HEALTH AND EDUCATION: CORNERSTONES
OF CHRISTIAN SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT
A Christian Strategy for Winning the Minds and Hearts of Needy Salvadorans.
“Señor, Usted es un milagro!” (Mister, you’re a miracle!) was an unexpected affirmation for our presence in Santa Barbara. Only three months earlier I had led an investigation team to this refugee center at the urgings of Salvadoran officials. They requested that Paralife provide medical and developmental social aid to three thousand Salvadoran expatriates returning to their homeland from neighboring Honduras. I had traveled throughout El Salvador during the previous four years and in no other part of the country had I encountered sickness and misery like that of the suffering people of Santa Barbara. Almost every child had eye and ear infections with pus oozing from both ear and nostril; the tell-tell signs of large, bloated stomachs and discolored hair revealed rampant malnutrition. The stench of death hung over the entire community as if it were the death angel waiting its chance to snare another sickly victim. Infants and children were dying weekly, and until the arrival of Paralife to Santa Barbara in June of 1985, there was no impediment to the work of the black angel of death.
This was the third trip Paralife and its team of Salvadoran doctors had made to the village. While the medical staff set up a clinic, I had decided to walk through the village and survey conditions. The houses, or apartments, were nothing more than half inch thick sticks tied together forming walls with galvanized tin for roofs. In almost each house, sick people lay on mats or in hammocks waiting their turn to die. Children looked dispassionately out doorways; children that should have been laughing and playing moved slowly and gingerly, pain and hunger controlling their movements.
“You’re a miracle” was such a contrast to everything else in the community. Death, discouragement, and sickness were the daily companions of these people trapped between starvation on one side, and guns and bullets on the other. During these deplorable conditions, this positive affirmation was totally unexpected. I had to know more about the speaker and why she declared it so.
Dorothea stood in the doorway of her thatched hut looking out to the muddy road where I stood. “Why do you call me a miracle?” I questioned. “What have I done for you?” She eagerly began to tell me her experience. One month earlier her baby girl lay in her hammock dying. There was no help and no encouragement from the community; children were dying all over the area. “After two weeks of continuous fever and refusing to drink her rice milk,” the mother explained, “I went out into the street, about where you are standing, and I looked up into the sky. I cried out, `God if you exist, heal my baby girl.’ Within two days, you and the medical team arrived, and a doctor gave my dying baby girl some medicine, and less than two days later, my baby was almost well.”
I stood there in the middle of the road and started crying like a baby. It was a burden for these hurting people like those who originally inspired the vision for Paralife. Hearing from the lips of a poor and needy person how Paralife had saved the life of this woman’s child was a fulfillment of the vision. Dorothea was not an abstract fantasy; she was not an idea, rather, she was a real person with a real life and death need, and she was one reason God had given the original vision. She was a special person, and her child was greatly loved by God. Why God had chosen to save that child, I may never know; but in His providence and wisdom, He did just that. It may be that God simply wanted to show Dorothea that He really does exist.
A PARALIFE STRATEGY
During the decade of the eighties, a most deadly and destructive civil war sacked El Salvador, the smallest country in Central America. Since 1979 more than 70,000 people died because of bellicose actions involving the Salvadoran government, as well as trained, externally financed revolutionaries. Not only have these civil actions cost thousands of lives and impoverished hundreds of thousands more, but also the Salvadoran national infrastructure and industry have suffered the loss of billions of dollars. The destruction of bridges, energy transmission systems, factories, and transportation has caused heavy economic losses as the war continued.
The roots of this civil war reach as far back as the Spanish colonial period. By searching out the roots and bringing to light many of the causes of hostile actions, we learn to confront these causes and act to stem their ugly consequences. There are many components that fueled this civil war: without doubt, poverty and human reactions to poverty are primary explanations; the increasing population, one of the densest in Latin America; the crippled ability of the country to feed its growing rural peasantry; ignorance and the lack of adequate schooling; the vast difference between the incomes of the land-owning elite and the nation’s poorest. These causes, catalyzed by imported ideology, fused sufficiently to provide a basis from which those of the poorer classes were provoked to take up arms.
The consequences of the violence produced by this civil unrest need to be analyzed in human terms. Government estimates reveal that 70,000 Salvadorans have died between 1979 and 1990 because of the civil war. Some estimate that as many as 500,000 persons have fled the country seeking safety. Another 500,000 to 700,000 have been displaced from their homes of origin and are on the verge of total social and economic disaster. Due to the loss of jobs as factories and other businesses closed, it has been estimated that 60% to 70% of the population are unemployed or underemployed. To put these numbers into perspective for the reader, for citizens of the United States it would be as though 3 million North American citizens had been killed and another 25 million people had fled to Canada or Mexico. Think of the confusion created if 25 to 35 million people had been displaced by violence and relocated to displaced people’s camp within the country. Consider the North American economy if 150 to 175 million people were unemployed or underemployed. It is difficult, if not impossible, for a North American to conceive of such drastic and ignoble events and consequences in the United States. The consequence of such a large, marginalized sector of society is hunger, disease, and ignorance. Since 1983, Paralife International has dedicated itself to the task of relieving much of this horrible suffering endured by the honorable Salvadoran people. Our programs of evangelism and social development are based on Biblical principles and implemented with Christian love.
Theological Imperative
Many Biblical verses speak directly to the subject of the poor. Undoubtedly, the poor were the concern of many inspired authors of Holy Script. Biblical admonitions to help the poor are one of the most frequently discussed topics by ancient writers and prophets. The large number of citations about the poor must in some way indicate the concern that our heavenly Father has for the needy of our world. The following verses represent a few of the many citations expressing concern for the world’s needy.
“If you lend money to My people, to the poor among you, you are not to act as a creditor to him; you shall not charge him interest.” Exodus 22:25.
“If there is a poor man with you, one of your brothers, in any of your towns in your land which the Lord your God is giving you, you shall not harden your heart, nor close your hand from your poor brother; but you shall freely open your hand to him, and shall generously lend him sufficient for his need in whatever he lacks.” Deuteronomy 15:7,8.
“Happy is he who is gracious to the poor…He who oppresses the poor reproaches his Maker, but he who is gracious to the needy honors Him.” Proverbs 14:21,31.
“He who shuts his ear to the cry of the poor will also cry himself and not be answered.” Proverbs 21:13.
“He who is generous will be blessed, for he gives some of his food to the poor.” Proverbs 22:9.
“The righteous is concerned for the rights of the poor, the wicked does not understand such concerns.” Proverbs 29:7.
