“The Migrated Others”: Mission as Practicing Compassionate Presence

Introduction

One of the important signs of this era is the mobility of people from one place to another place. The 21st century is known as “the era of the greatest human mobility” (Pouchous website, 2014). UN’s Department of Economic and Social Affairs reported that “the number of international migrants worldwide has continued to grow rapidly over the past fifteen years, reaching 244 million in 2015, up from 222 million in 2010 and 173 million in 2000” (United Nations, 2016: 1). About 75 million of these migrants live in Asia and 104 million (43%) were born in Asia (United Nations, 2016: 1). This shows that Asia is one of the major contributors of as well as destination for migration. As part of the Church in Asia, this massive migration should be part of our concern because many migrants are part of the church and many of them seek a church as their refuge and comfort.

Living in the context of migration requires a different missional paradigm in order to accomplish God’s mission for the world in promoting justice and peace, reconciliation and love, and the fulfillment of life to its fullest. The popular missional consensus in the context of migration is that people on the move are “moving targets” for evangelism. Many times, all kinds of charity and services given to migrants are seen only as part of softening their hearts in order to win them to Christ and then bring them to church. By doing this, churches are treating migrants as merely object thus perpetuating the othering of migrants. Despite all of this, churches that encounter migrants begin to realise that migrants are not merely target for conversion, but persons created in the image of God who inhabits the same God’s oikos. This encounter challenges churches in Asia to perceive and treat migrants with honor, dignity, and compassion. If the church fails to rethink her position, then she will continue to fall into othering migrant in the form of objectifying and dehumanising migrants (Rivera-Pagan, 2013: 43).

In order to treat migrants with honor, dignity and compassion, we need to rethink of and reconstruct a model of mission that is embedded in the complex reality of migration. To do this, I will look into the details of the narratives of Indonesian and Filipino migrants who live and attend a Charismatic church in Sabah, Malaysia. The three narratives are a male-middle aged Indonesian migrant, a female-middle aged Philippine migrant, and one female youth Philippine who grew up in Malaysia. Their narratives will give insights to the process of othering that shaped the experience of being migrants. We will also discover the quality of compassion in their lives that is born from the experience of suffering, violation, and marginalisation. Based on their experience, I argue mission as a compassionate presence provides a sound theological basis for churches to challenge the continuous othering of migrants done by the state and church herself. Thus, the relevant practice of mission under God’s oikos in the context of migration is compassionate presence. Compassionate presence is a missional presence of the church that has three distinct characters, “syilingness ¹ ,” hospitality-friendship, and “in-betweeness, in-bothness, and beyondness.”

This paper consists of three parts. The first is a short description of migration from Indonesia and the Philippines to Sabah, East Malaysia. I show the historical, geographical, cultural, and economic reasons for the migration. There are three categories of migrants living in Sabah: documented, undocumented with nationality, and born-raised in Malaysia yet stateless. I share my first hand encounter with some migrants who attend one Charismatic migrant church.

The second part is an explanation of the understanding and practice of “soul evangelism” ² as professed by this Charismatic migrant church—also considered as the popular understanding and practice of mission. I show that “soul evangelism” perpetuates the process of othering migrants. For security reasons I do not use the real name of the church because many of the members are undocumented and stateless. In this part I also share the narrative of three migrants, using pseudonyms, regarding their understanding of mission in their daily lives and how this in turn points out the existing discrepancy between “soul evangelism” as the professed understanding of mission and “compassionate evangelism” as practiced mission.

The third part is a further explanation of my argument that mission as a compassionate presence provides a sound theological basis for churches to response to the continuous othering of migrants. Compassionate mission recognises that God’s Oikos surpasses any boundaries set by religion, denomination, race, sex, and even state. Compassionate presence is a form of mission as practically embodied theology of presence. Compassionate presence invites us to rethink of evangelism, not solely as winning souls for Christ, but to embody Christ by being present in the world. The idea that we are living in the same Oikos requires us to reorder the economic structure in a way that will be able to fulfill the basic need of many people, in particular migrants. Being present and sharing what one has with the other, with a perception that the other is another human being, is the way migrants embody the gospel. This is one of the greatest contributions from those in the periphery towards the so-called center, that is the church.

