Poverty is a global social phenomenon. Broadly speaking, the term poverty refers to the situation of an individual, household, organization or community that lacksthe resources necessary for wellbeing: food, drinking water, shelter, clothing – basically, access to goods and basic social services (Déméro, 2007).

In other words, it can be described in terms of marginalization, deprivation, inequality, dependency, incapacity, scarcity, restriction, inadequacy – in a word, vulnerability. The World Bank has described it in these terms: to be poor is to be hungry. It is homelessness and lack of access to health care. It is not being able to go to school. It means not having a job, worrying about the future and living from day to day. These descriptions reflect the daily reality of the suffering majority of the Haitian population for several decades.

Poverty from a secular perspective

Psychologically, poverty is first and foremost a question of mentality, i.e. it is linked to culture and mindset (Déméro, 2007). In this view, it is easy to recognize a poor person by his or her speech and oral expression. Dr. Wesley K. Stafford, in his doctoral thesis^[1] dated 1986, identifies the forms of language used by children living in poverty. These are: “M pa kapab”, “M pa konnen”, “M pa genyen”, “Se pa fòt mwen”. These expressions are very common among the majority of Haitians, especially children living in poverty in rural communities. Other forms of speech such as: “M pa gen chans”, “M fèt nan move lalin” are found among young people and even adults in the church.

Poverty is the result of relationships that are not fruitful, that are not fair, that are not harmonious or pleasant. These types of so-called fruitless relationships are observed in groups where members say they have a friend but do not actually have one. These categories of friends are, in many cases, an obstacle to people’s advancement and individual progress. The same example applies to school, church and community institutions. Some institutional partners do not really bear fruit for the advancement of institutions and contribute to their backwardness by keeping them further in poverty.

Sociologically, poverty is at the heart of social debate in modern democratic societies (Paugam, 2001). According to the World Bank’s 2015 report, 85% of the world’s poorest people are in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. According to the same report, Haiti is considered the poorest country in the American hemisphere (Tremblay, 2005). It has been in a situation of extreme vulnerability for several decades. This puts at risk the lives of the weakest, such as children and women, who make up the majority of the Haitian population (EMMUS-VI, 2017)^[2]. This phenomenon occurs as a result of slavery, repeated socio-political crisis, corruption, natural disasters and epidemics.

Paugam & Duvoux (2008) propose two main fundamental explanations for poverty. The first explanation is laziness. In this perspective, the poor are accused of not taking sufficient care of themselves. Therefore, the state should not help them. Each individual is responsible for himself or herself and must take steps to avoid experiencing poverty. The second explanation is injustice. In this context, the poor are mostly victims of a system that condemns them. Consequently, the State must help them to achieve greater social justice.

Paugam (2005) distinguishes three basic forms of poverty. First, integrated poverty, which describes the situation of an economically backward country. The poor in these countries benefit from intra-family solidarity and the support of organized groups, particularly religious groups. Secondly, marginal poverty, which corresponds to the poverty of a small part of a rich country where individuals face difficulties in adapting to the modern world. And finally, disqualifying poverty refers to post-industrial societies that are experiencing economic decline.

Simmel (1907)^[3], states that “the most terrible thing about poverty is to be poor and poor alone, that is to say, not to be defined by society in any other way than by being poor.” Simmel adds that the poor, as a social category, are not those who suffer specific deprivations or wants, but those who receive assistance or should receive it according to social norms. According to him, the fact that someone is poor does not yet mean that he or she belongs to the category of the poor. He may be a poor trader, a poor artist, or a poor employee, but he remains in a category defined by a specific activity or position.

Further on, the American sociologist Herbert J. Gans, in his classic article published in 1972 in the American Journal of Sociology, helps to understand the interest of stakeholders in maintaining and extending poverty. He concludes that poverty benefits social groups. For him, the poor perform four functions for the non-poor: economic, social, cultural and political.