“Let the man who has two tunics share with him who has none; and let him who has food do likewise.” Luke 3:11.
“The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me, because He anointed Me to preach the gospel to the poor.” Luke 4:18.
“If a brother or sister is without clothing and in need of daily food, and one of you says to them, ‘Go in peace, be warmed and be filled,’ and yet you do not give them what is necessary for their body, what use is that? Even so faith, if it has no works, is dead, being by itself.” James 2: 15-17.
Paralife’s Tri-Part Health Development Program of Aid for the Poor
Paralife, based on compassion for human suffering and the most explicit encouragement from Scripture, developed a tri-part program of medical, immediate, and development aid to the needy. Paralife defines development as a process of learning through which the poor accept responsibility for their personal and social environment. The poor learn how to obtain and maintain health, thereby increasing their capacity to provide for themselves, their families, and their communities. Communities learn that the causes of many of their sicknesses are unsanitary living conditions and improper diet. In previous years, Paralife trained community health workers and taught them methods for proper environmental sanitation, techniques in maintaining minimum levels of community cleanliness, gardening techniques and food preparation, and primary health care essentials. In addition, proper housing, water systems, schools, and community clinics were provided as aids to encourage involvement in the development process. Paralife calls the program that meets immediate needs Samaritan Compassion; Paralife’s development program is referred to as Developmental Compassion.
Samaritan Compassion
In the case of the Good Samaritan, a person in need lay destitute and dying beside the road with no one to aid him during his crisis. The Good Samaritan happened by, saw the need, and supplied the dying man with sufficient aid to see him through the crisis. In conclusion, the once dying man had received effective relief. Later, both men went their separate way with no lingering responsibility from either the beneficiary or the donor. In this case, a need was evident and effective Samaritan aid was successfully applied.
When there are no other alternatives, Paralife donates food, clothing, and medical care to those who have no immediate resources. In El Salvador, there are desperate situations that call for immediate relief. When the need is of such a character that starvation or severe health problems are eminent, Paralife’s Samaritan Compassion gives the individual or family food and medicine. It is difficult to imagine the Lord acting any differently under Salvadoran circumstances.
The above story of Dorothea vividly illustrates this principle. Dorothea’s baby needed help; her child was dying. Had Paralife not extended help to this woman, her child would no doubt have died. Had Jesus not healed the blind man, the leper, the lame man, or the bleeding woman, they too would have died an untimely death. Yet Jesus did heal them. He too practiced Samaritan Compassion.
A few months after the Santa Barbara experience with Dorothea, another Paralife medical team traveled to San Francisco de Gotera, a provincial village about ten miles north of Santa Barbara. The largest concentration of “in country” refugees were in this area; thousands of people living in small, crowded areas, bacteria-infested camps. It was these disease plagued conditions that led Paralife to these displaced people’s camps. Upon hearing that two North American nurses were working in the area, our team leaders sought them out with the purpose of inviting them to join our efforts. Without much effort, the medical team leader found that the nurses were working with the local Catholic church. They were teaching health principles to the local peasants through the church’s Christian Base Community program. When invited to work with the Paralife medical team, their immediate response to the invitation was negative. When asked their reasons for refusing to help the sick, they replied that they were not in agreement with giving immediate medical attention. Rather, they were teaching primary health care to the peasants, explaining that immediate health care would not be available to the nation’s poor until the Salvadoran capitalistic government had been replaced. It was immediately apparent that their concern was not for the people; instead, their interest was in forming a particular political and social concept in the minds of the peasants. They had little Samaritan Compassion.
Developmental Compassion
Through 1990, Paralife was directly involved in the execution of social development programs. However, in 1990 our focus became narrower and more defined. Our past help had been professional and high quality, but limited in the amount of work that could be done. For this reason, Paralife chose to use our experienced and trained personnel as facilitators of development, training local churches to execute programs. By using this method, Paralife can now be instrumental and influential in hundreds of communities throughout El Salvador.
The goals of Paralife’s programs of Development Compassion are to link needy communities with resources that can build and restore local capacity for self-directed living. These programs require cooperation between project donor and donee. Often the recipients describe what they feel are local needs while Paralife provides technical help that empowers communities to reach their goal of self-sufficiency. As examples, in previous years Paralife’s technical staff helped communities build latrines, dig new wells, purify existing wells, and obtain electricity. In many communities’ nutritionists taught classes on how to prepare local foods and how to expand the families’ diet using foods grown locally. Medical doctors taught classes to expectant mothers focusing on care for infants. Community specialists taught leaders means for keeping the community ambient clean. These classes were taught for the purpose of training communities how to bring health to their local communities.
Since 1983, Paralife has assisted Salvadoran communities with housing, water, education, nutrition, and health care. As examples, one community expressed its need for housing. For two years Paralife’s technical staff trained people in the process of manufacturing concrete blocks and roofing tile with sand that was abundant in the area. Then with Paralife’s technical help, the members of the local community built their own houses in accordance with the particular needs of each family. When the project ended, many of the local people not only had new homes, but they also had marketable skills. Also in health care, Paralife has trained health workers who return to their communities and provide primary care.
To execute both programs, Paralife is committed to and dependent on the local church. Our commitment to the local church is because we believe that God has given local bodies the responsibility of caring for those needy persons who live within its vicinity. Often, health clinics are established in local churches to encourage the churches to become involved in their community. Involvement in community activity through health and education is means to greater influence in individual lives. Our goal is to empower local churches with sufficient information and training, thus enabling them to carry on social development programs in their own local area. This, we believe, is consistent with the Word of God.
Paralife’s Development Program Matures
As part of our nascent development program, Paralife unveiled a childcare program in 1984 called “Project Lifeline.” Lifeline originated as a program to individually care for sponsored children. Children were individually taken to the clinic when they became ill; specific items were purchased for individual needs of a family or individual, even food was purchased for individual families. As the program evolved, we learned, and our programs increased in effectiveness. Many of these individual services had to be changed to meet the needs of the community. The changes were appreciated by most community members for each change greatly affected many people. For instance, we offered for the communities feeding programs which included a medical examination of the children who participated in the program; we also provided systematic medical visits to the communities by staff physicians, and we provided clothing articles two or three times a year.
However, as our program enlarged and the developmental aspects of the program became more efficient, many of these community services changed. As the programs matured, we became aware that certain well-intentioned services were hindering the development of many children within the community projects. For instance, established families continued to receive free clothing and food. Unfortunately, they became dependent upon Paralife for their clothing and much of their food. Also, families who had children participating in the feeding program were transferring to Paralife the responsibility for their children’s nutrition. In other words, we were creating dependencies and defeating our efforts of educating the parents to their responsibilities for the proper care of their families. We were not really helping the communities. It became apparent that some changes had to be made.