Migration to Sabah, East Malaysia from Indonesia and the Philippines

In the context of South East Asia, Malaysia is the third highest receiving countries in 2015 (United Nations, 2016: 29). Currently, there are about 2,514,200 migrants in Malaysia compared to 1,277,200 in 2000 (United Nations, 2016: 29). According to International Labor Organization (ILO) Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific “. . . There are 3–4 million migrants currently employed in Malaysia, which would constitute approximately 20–30 per cent of the country’s workforce” (Harkins, 2016: 1). It is not clear whether the data reported by ILO include those undocumented and stateless people but on 2 September 2014 the Minister of Malaysia Human Resource, Datuk Seri Richard Riot Jaem, stated that there are 5,8 million working migrants and only 2,9 million are documented (Network of Action for Migrants website, 2014).

One of the states in Malaysia that receives many migrants is Sabah. Its strategic location, close to Indonesia and Philippines, has made Sabah a magnet that draws people from Indonesia and the Philippines. Long before colonialism, this place had already become a meeting point for many different tribes from different places (Tirtosudarmo, 2005: 169). People from Indonesia entered from Nunukan, Sebatik Island, North Sulawesi, northern part of the Moluccas Islands; and, those from the Philippines entered through Mindanao, Basilan, and Tawi-Tawi (Tirtosudarmo, 2005: 168). This shows that migration is a historical phenomenon and not only a contemporary phenomenon.

It is estimated that migration from Indonesia to Sabah started in the 18th century. ³ Based on a census in 1891, there were around 962 Javanese in Sabah. Apart from Hakka people who came from mainland China, in the early of 19th century England recruited migrant workers from Java Island, Indonesia. The first group came in 1907 and in 1931 there were around 10,000 workers from Java, Indonesia (Tirtosudarmo, 2005: 169). Around 1950s, people from East Nusa Tenggara, especially east of Flores, came as “pekerja kasar” (literally translated “course laborers”) to work on the plantations, logging wood, and to do other work not requiring a high level of skill, because they did not have the skills to work as professionals (Yoga, 2012).

Migration from Indonesia to Sabah became more intense as two organisations, the Malaysia Agricultural Planters Association and the United Planting Association of Malaysia successfully lobbied the government to reduce the requirements for workers from Indonesia to enter and work in Sabah (Hidayah et al., 2013: 22). This accelerated the flow of migration that was traditionally based on ethnicity. After 1984, the pattern of migration slowly changed where the role of the state became more evident through the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding between Indonesia and Malaysia called the Medan Agreement (Hidayah et al., 2013: 22–23). This new mechanism created new categories in the process of migration: the so-called legal migration set up by the state based on the Medan agreement and “illegal” migration done personally or privately without following the process outlined in the Medan Agreement. Thus, it is not surprising that a new label is now used to name those undocumented migrants as “pendatang haram” (literally “illicit guest”) or Pendatang Asing tanpa Ijin (PATI)/Foreign Guest without Permit (Hidayah et al., 2013: 24).

Migration from the Philippines to Sabah, probably occurred in a few waves. The first wave was comprised of people from the tribes of Bajau/Sama and Suluk/Tausu who came to Sabah at the end of the 15th century as a reaction towards pressures and suffering brought by Spanish colonisation (Tirtosudarmo, 2005: 169). The second wave occurred before the Second World War when many Filipinos came as professionals like English and Math teachers, clerks, engineers, and technical experts in logging companies (Navallo, 2013: 6). The third wave was a massive influx of Filipinos who had been severely affected by the conflict between the Philippine Army and the Moro National Liberation Front in 1970–1977 (Navallo, 2013: 7; Tirtosudarmo, 2005: 169). Responding to this situation, the state government of Sabah formed the Resettlement Division who then set up criteria to determine the refugee status: (1) They must come from Region 9 (Zamboanga del Norte, del Sur, Sibugay); (2) They were directly affected by the unrest; (3) They arrived in Sabah between 1972 and 1984; (4) They must be Muslims; and (5) They must be willing to stay permanently in Sabah (Navallo, 2013: 7). They were then granted IMM13 social work pass which would enable them to register for a resettlement identification card (Navallo, 2013: 7). The fourth wave was composed of “economic migrants” who came in the late 1970s due to economic recession having been affected by the second oil shock and economic mismanagement by the Philippine government. During this time Marcos encouraged Filipinos to find work abroad as a temporary solution to the economic meltdown (Navallo, 2013: 7–8).