With regard to the economic function, the existence of the poor guarantees the performance of dirty work, i.e. work that is physically dirty or dangerous, temporary, undignified, without a future and underpaid. As a result, the poor are needed to work in the fields, in hospitals, in restaurants, in homes and in subcontracting. In this sense, they directly or indirectly subsidize activities that contribute to making the rich even richer. The economy of poverty facilitates NGO tourism. It creates a number of activities and professions that serve the poor or contribute to a classification of the poor. The poor buy goods (cars, clothes, shoes, houses, etc.) that the rich do not want. Finally, poverty helps to secure the status of those who are not.

In terms of social function, the existence of the poor ensures an honourable social status for those who are not or not yet poor. According to Gans, the existence of the poor encourages people in other categories to demonstrate moral virtues such as work, constancy of effort, will, individual responsibility to keep away from degeneration and continue, if possible, to climb up further rungs of the social ladder.

Regarding the cultural function, the poor can play a useful role in society. The promotion of popular culture is in a sense the recognition of the creative capacity of the marginalized, such as jazz, reggae, rap, troubadour, slam, and so on.

Finally, the role of the poor in maintaining dominant norms also has a very significant political function. The poor serve as a symbolic electorate for several political groups. This explains why politicians keep the poor in their state of poverty.

Poverty from a biblical perspective

The term poverty appears repeatedly in the Bible in both the Old and New Testaments. These uses refer to spiritual, economic, physical, material and relational poverty. From this perspective, poverty can be defined as a situation in which an individual suffers from a lack of basic needs such as food and clothing (Deuteronomy 10:18; Isaiah 58:7; Luke 3:11) and is vulnerable to various forms of injustice. Biblically speaking, this phenomenon is linked to oppression, isolation and injustice (Proverbs 13:23). It can also result from the folly of men (Proverbs 28:19) and the degradation of an individual’s spiritual and moral life (Proverbs 23:21).

Poverty can also be defined as a lack of relationships (with oneself, God, others and the environment). Myers (1999) states that poverty is relational and its cause is fundamentally spiritual. For him, the phenomenon of poverty results from relationships damaged by sin. It is these broken relationships with God that are at the root of spiritual poverty. At the same time, broken relationships with others and the community result in social poverty, just as broken relationships with the environment have caused economic poverty.

From this perspective, poverty is an abhorrent reality and, as such, a phenomenon to be combated. The Bible also denounces the various forms of corruption for which the poorest pay the price (Amos 8:4-6). In Jeremiah 22:13-19 and Psalm 82, the Bible shows that it is kings and people of high rank who are guilty of injustice. The poor are those who are so weak that they cannot claim their rights. At the same time, the rich are sometimes those who are so powerful that they can buy justice. As a result, those in positions of power and authority tend to exploit or abuse the weakest.

Action in favour of the poor is a Christian, civic and human duty. God invites the Church to do right by the poor because they are most often vulnerable to injustice. Moreover, the Gospel of Jesus Christ is, in its essence, good news of the kingdom for the poor (Luke 4:18, 19). (Luke 4:18, 19) The Bible is clear in Proverbs 14:31 that “he that oppresses the poor reproaches his Maker: but he that honours him has mercy on the poor.” In the Acts of the Apostles, the first Christians showed the example of a church community where there were no poor (Acts 4:34). Later, the Apostle Paul encourages the Christians of Corinth in their action on behalf of the poor: “For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, who for your sakes made himself poor, though he was rich, that by his poverty you might be made rich” (2 Corinthians 8:9).

According to the biblical texts, too often man does not care about injustice and shows a lack of interest in the needy. This is why, in the Old Testament, the law of Moses protected the poor and also invited the people of Israel to help them. The New Testament shows that Jesus and his disciples lived on donations and themselves gave donations to the poor. The early Christians shared the wealth among themselves to show their unity and love for one another. So the leaders of the early church encouraged this communal attitude and built a church without favoritism.^[4]