Another example of the need to make changes in our programs was seen in the Colima water project. In the years 1985 through 1986 we installed a new water system in the community of Colima. Up until this time the community obtained its water from a very polluted Rio Lempa and two small wells that were very unsanitary. A company from Austin, Texas that manufactured water purification systems, volunteered to help us with this project. We installed the purification equipment, set up the water tanks, and ran pure water into the new community that had been organized. We used the Rio Lempa as the water source, purified the water and made many people very happy. Colima had an abundance of pure water: something that they had never had before.
The following two summers were devastating to the project. The water in the river receded during the hot, dry months of our Salvadoran summers. Eventually, our pumps were pumping mud. By the end of the 1987 summer, it was clear that we had ruined the pumps as well as the filters that were part of the purification system.
During the previous months we had formed in this community various committees: a nutrition committee, an education committee, a health committee, and a community sanitation committee. These committees were formed in order that the community would be able to add its input into the projects. Their input was important, for we felt that the community needed to be part of the decision-making process. But what we and the community leaders were about to learn was that with the right to make decisions also came the responsibility of carrying out the decisions.
In our investigations and consultations with the community, we realized that the river was not our best option for supplying water to the community. It was decided that we would rehabilitate a water well that once had been used by the nearby sugar mill. The estimated cost of resupplying water to the community was about $6000. In our discussions with the community committee responsible for the water project, Paralife agreed to pay the up-front money that was necessary to install the water equipment. But there were those on the committee who also wanted Paralife to pay workers from the community for their labor to install the new pipes. Paralife felt strongly that the community needed to invest in this project, but they could only invest time and labor. To my surprise, at one of the meetings, a parent of one of the Lifeline sponsored children was overheard saying, “Why should we work for nothing? The gringos have money; let them pay us for our work. Let the gringos do it.” At that moment I understood that Paralife had given too much. We had built and given the community houses, a church, a feeding center, a health care program, and a school. Some of the people from the community provided labor for these projects, but generally we had paid for their labor.
When I heard the phrase, “Let the gringos do it,” I realized for the first time that our community training program was faulty. The community wanted a part in the decisions process, but they did not want to share in the responsibility of that decision. I knew then that with all our help to the community: food, medical care, buildings, etc., that we had established in the minds of our beneficiaries some bad precedents. The problem was not in the community; the problem was Paralife. We had attempted to develop this community with a Samaritan attitude. The people had been physically helped, but they had not been taught their responsibility, a development process.
Lifeline had provided much of the medical, nutritional, and special project funding for the community of Colima. We had attempted to tailor a special program just for our sponsored children. But this paternalistic program had separated them from the development that Paralife had desired. Many parents of the sponsored children had transferred to Paralife their responsibility for their children’s medical care, education, and nutrition, we were helping their immediate needs (Samaritan attitude) while hindering their long-term development.
With the help of the community committees of health and education, we set about the task of adjusting this error. Development programs should not only help people in their immediate needs such as nutrition and health, but these programs should also help people develop to the point that they feel the responsibility for the education of their children, for the health care of their families, and for the environment of their communities. Realizing these basic tenets, Paralife set about correcting them. We realized that even our basic Project Lifeline program was also a factor in the community problem, and it too had to be adjusted.
The criteria that Paralife used to make these changes was based on the needs of the communities. We had to face these questions: “Are we working in the communities in order to satisfy only the immediate needs of the people, or are we working in the communities in order to produce productive and healthy communities?” We based our decisions on the later alternative.
This did not mean that we withdrew all immediate help from our community projects. In Colima and Porfiado we continued to provide full time doctors and dental services as needed. We continued to provide schools in Colima and Rosario and to help the school in Porfiado. And we continued to provide clothing in certain needy situations. But we removed from our development projects all the older programs that were producing dependency. These programs were hurting rather than helping the people.
Paralife’s staff of doctors, nurses, and social technicians developed a community health training program that was acclaimed and approved by the Salvadoran Ministry of Health. Immediate aid was made available, but it was not given freely. All community members had to pay a token fee for most services. We learned that this small payment for services was a great benefit in the building of character and individual responsibility. However, we did not turn anyone away. If they absolutely could not make the small payment, they were treated.
Paralife trained members of the community who served as health and nutrition workers. The Salvadoran peasant seemed to identify with a member of his community more readily than with a professionally trained doctor or development specialist. This accomplished two things: first, medical help was always readily available, and secondly, it enhanced our efforts in developing community trust and cohesiveness.
For two years (1987 – 1988) we conducted parallel programs in the communities of Colima and Porfiado. In Colima we continued our traditional programs, and in Porfiado we applied a new methodology. In Colima, we provided nutritious daily meals and free, or token-fee, medical aid along with the same classes that were being taught in Porfiado. In contrast, in Porfiado we only taught the nutrition and health classes. In addition to teaching these classes to mothers and selected individuals, we trained nutrition and health workers within the community. Curative medicine was also made available, but not freely given. The results were astounding. Porfiado had significantly less sickness related to malnutrition than Colima. By the end of 1987, it was statistically proven that the method used in Porfiado was superior. After two years of morbidity studies (a study of the causes of death), people in Porfiado had fewer sicknesses related to malnutrition. In the beginning of the study, both communities had almost identical rates of sicknesses related to malnutrition.
The next question to ask was, “Why?” The answer was that in Colima, we had produced dependents who expected their good health to come solely from the food and medicine supplied at the clinic and nutrition center. The Colima peasants felt little responsibility for home care in maintaining healthy children. Many of the parents whose children were in the program did not give their children more food at home. They completely depended on the feeding center and did not take to heart the nutrition and health classes that had been offered. It was interesting to note that one year later, after the daily feeding had been discontinued in Colima and the same program had been applied as in Porfiado, that the morbidity rate in Colima had come into line with that of Porfiado.
In Colima and Porfiado, Paralife’s programs continued until significant levels of development had been reached. People of Colima have already built individual latrines for each house. Paralife provided the plans and the materials, but the people built their own latrines. Next water was offered to each house with the owner paying only for the connection cost. Paralife provided the pump and the initial cost of pipe, etc. Shortly after water was installed, electricity was supplied to each house. And during these years dozens of primary health care workers were trained. In Porfiado, fifty new houses were provided for that community. Paralife supplied the materials, and the men of the community provided the labor. These were mutual programs in which Paralife provided the costly materials, and the people supplied the labor.