The increasing number of foreigners living and staying in Sabah was at first seen as a temporary solution to fulfill the shortage of human resources, especially in the area of the “five D:” dirty, difficult, dangerous, demeaning, and demanding. As time passed, their presence began to be seen as a problem, because they were seen as competitors for job opportunities. Furthermore, they were also considered to be a burden for the state in regard to education and medical resources. As they began to be seen as problems, the migrants also began to receive negative stereotypes such as unlawful and dangerous. “They are often blamed for the increase in crime rate, for unemployment among the locals, for overcrowding in schools and for environmental pollution” (Navallo, 2013: 10). Despite all these negative stereotypes, many migrants experience the opportunity of becoming part of certain churches. They have stories and values that many people do not know. Thus, it is important to explore the localities of their life in the context of religion. It is important to listen to the underside stories of them.

Mission as Soul Evangelism, the “Othering” of Migrants and Mission from the Perspective of Migrants

Since sharing the gospel to the Muslims is a serious crime in Malaysia, the Charismatic church attended by those I interviewed focuses on sharing the gospel to migrants from Indonesia and the Philippines. For security reasons I do not reveal the name of this church because many of the members are undocumented and stateless. There are about 150–200 migrants attending this Charismatic church out of 250 members. I had the opportunity to work with them for almost five years in 2001–2003 and 2008–2011. Here I will share the narratives of three migrants, Dani Kareba, Shiloh Amarez, and Christina Christopher: ⁴

Dani Kareba

Dani Kareba is a 35 years old father who works as a vegetable farmer in Sabah. He rents empty land from a Chinese boss who is also a big buyer of his vegetables, Dani can sell a small number of vegetables in the daily market. The highest education level he completed was fourth grade elementary school. He came to Sabah when he was 11 years old (1990) because his mother passed away and he could not go to school anymore, and his father was already in Sabah. He travelled with another six men from Toya’sakung to Makassar to Tarakan in Indonesia to Tawau and then to Sandakan in Malaysia. Dani has stayed in Sabah for 24 years. His first job that provides levy guaranty was in 1994, 2003–2009, and after 2009 he does not use any passport. He was cheated by some agents four times when he tried to arrange his proper documents. The last one, when I interviewed him in September 2014, his passport and RM 2,000 or 475.28 USD ⁵ were taken away by the agent and there was no news for almost a year. Many times, during police, army and immigration force raids he has to run with all of his family into the woods and stay there for three days. Despite all of the hardship and living under fear of arrest and deportation Dani Kareba continues to go to church by the church van that takes him, his family and many others weekly. He also serves in the church as one of the leaders. Once a month, after a couple of intense classes, he is given the opportunity to share his reflection on the Word of God at various cell homes. (Dani Kareba 2014)

Shiloh Amarez

Shiloh Amarez originated from Palawan Island, Philippines. The highest education level that she completed was 6^th grade elementary school. She came to Sabah in 1989 when she was 20 years old. She, and eight other women, were promised jobs at a clothes factory in Sabah. They had to stay one night in an empty house at Kudat and were transferred to Likas. At night they were asked to dress up and wear make-up. When they asked the reason why, they were told that they had been sold to work as waitresses at a karaoke bar. They attempted to run away but were caught by the police and were held for a week. After that they were released and went to Sandakan. They decided to stay in Sandakan because they felt ashamed to go back to the Philippines. Shiloh was married twice. Her first husband was a bartender and they were married in an Islamic way. Her mother in-law told her that to be a Muslim, she only needed to stop eating pork. Her second husband, without her knowledge, was a drug user and an abuser. In 1993 Shiloh received an Identity Card and she used it for 8–9 years, but her second husband sold it for 1 kg of drugs. Shiloh has been attending this Charismatic church for two years. She will come as long as the church van continues taking her. Many times, when the police are checking vans, the van will not go to pick her and her family up. Normally she will wait for one to two hours. If the van does not come then she understands that checking is happening around the city. Whenever checking occurs she will only pray. Once the police officer entered her hut and asked her to just stay silent till the operation ended. (Shiloh Amarez 2014)

