on Christian values or a cultural group.⁵⁶ I do not argue that the government has completely neglected the Muslims in Mindanao. True, much progress has occurred in Mindanao. However, because of three centuries of tension between non-Muslims and Moros in the region, economic prosperity is still elusive.⁵⁷ While it is necessary to address the Moros’ political and economic rights, they should be first treated with respect as Filipino citizens. This requires affirming their value and appreciating their contributions to the progress of our country. Thus, the negative attitudes and labels thrown at them must be eradicated.⁵⁸

Peñamora’s Eucharistic lens and its implications for loving the oppressed significantly contribute not only to Christian scholarship. He also educates evangelicals in understanding the plight of the Muslims and the marginalized. Seminary students, particularly Filipinos, would learn much from Peñamora’s writings, and I hope that once again, we are challenged to see spirituality as not merely otherworldly.

Francis Jr. S. Samdao is happily married to Shilo Rose Tacay-Samdao. He serves as a senior lecturer in theology at the Philippine Baptist Theological Seminary in Baguio City and as the assistant editor of the World Evangelical Alliance’s Evangelical Review of Theology. He earned a Doctor of Theology (ThD) from the Asia Baptist Graduate Theological Seminary and has published several articles and book reviews in various academic journals.