Paralife’s Clinical Programs
Since 1984 Paralife has maintained a high-quality medical clinic in San Salvador. Patients who seek help in this facility are people from the lower classes whose options for medical care are very limited. Patients pay a small fee for services. These fees are generally only ten to twenty-five percent of cost in local clinics. In most cases, patients of Paralife’s clinic would not be attended if it were not for this facility. Patients who cannot afford any payments but need immediate attention are treated without charge. Paralife has a special fund which subsidizes the clinic’s medical services to totally destitute people.
For instance, in 1985 Paralife initiated a program to teach community based primary health concepts to some of the people of El Porfiado. The project centered in the local school and was open to all interested community inhabitants who offered their time to promote the community’s well-being. On a certain occasion, one of the project instructors noticed a ten-year-old girl, Blanca, who had a swollen and discolored arm. The girl and her mother were taken to the San Salvador clinic where the girl was diagnosed as having a tumor in one of the arm’s blood vessels. Blanca underwent a surgical procedure that not only saved her life, but saved her arm and gave her hope for a normal life. In this instance the clinic saved this little girl’s life.
This clinic employs Salvadoran medical doctors in nearly all major specialties. Although the clinic began as an outpatient clinic, it has grown to include surgical care and now operates a small hospital. The clinic provides laboratory, EKG, X-Ray, and pharmacy services. Spiritual counselling is also provided. Although a hospital had been envisioned for some time, the need for hospital services became apparent when forty-year-old Esmilda de Gómez solicited our help. Esmilda had been diagnosed with kidney problems at the local charity hospital three months earlier. When the problems persisted, she returned to the government charity hospital where she was given more medicine and sent home. When her pains would not go away, a family member brought Esmilda to the Paralife clinic where a surgeon dismissed the kidney diagnosis and clearly demonstrated a swollen and inflamed gall bladder. Esmilda returned to the charity hospital and the new diagnosis confirmed. Surgery was recommended, but due to the lack of beds and medicines, the hospital could not perform the surgery for four months. The family knew that Esmilda would die before the surgery could be performed. They brought Esmilda back to the Paralife clinic and begged the surgeon to perform the operation. Paralife had the necessary personnel and equipment, and by readjusting some personnel schedules, Paralife’s surgeons were able to make arrangements to remove the infected gall bladder. Due to the nature of the surgical intervention, Esmilda had to be hospitalized. This was Paralife’s first experience with hospital operations. Paralife’s first major surgery was a success, and Esmilda’s life was saved.
Paralife’s combination of local clinics and community development is unique in one major aspect. Most community development projects are funded by government or out-of-country funding agencies. This type of funding makes the development agency dependent on the funding agency. This is a major contradiction to development agencies’ principle of forming independent communities capable of self-care. Paralife has been able to develop a local funding base using the clinic as a means to generate a part of its own funding. Since a major portion of the clinic’s financial base is locally generated, a very active local Board of Directors oversees the clinic’s operations.
Paralife’s plan for community development includes not only the central clinic, but one goal is to help rural local churches establish clinics. These rural clinics serve to link the local church with the community. Through this linkage, God can demonstrate His love and concern for human need through an established local church. Our understanding of the Scripture demands that we offer, to the extent that is logically possible, a Samaritan concern for the immediate needs of hurting people. Our experience has shown us that by carefully coordinating the clinic’s work with that of local primary health workers who are part of a local church, we limit the communities’ dependence on clinical services while strengthening individual reliance on the application of health and nutrition practices. In these cases, the church becomes a source and repository for means of successfully implanting health principles.
One of the major goals of these rural church clinics is to evangelize the local population. This form of evangelization is Biblically based using the Apostle Paul and Dr. Luke as examples. Our goal is not to disrupt local culture, rather, our goal is to present the gospel in a variety of ways so that local populations can see the love of God and accept His salvation.
Results
Since 1983, Paralife has influenced the lives of thousands of Salvadorans. Communities have benefited directly from housing, schools, nutrition programs, local health clinics and training received by local primary health workers, and through spiritual training of church workers. In communities where Paralife has had continual influence since 1984, infant mortality rates have dropped from 125 per thousand to 50 per thousand. Diseases related to malnutrition were sixty percent of all illnesses treated in 1984, and by 1989, these diseases did not appear in the most frequently treated disease list. These statistics are the results of an integral program of education and direct medical care. During the same time period, Paralife also assisted in the construction of nine local churches through which much of our work is coordinated.
Conclusion and future plans
Since 1983 Paralife International has been committed to evangelization and the care and development of the Salvadoran poor. We have been most conscious of the causes of poverty as well as the roots of revolution that has decimated the country. However, by working within a legal framework recognized by the Salvadoran government, Paralife has been able to influence thousands of Salvadoran lives. Hundreds of people are alive today and working because Paralife touched their lives. Paralife’s presence in El Salvador has been a message of liberation and hope for the thousands of persons influenced through its Samaritan and Developmental Compassion programs.
In 1990 Paralife’s Salvadoran budget was seventy percent locally financed with only thirty percent of the budget from external sources. Paralife’s goal is to support its Salvadoran organizational infrastructure through local financing while using special project funds to pay for Samaritan and Development Compassion projects. Using this type of financing, Paralife in El Salvador is not dependent on external or government funding sources. In this manner, 100 percent of project funding can go directly to development projects.
Paralife has operated a small four bed hospital for the past year. During 1992 our goal is to increase this hospital to a thirty-bed hospital capable of major medical interventions.
Through the years Paralife has developed a staff of dedicated and educated medical and development professionals. In 1990 we decided that our contribution to community development in El Salvador could be best attained by facilitating other groups. Our staff of public health specialists can now train other local church groups and thereby expand our concept of evangelistic community development. Paralife is linked with local organizations which represent more than 1000 local evangelical churches throughout the entire country. This means that Paralife can use its project resources to distribute health and health care concepts throughout the country of El Salvador.
EDUCATION: A SALVADORAN NEED
Growing Population
El Salvador is the smallest of Central America’s five countries and competes only with Haiti for being the Western Hemisphere’s most densely populated nation. Recent studies have concluded that El Salvador’s population doubles each 25 years, indicating that by the year 2015, the national population will reach 10 million. For a nation that imports a significant portion of its basic foods, this prediction looms like dark storm clouds on the horizon.
Forty percent of the Salvadoran population is below 14 years of age. This indicates that within the next few years, more and more women will be having children. Because of religious and cultural beliefs, many of these women refuse to use birth control methods that could limit the Salvadoran population growth rate. The greater the population, the greater too is the Salvadoran potential of large numbers of people living in abject poverty, sickness, and ignorance.