Christina Christopher

Christina Christopher was brought to Sabah when she was only four months old. Her grandparents entered Sabah when it was still British colony. Her father entered Sabah and used IMM13 documents for Islam refugees. Christina was able to get an education up to junior high school because she used a birth letter (not a birth certificate) given by the Malaysian government. She dreamt of becoming a nurse until her parents explained to her that she is not a Malaysian citizen and she could not continue education through senior high school less through college. Christina was deeply shocked and frustrated because her whole life she had thought that she is Malaysian. All this while she was using the birth letter as her legal document wherever she goes. When she became 15 years old, her dad became her guarantor as he is using a working visa. At the age of 17 Christina became a full-time staff at the church, hence she got her own passport and one of the church members became her guarantor. She used a plantation worker’s visa even though she is working for the church in the area of administration and children and youth ministry. She has been a part of the church for 17 years. (Christina Christopher 2014)

It is important to listen to their stories because it is important to see the underside of their history, to listen to their stories as victims, to preserve their dangerous memory, and to accompany them in their struggle for liberation and human dignity (Phan, 2013: 183). Not only that, it is also important to see their understanding of mission and how they practice it in their daily life. This in turn impacts the understanding and practice of mission of the church.

Based on the narratives above, we can see the process of “othering” that many migrants experience. Othering happens when:

“. . .we emphasize differences negatively over and above valuing commonalities or mutuality positively. “Othering” or stereotyping is a process in which mental, psychological and physical fences are constructed to keep out what and whoever appears to be “strange.” The “other” is seen as a “non-fit,” as “strange(r)” and as not meeting the requirements or nature of the “in-groups.” In a search for a clear-cut identities, “othering” excludes, inferiorizes and very often hurts and violates those who are not admitted to the “in-group” and into the dominant players’ culture(s) and discourses. As such, “othering” can pave the way toward racist attitudes and practices. (World Council of Churches, 2013: 48)

Based on the definition above, and looking into the three narratives, we can see a few forms of othering that was experienced by Dani Kareba, Shiloh Amarez, and Christina Christopher. The first is various forms of exploitation due to poverty. Shiloh’s experience as a victim of human trafficking projected the experience of many other migrants who entered Sabah forcibly by other people. Many was promised a better salary and livelihood by working in factories, restaurants, hotels and plantations. The reality is far from expected, many were turned into working in bars, discotheques, and even prostitutions. The second form of othering is the denied access to proper documentation. This is evident in Dani’s experience where tried all the best that he can to have a proper document. Apparently, there are many agents who are taking advantage of their situation by defrauding them. Being in a situation without document is the least option that many migrants have to go through. Apart from these agents, many companies and employers are also taking advantage of this situation. They pay less salary than the standard set by government, do not have to provide health insurance, do not prepare a safe working environment and yet these migrants will work very hard because this is the only way for them to survive. The third form of othering is the denied access to the basic need of a human being like education, health and security. Christina dream reflects the dream of many other migrant youth in Sabah. Based on my encounter, many migrant youths have their own picture of what the future holds for them. In reality, many have to discard their dreams and adjust themselves with the reality as undocumented migrant with no access to education.

Analyzing the process of othering and its relation towards mission, I argue that soul evangelism as a model of mission perpetuates the process of othering. For example, the mission of this particular Malay speaking church is “Every soul that belongs to Christ is an Evangelist and every soul that does not belong to Christ is the field of evangelism” ⁶ (Pastor of the church, 2014). The main focus of the presence of the church is to bring souls to Christ. One of the evidences that a soul has been brought to Christ is by being born again or in other words, verbally accepting Christ Jesus as the one and only Savior in one’s heart. This notion of evangelism sees migrants are moving targets and their souls have to be saved. Concern towards the physical needs and social welfare of migrants are less and not seen as something important. Since their souls is the most important, any oppressive system and law are glossed over as a worldly suffering that one day will be redeemed in heaven. According to Bryan P. Stone, this is the impact of dualism between body and soul promoted in the Greco-Roman philosophy and individualism that is promoted in the northern American culture (Stone, 1996: 144–145). Thus, the process of othering is subtly exercised through this form of evangelism.

Despite the mission of the church, the reality of migration and all its suffering has brought a different practice of mission to the church. As an example, the ample problems faced by church members have put the church in a situation where the church is constantly aware and ready to help the church members and even their friends and relatives who do not attend the church. Any time they can call the church and to requested to be taken to the hospital or to have a member or leader of the church speak to any Christians with the authority to release them from jail. Church is challenged to see migrants not as merely objects of evangelism. The daily encounter between the church and migrants has birth a different concern, that is the social welfare of migrants.

This encounter happens when migrant themselves were given the opportunity to become active member and part of the leadership in the church. The believe that every person who believes in Jesus Christ have the equal participation in the church gives room for many migrants to be involved in any kind of ministry in this Charismatic church. Dani Kareba and Christina Christopher are two of the leaders in the church. They are actively sharing the word of God in various cell groups and even at certain meetings in the church, though not in the main Sunday service. This opportunity then gives way for the reshaping of the understanding and practice of mission of the church by migrant themselves.

Dani Kareba, as one of the leaders in the church, understands that the mission of the church is to help those in need, especially those who are lacking food. For him, to be a true witness of Christ is to show love and to set a good example. In a situation where he would have to choose to proclaim the gospel or help someone in-need he would choose to help the person. He has often met Suluk people (a poor Muslim tribe from the southern part of the Philippines) and he likes to bring food and clothes for them. He also lends money to one Bugis (a Muslim tribe from Indonesia) friend who is in need. He quotes parts of the Bible that explains that if we do not help our brothers who ask for help then we commit sin. Dani Kareba emphasises the importance of helping others as a sign of a true follower of Christ.

Shiloh Amarez, who has only attended the church for two years, did not know what the mission of the church is, but she expressed a special kind of spirituality that is also evident in the life of other migrants, that is, a compassion. When she was asked to choose between sharing about Jesus or helping people in-need she chooses helping them. For her the action of helping is far more important than speaking about Jesus. Though her job as a masseuse and collecting soda tin does not provide a big income, she still adopted two stateless children that her neighbor found at one bus stop. She said, “Even though I am very poor I will even help abandoned animals. How much more these children.”

Christina Christopher, who has been part of the church for 17 years, explains that being the witness of Christ does not mean talking about Jesus, but rather helping people in the community by, for example, giving food to those in need regardless of their religion. Whenever there is an opportunity to share about God then it should be taken, but if people do not accept Jesus, then keep on doing good to people. For Christina the most important thing is to be part of the life of the community. Christina realised that in the context of Malaysia, Christians are not allowed to share the Gospel to Muslims, ⁷ and the most that Christians do is to pray for them.

The three narratives above show that church members themselves often see another person who is suffering with a sense of solidarity rather than seeing them as targets of evangelisation. In other words, their very first impression is to see to the other who is suffering like themselves and the mission as stated by the church leader is not seen as the only point of reference for serving others. As a matter of fact, the point of departure to serve each other is the experience of being marginalised, discriminated, poor, and suffering. Soul evangelism as the main dimension of the vision and mission of the church is being reshaped by the context of migration and by their own presence for others.

This reality is in alignment with the research done by Nancy Ammerman about Christian congregations and communities:

Confronted with a changing environment, congregations seem to draw on the stock of activities they already know and the resources they have at hand more than on any ideological blueprint. . . Even ideas about Bible do not necessarily guide a congregation in its decisions about whether to move or stay, whether to change or remain the same. Those decisions are best understood in the matrix of resources and structures that shape the ongoing life of the congregation. (Ammerman, 1997: 333–344)

In this case, the unique experience of migrants has created a resource that became a strength in their involvement in the mission of God in order to bring love, care, and sharing resources to others who are suffering. Mission according to those who are on the periphery, does not prioritise winning souls for Christ, but being present for those in need. This world where we are living now is important and salvation from suffering, oppression, discrimination, police checking, and deportation is more urgent than salvation in the other-world.

Compassionate Presence: A Missional Practice in the Context of Migration

Based on the experiences of Dani Kareba, Shiloh Amarez, and Christina Christopher, it is obvious that their understanding and practice of mission is in the form of being present for and sharing resources that they have with others. This is not moved by an understanding that the other is a target of evangelisation, but by compassion that was born out of their own experience of suffering. This is a very important contribution to the discourse of mission from the context of migration. The church does not only impact the life of migrants, but also the migrants impact the life of the church. Based on the experience of these three migrants, and many others that are not told in this paper, I argue that mission as a compassionate presence provides a sound theological basis for churches to response to the continuous othering of migrants.