Over 50 percent of the Salvadoran population resides in rural areas. The significance of this statistic is that rural inhabitants generally produce more children, earn less income, receive less education, and in general suffer more physical ailments. Living conditions in rural areas contribute to Salvadoran campesinos’ health problems. Less than 15 percent of the rural population have running water to their houses; ninety-four percent of the rural population use wood for fuel that aggravates respiratory ailments; thirty-seven percent of the rural population have no latrines or other means to dispose of human wastes. A large portion of the rural population has inadequate housing which promotes sexual promiscuity resulting in large numbers of children having children.
These statistics show that El Salvador is on the brink of serious health conditions. For years, health professionals have shown that good health leads to greater learning potential. Trained persons have the potential of earning greater income while being more productive in their job assignments. A key to El Salvador’s future economic and social health is education.
A Relationship Between Education and Modernity
A correlation between education and economic and social well-being has long been established. Education specialists concluded long ago that a person’s economic and social condition corresponded to one’s education. In third world countries, there is a direct relation between the population’s education, health, economic status, and death rates. It appears that when a nation’s population is educationally weak, then also the masses’ economic status is low, death rate is high, and general well-being is dubious.
El Salvador, the tiny Central American country, demonstrates the validity of this opinion. The majority of Salvadorans are rural peasants who are generally undereducated. As a result, the rural poor earn less income; infant death rate ranges between 100 to 200 per thousand, parasitic infestation is extensive, and their general well-being is uncertain. Consequently, El Salvador has been unable to produce a Gross National Product sufficiently high enough to claim status as a modern or developed nation. In today’s political parlance, modernity signifies that a country has developed economic capabilities allowing it to supply most of its internal needs as well as compete in the international export markets. El Salvador is far from this envied position in the world. Through education, the Evangelical church can help El Salvador modernize its economic and industrial base permitting the country to escape the level of misery that a greater part of its population endures.
Since the escalation of the civil war 1979, the percentage of persons with a ninth-grade education has been falling precipitously in El Salvador. Recent studies sponsored by the Fundación Salvadoreña para el Desarrollo Económico y Social (FUSADES), show conclusively that the percentage of students with primary education (first through ninth grade) in the urban areas has decreased further since 1985. Knowing these data, plus the fact that seventy percent of the rural population are unable to read and write, portends a sad future for El Salvador. The nation’s government and other interested organizations are faced with the challenge to stem the tide of declining educational proficiency. The Salvadoran educational system is divided into three distinct levels: level I, primary education, or basic education, includes the first nine grades; level II is secondary education or high school; level III is university level education. The focus of this report is basic education.
A Changing Society
Since the mid-seventies and the beginnings of armed conflict, traditional rural families fled to the urban areas. For instance, since 1970, San Salvador, the capital city, grew from a sleepy commercial center of five hundred thousand to a bustling industrial and commercial center of more than a million inhabitants. Factors that confluenced in the rural peasantry driving them toward safety and the hope of jobs in the cities are the increasing population (doubles each twenty-five years), a change in the traditional farming techniques, increasing violence in the countryside, and an increasing level of poverty. Instead of finding safety and jobs, these traditionally peaceful people were driven into “barrancos” (ravines cut into the volcanic ashen soils during the rainy season), where they lived in small, crowded cardboard huts. Demoralized by no work and no food, they had no desire to send their children to school, resulting in a restive and sullen social level. Some of the men sought work as gardeners; the women sought work as maids in the middle and upper classes; the youth sought fulfillment in petty crimes and prostitution while the younger children learned the art of begging.
The past two decades have not been good for the Salvadoran rural peasantry, and the disenchanted peasants have not been good for the political tranquility of the nation. A desire to study and learn has not been the most important goal of these people; rather, they have had to learn how to survive in a rapidly changing world. In their traditional past, these simple, rural laborers did not have to worry about jobs, food, or an education. Life’s necessities were provided by the landowners. However, as El Salvador attempted to enter the more modern world during the fifties, economic changes began to occur that greatly affected the rural masses.
El Salvador is a changing nation. Traditionally, this country was able to live on the export of coffee and sugar. There was enough land for the hacendados as well as for the rural sharecroppers that worked the plantations. However, that is not the situation today. Coffee and sugar are still major exports, but it takes less of the growing population to harvest and process these crops than previously. The civil war and violence have reduced investments by causing foreign and local financiers to take their money to safety in Miami or Venezuela. Since World War II, light manufacturing such as food processors, clothing, soft drinks, and textiles was introduced into the country. Jobs were available for those who cared to leave the tranquil countryside for higher salaries in the cities. But the violence of the seventies and eighties has reduced industry and job opportunities to broken dreams and memories of what could have been. Some industrialists have braved the turbulence of civil war conserving a few jobs. However, 60 to 70 percent of the Salvadoran population are unemployed or underemployed. El Salvador’s future depends on industrial jobs for the increasing population, and industry needs accountants, managers, foremen, and workers. Such jobs require education. Meeting the challenge of an industrialized El Salvador requires that today’s generation have at least a basic education.
Education in El Salvador
Due to the violence and an ailing economy, educational opportunities have decreased sharply since 1979. Newspaper and magazine articles report that since 1979, more than one thousand public schools closed. In June 1990, one of the major Salvadoran newspapers maintained, based on information provided by FUSADES, that 575 schools are still closed. In recent communication with this writer, the minister of education stated that 302 schools, 1747 classrooms, have been reconstructed with help from USAID since the initiation of violence. At the beginning of the 1990 school term, a total of 3630 public schools plus an additional 530 private schools were opened for classes. According to statistics received from the Salvadoran Ministry of Education, a total of 1,017,595 students were enrolled in basic education classes for the 1989 school year. Of this total, 476,218 students were in urban schools, 418,269 students were in rural schools, and 123,108 students were in private and religious schools. There were 22,991 teachers serving the educational needs of these students.
Analysis of the Statistics
An evaluation of these statistics reveals a major problem for El Salvador. It is presently estimated that the total population of El Salvador is around 5,200,000. Of this amount, fifty-seven percent or 2,964,000 persons live in rural areas. Approximately fifty percent of these rural persons are under the age of fifteen, meaning that 1,482,000 rural children should be receiving primary education. However, as the records in 1989 show, only 418,269 students were receiving primary education in rural schools. This leaves over one million rural children who are not receiving basic education in rural El Salvador. In addition, there are 1,118,000 children under fifteen living in urban areas. Of this amount, only 476,218 received basic education in 1989 resulting in a net deficit of over 460,000 children in urban centers who received no education. Without doubt, these urban unschooled children are the children of the barranco dwellers: the poor families displaced by the violence of war, the marginal families who had been rural laborers, but because of the changing economies of the nation, have been rooted out of their traditional labor positions. Many of these children are the beggars who stand at traffic intersections with their hands out asking for donations to buy bread. Of the one and a half million children under the age of fifteen not receiving basic education in El Salvador, two thirds of this total live in rural areas. This total of undereducated people represents almost thirty percent of the aggregate population of the country.
El Salvador is arduously working toward democracy. Paralyzing this effort is the poverty left by civil war, an ensconced military, and an economy that is woefully lacking in productivity, primarily due to the dearth of investments. The transition from an authoritarian rule to democracy has been difficult and fraught with civil war and death. Yet, the greatest threat to this transition is the lack of basic childhood education for thirty percent of its population. As mentioned above, the lack of education is related to poverty and sickness. Poverty, sickness, and illiteracy result in social unrest and violence. No modern nation can exist in a violent environment. Negotiations between the Salvadoran government and the guerrilla forces of the Farabundo Mart° Army of National Liberation (FMLN) are encouraging. However, unless the present deficiency in educational opportunities is repaired, violence in this tiny Central American country will continue.
A Challenge to The Church
Catholic and Protestant churches are attempting to fill the gap between the population’s educational needs and the government’s ability to fulfill them. Religious and private schools enrolled 123,108 students in basic education in 1989 constituting over thirteen percent of the public-school enrollment. It is interesting to note, however, that a large percent of the teaching staff of these schools is paid by the government. Even many of the religious schools’ teaching staff is paid by the Ministry of Education. All these schools charge the students some fees limiting access by the lower social levels. As a rule, it is the middle- and upper-class children who attend these private and religious schools.
One of the largest religious school systems is sponsored by the Catholic church. Various social, political, and economic leaders of El Salvador received their basic and secondary education in this parochial system. Many large and impressive schools are located throughout the country. Although the church supplies the buildings and other infrastructural needs, the state pays many of the teachers’ salaries. Most of these schools charge a handsome tuition to the students thus limiting entrance.
Protestant churches also have impressive school systems. Assemblies of God, American Baptist, and the Central American Mission are the top three church groups with North American links operating school systems in El Salvador. The largest of these systems is operated by the Assemblies of God. The Juan Bueno school system is composed of dozens of schools, each a part of a local church, with thousands of students. Although many of the students are from middle- and upper-class families, scholarships are provided by families in the United States who contribute monthly. To maintain control of its teaching staff of five hundred teachers, less than twenty-five are paid by the state. In addition, the Assemblies of God has created a university solely for the purpose of preparing teachers for their school system.
Another notable school system is operated by Compassion International. This system operates within a multi-denominational environment. Approximately five thousand students attend fourteen different schools throughout the country, each linked with a local Protestant church. Compassion’s system, like that of the Assemblies of God, receives donations from families in the States. This system of scholarships allows these Christian schools to provide basic education for some very needy children. However, most of the teachers’ salaries are paid by funds from the Ministry of Education.
The American Baptist, Central American Mission, Paralife International, and a few other organizations also maintain school systems in El Salvador. These systems are smaller and are either denominationally supported or child sponsor supported. All religious related schools charge monthly tuitions that range from five to twenty-five dollars. Many of the denominations and child sponsor programs permit scholarships for children from poorer families. The scholarships allow these organizations to fund education for some of the poorer children who otherwise would not have the opportunity to receive even the most basic education.
A Criticism and Challenge
One of the major criticisms of the church related schools is that most of these schools are located in urban areas. Many churches place their schools in areas where the population is concentrated. In terms of economic justification, this may be practical reasoning; however, the larger percentage of illiterate people is in the countryside. El Salvador’s population is fifty seven percent rural, meaning that most people live in rural areas. In addition, the purchasing power of the rural population is less that fifty percent of their urban counterparts. The lack of economic resources in the rural areas has been one of the major contributing factors to peasant unrest and associated guerrilla activity among this class of people. Rural laborers are the ones who feel most exploited by the traditional economic system. A deficient education may be one reason why rural income is so depressed.
Although the logistics of locating a school in the rural areas are more difficult, the church can meet its major goal of ministering to the very needy, and at the same time help to bring about stable government. Protestant churches historically have suffered under authoritarian governments. An open democratic political system is a much more desired environment in which churches can carry out their programs. One means of helping to assure this environment is for churches, in addition to their evangelistic efforts, to invest in educational programs in El Salvador. Church missions’ groups along with Christian development organizations should dedicate more time, energy, and money to educating the Salvadoran rural poor. This assures continued religious freedom and national development. An illiterate and uneducated peasantry is undesirable for the country and obstructs the survival of Christianity.
Christ did not intend that His church be sick, impoverished, and illiterate. A sick, poor, and uneducated church is weak. Jesus said that His church would conquer every force that opposed it. In many third world countries, the church membership is growing, but society and environment remain unchanged. This is rational proof that the church is not accomplishing the work of the Master. When Jesus entered an area, he not only changed people’s lives, but he also changed the society in which those people lived. Christ’s commission was not only to save the world, but also to feed the hungry, cloth the naked, and heal the sick. This can be accomplished through proper Christian education. It is essential that church related schools be opened and operated in the rural areas of El Salvador.
THE MISSION OF THE CHURCH
The Responsibility of The Church
The modern Evangelical church has no doubt understood one of the major imperatives of the Gospel. “Go into all the world and preach the gospel…” is well known in most Evangelical churches. Many of these churches place great emphasis on evangelical missions that preach salvation and local church growth. This evangelistic mission of the Latin American church has resulted in the first major threat to the religious hegemony historically held by the Catholic church. During the past two decades, thousands of Catholics left the traditional church and opted for the more dogmatic Protestant churches. For instance, in El Salvador the Evangelical church consisted of only 90,000 members at the beginning of 1979. However, by the end of 1990, it had grown to more than 1,500,000 adherents. Similar growth patterns are seen throughout the nations of Latin America.
The Evangelical church grew in Latin America because of committed and dedicated churchmen who envisioned a strong Latin Evangelical church. Millions of North American dollars and thousands of lives have been invested in evangelistic enterprises in the Hispanic speaking world. The physical and visible church grew rapidly through the decade of the eighties as thousands of new converts were added to the church rolls.
To the honor of North American Evangelical churches, many generously financed and supported evangelistic efforts created and built hundreds of structures since 1960. However, these efforts inadvertently excluded another commission of the Lord: the preaching of the Gospel of the kingdom to the poor. Verses like those quoted below seem specific enough to demonstrate our Lord’s concern for the well-being of the world’s poor. “Let the man who has two tunics share with him who has none; and let him who has food do likewise.” (Luke 3:11); “The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me, because He anointed Me to preach the gospel to the poor.” (Luke 4:18); “If a brother or sister is without clothing and in need of daily food, and one of you says to them, ‘Go in peace, be warmed and be filled,’ and yet you do not give them what is necessary for their body, what use is that? Even so faith, if it has no works, is dead, being by itself.” (James 2: 15-17). Yet most Evangelical churches have done relatively little to relieve the pain and suffering of the poor.
Unfortunately, the Evangelical sector of North American Protestantism became overly apprehensive about the social gospel that swept the states during the first three decades of this century. Evangelical churches feared that this gospel weakened the Holy Spirit’s work in salvation and replaced it with human effort of good works. Early evangelicals emphasized the work of the Holy Spirit in the individual salvation experience to the exclusion of social concerns. Evangelicals accused the leaders of the social gospel of turning their backs on traditional spiritual and moral concerns while emphasizing social and community reforms. These social reforms were intended to improve social conditions for the poor and working class. Even the eschatology of many Evangelicals precludes social concerns: if the Lord is to return very soon, then there is no need to spend money on social improvements. North American missionaries transferred this North American Evangelical apprehension about social work to Latin American evangelicals who also preached salvation to the exclusion of social concerns.
This exclusion of social concerns in Latin American evangelicalism can be seen in an example taken from one of Paralife’s projects. From 1985 through part of 1988, Paralife maintained a nutrition project in Colima. To obtain input from the community, a community nutrition committee was formed to interact with Paralife’s technical staff. Some members from the local Evangelical church as well as other members from the community initially worked together as members of the nutrition committee. As part of the nutrition program, a well-balanced lunch was given to some of the neediest children of the community. Before the children ate, they were taught to wash their hands, sing a song, and offer a prayer of thanksgiving for the food. Well into the project, I was visiting the nutrition center and noticed that the children were not singing nor asking a blessing for the food prior to eating. After investigating the incident, I discovered that the local church had changed pastors, and the new pastor wanted his flock to be involved only in “spiritual” ministries. This pastor had determined that giving health to the undernourished children was not a spiritual ministry. When the pastor prohibited his members from participating in the nutrition project, local Christian input to the nutrition committee was left in the hands of unbelievers who saw no advantage or use in asking a blessing over food. This example is a direct reflection of early North American evangelicalism and its fear of social programs.
Kingdom Building and Church Development
As a missionary at heart, I want to see churches built. I want to see churches filled with people. During my twenty years of working in Latin America, I have been involved in building a score of churches, participated in, and preached numerous evangelistic campaigns. I say this in order to establish the fact than I am not anti-evangelistic. The following, however, may appear so.
One reason why many Evangelical churches have less motivation to become involved in social work is the difference in the way God’s kingdom and Christ’s church are perceived. It is interesting to note that evangelicals are very anxious to build church buildings, and through evangelistic activities, fill those buildings with enthusiastic new members. Evangelistic messages are preached, hundreds of thousands of dollars are spent in evangelistic campaigns and new church buildings. Evangelists get excited about preaching campaigns in foreign countries while local North American churches get emotional about giving for the planting of a new church in Latin America. Most evangelicals get very excited about building new churches. But I propose a question; when did the Lord ever suggest, much less command, that we build churches? Rather than commanding His disciples to build churches, he declared, “I will build my church.”
What did Jesus command His disciples to do? “Preach the gospel of the kingdom” was the Lord’s encouragement to his followers. God’s kingdom will be a subject of a future book, but the “beatitudes” of Matthew and Luke as well as other words of our Lord in the Gospels adequately describe the effects of the gospel of the kingdom: the hungry shall be fed, the lonely shall be visited, the naked shall be clothed. The object of the gospel of the kingdom might well be defined in Luke 4:18 when Jesus said, “For the Spirit of the Lord has anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor.” These and many other citations of Scripture lead us to believe that a part of the gospel of the kingdom is care and concern for the needy. To preach “love thy neighbor” is very much a part of the gospel message, and it is also part of the gospel of the kingdom.
Compassion for the needy is another way in which the kingdom of God can be demonstrated. Compassion is not a feeling; rather, it is an action whose express purpose is to relieve pain and suffering. A walk though some of El Salvador’s displaced people’s camps and city slums will reveal more pain and suffering than many North American evangelicals believe exist. Preaching and practicing a message that spiritually and physically relieves some of this pain and suffering is a message that Jesus taught his disciples. This is the same gospel message that Jesus expects his twentieth century disciples to preach and practice.
Many evangelicals have confused God’s kingdom with Christ’s church. Many of us have taken the responsibility of building Christ’s church, and we have done an admirable job. I have learned through the years that it is much easier to build a church than practice the gospel of the kingdom. More popularity is given to the evangelist who plants a church than to one who feeds the poor. More distinction is given to the evangelist who preaches an evangelistic campaign than to one who teaches community sanitation. More prominence is given to the one who teaches church growth than to the person who proclaims the values of primary community health. But in Matthew, chapter 25, when Jesus separated those on his right from those on his left, those that found his favor and comfort were those who fed the hungry, clothed the naked, and visited the lonely. It seems to me that a greater harvest of souls would be realized if Evangelical churches followed the pattern set out by the Lord. If evangelicals were to preach and practice the gospel of the kingdom, lost sinners would be more open to the gospel message. Some might come knocking on our doors requesting permission to join this great army of God. Just as Jesus won His followers through an evangelism that recognized the pain and suffering of hurting people, so should the present church follow our Lord’s example.
One reason why North American Evangelical churches have difficulty with the concept of Christian social development is our North American orientation toward results. We live and work in a society that awards goal setting and quick results. Therefore, North American Evangelicals seem to award those who get things done quickly and efficiently. Evangelistic enterprises easily lend themselves to this criterion. Those evangelists and missionaries who report positive church growth projects are applauded and supported. A part of our orientation is quickness in seeing results.
On the other hand, social development in third world countries is a process that takes patience and time. Development projects usually take between three to seven years to complete. North American churches want to see results in one year. For this reason, it is easy to raise money to buy medicine for sick people, yet it is difficult to raise financing for a project that prevents sickness. It is easy to raise money for food, yet it is difficult to raise money for the purpose of training people how to raise a garden. It is easy to raise money to build a third world church, yet it is difficult to raise money to help a third world church solve its local social problems of poor health and malnutrition. North Americans think in terms of church projects that have immediate results, but not in long range kingdom projects.
Another difficulty for North American evangelicals to understand is “Who is in charge?” Many evangelicals feel that due to the economic and social success that the United States has historically experienced, we know best how to create and operate organizations. Therefore, our North American egotism tells us that we have the correct answer for most problems. This is not the case in most Latin American Christian development projects. Without a lengthy discussion as to why Latins need to be in control of their own Christian and social development, it is sufficient to say that North Americans generally do not understand Latin culture nor history. Without this understanding of local social rules and values, costly mistakes can be made that interfere with the progress of the project. An example from Paralife’s files illustrate this problem.
During the latter phase of the Colima project, a North American and his family decided to spend their vacation in El Salvador. With good intentions, he and another North American, without seeking advice from Paralife, decided to visit the Colima project. One of the project families asked that this North American family help them dig a water well. This seemed like a reasonable request. (Refer to the earlier discussion about the water system in Colima.)
Since 1985, the people of the project had water, although at times it did not flow due to the problems discussed earlier. However, Paralife had taken the advice of the community leaders and concluded that the people could manage a water system that provided water to each house. Several months passed during the phase in which it was decided who would pay for the project. Just when it appeared that a solution had been found, this visitor arrived and offered to build a well for this family. To the chagrin of the visitor, he discovered that the cost of the well was more than he was willing to pay; therefore, he called off his offer. In the meantime, however, the family argued in the community against the proposed community water plan, almost ruining the community’s water project. Why? Because they had discovered a money-making project of their own; they could sell water to their neighbors who had no water.
Quite by accident, Paralife management discovered the reason for the resistance to the water project, made necessary adjustments and explanations, and in the end, the community received water. However, the point here is that if the North Americans had asked Paralife about the project, the water project and its benefit to the entire community could have been explained. In the manner that the offer was made to the local family, Paralife’s previous five years of community development could have been lost entirely or months of reparation to the community organization could have been required. Other families could also have requested their own well which would have been impossible for Paralife to provide. In the end, another family, encouraged by the talk of possible earnings from the sale of water, dug their own well. This demonstrated that some Salvadoran families, though living in displaced people’s projects, had access to economic resources. In this instance, these resources, instead of being an aid to the community, almost caused the residents of Colima to lose their chance of having pure water piped directly to their houses. Again, this entire episode could have been avoided had the North Americans asked the Salvadoran Paralife management before making offers to families in an existing development project.
The Scripture can help us with this question of “Who is in charge?” if we would be willing to be patient and wait. Good Christian social development requires humility and patience. El Salvador has excellent Christian leaders who have impressive abilities. In El Salvador there are good preachers, pastors, teachers, managers, doctors, and other professionals. We, as North American expatriates living and working in El Salvador, can help provide counsel and assistance to Salvadorans. However, El Salvador must solve its own problems of poverty, ignorance, social, and spiritual needs. If North Americans bring a solution, in many instances, the North Americans learn while the Salvadorans remain as before, generating the same problems. II Chronicles 7:14 declares, “If the people who are called by my name……and I will heal their land.” Outsiders could not provide the solution for Israel’s problems, but Israel and God could. God and Salvadorans should do the same in El Salvador. In many instances, this is happening as more Salvadoran churches produce trained pastors, evangelists, and teachers.
CONCLUSION
From the preceding pages several conclusions can be drawn. First, God expects his church to be attentive to the needs of the poor. Attention to the needs of the poor can be shown by either Samaritan or Development Compassion. The need determines the method. Health clinics are one means to meet immediate needs, but they can also be used to promote Development Compassion. In the case of Paralife in El Salvador, Paralife clinics are a means of directly meeting some communities’ immediate and development needs while also generating income that reduces dependence on foreign aid. In this way, future development can be wholly Salvadoran.
A second conclusion is that El Salvador will never progress until education becomes a primary national goal. Salvadoran Evangelical churches, with proper vision and guidance, can be facilitators of education and provide ministries in rural areas where education is woefully lacking. Many of the hundreds of rural Evangelical church facilities could be made available for the development of Christian school programs. No doubt, future integral development projects, promoted by Evangelical churches, will include Christian schools.
A third conclusion is that properly trained Evangelical churches can be major contributors to Salvadoran health, educational, and social development. To accomplish this goal, North American churches, that have not done so, must make some attitudinal changes that allow equal spending of mission’s funds between evangelism and development projects for the poor. Evangelistic oriented churches must also focus more on long range solutions for poverty, sickness, and ignorance. Solutions to these problems require patience and prayerful support by North American evangelicalism.
A fourth conclusion that runs like a quiet thread through this article is that El Salvador has people just as capable, traditional, and some just as rich as North Americans. Therefore, North American missions and para-church organizations should be training managers, pastors, evangelists, and teachers. In other words, North Americans should be working themselves out of a job. However, there is one thing that North American missionaries can do better than most Salvadorans; that is, provide vision. North Americans have a broader world view than most Salvadoran and therefore can see the world in a bigger picture. This broader view allows some people to see needs and project a vision to fulfill those needs. The major contribution that North American churches can provide to El Salvador today is an Evangelical church vision that emanates vertically from God and is shared horizontally with neighbors.
A social development program that does not include the life-changing power of Jesus is hardly a development program. Development through health and education begins by recognizing that only Jesus can really make a change in society. Paralife’s development program recognizes that people impact their society and environment by first changing their hearts. When people’s hearts are transformed by God’s own Son, their motivation to influence their society and environment are changed; Their motivation to seek better health and education emanates from an inner vision rather than an external model. The first is a subjective vision seen by a redeemed person who lives with Christ as his life’s center; the latter is an objective material goal. The first is permanent development while the second type is temporary.
El Salvador is a nation of 5 million people of which 1.5 million are Evangelical Christians. The Evangelical population is slowly becoming aware of its role in changing this nation; the hearts of thousands of people have been transformed making it possible to change Salvadoran society. The North American church can greatly aid their Salvadoran brothers and sisters in the Christian transformation of their country. This help can be optimal only as we understand our visionary role in evangelistic, church development, education, and health projects. During the past decade, Salvadoran evangelicals have been given leadership and the development and spiritual tools necessary to demonstrate God’s kingdom on earth. Slowly, God’s kingdom is becoming reality in El Salvador.
January 4, 1992
CubieSphere 