Presence is one of the most basic and foundational of evangelistic virtues ⁸ (Stone, 2007: 285). Presence receives “its original definition from the story of God’s incarnate presence in Jesus and is further clarified both by our incorporation through baptism into the body of Christ and by the eucharistic repetition of Christ’s presence in the Lord’s Supper” (Stone, 2007: 285). This has become the ground of our being with and for each other. “Intrinsic to the virtue of presence is a quality of embodiment that gives witness to its visibility and tangibility and that communicates to others the habitability of the faith to which the witness points” (Stone, 2007: 285). Related to this, I believe that the main ingredient of presence is compassion. God had compassion because of the suffering of the people, thus he came in the bodily form of Jesus. In the context of migration, the compassion does not come from a high position of affluence, it comes from the lowest position in the society that abounds with suffering.

Migrants’ lives set the example of compassionate presence. Compassionate presence recognises that God’s Oikos surpasses any boundaries set by religion, denomination, race, sex, and even state. Compassionate presence is a form of mission as a practically embodied theology of presence. Compassionate presence invites us to rethink evangelism, not solely as winning souls for Christ, but to embody Christ by being present in the world. Compassionate presence starts its theology of mission in the life of migrants who are many times seen as nonpersons who can be treated unequally and objectified. Seeing migrants as nonpersons—the other form of othering—has somehow influenced the way Christians perform evangelism, mainly through the idea of soul evangelism that see migrants as nothing more than as objects of evangelisation.

Conversely, compassionate presence “affirms the sacredness of all persons” (Messer, 1992) and thus “affirms the fullness of life” of migrants (World Council of Churches, 2012) whose lives symbolise the complexity of marginalisation across boundaries. Thus, evangelisation is not seen as a means for “softening up” persons or a bait for conversion and to support church growth (Messer, 1992), but to bring life into its fullness by being “available in bodily form” (Stone, 2007: 285) for migrants. This first hand encounter with migrants gives the church a privilege to experience God in a transforming way. World Council of Churches (WCC) states, “To encounter the vulnerable, and to find oneself in a vulnerable place and becoming vulnerable to others, is to be purged of one’s own prejudices, preoccupations, and priorities—stripped down to face God and God’s own aim for the world. It is a transformative journey, a conversion to the needs of others and the vision of God” (World Council of Churches, n.d: 4). Thus, being present for migrants allows the church to repent from her sin of othering and affirm the sacredness of all persons, regardless of her/his legal status in a foreign country.

It is expected that this alternative perspective of mission will be able to reconstruct the expansive missional paradigm, that is mission as winning souls and expanding the church (Bevans and Schroeder, 2004: 36–49) into a compassionate mission—that displays the movement of mission from the space of vulnerability, uncertain relationships, and continuous struggle of life as something that is inevitable to the Christian presence beyond borders of nations, states, classes, religion, and gender. Through this compassionate mission, the awareness of the church as a community of pilgrimage will receive a new understanding (Froechtling, 2013: 278). The nature of the church has always been “becoming” (a process where the church has to reinterpret her presence in this world) a companionship that brings peace and welfare for migrants (Froechtling, 2013: 278). In this sense, the church is being reshaped by and through the presence of migrants.

Compassionate presence will then at the same time function as a critique towards the theory of receptivity that is developed through Missiology Diaspora, “people tend to be more receptive to the gospel when they are in times of stress and transition, both situations very common among migrants” (Payne, 2012: 131). Compassionate presence sees the vulnerability of migrants not as an opportunity to usher in the gospel, but as a challenge to the church to develop the capacity for deep listening, critical listening, and compassionate listening that in turn will reshape the missional presence and response of the church. Then migrants will not be seen as “moving targets” (Wan, 2011: 148–149) of the gospel, but as companions who are also suffering. Mission in this context is looking for a “partner in pilgrimage” and not “objects of mission” (Froechtling, 2013: 287). By this we learn that the mission of the church does not only start from the center, but it can start from the marginal and vulnerable spaces. God’s compassion is the center and God’s compassion is birthed at the marginal and vulnerable spaces. As we live together with all of creation under God’s oikos, particularly in the context of migration, I do hope that more churches will encounter migrants despite their fear, but may the encounter be seen as an opportunity to host Christ in the form of a stranger (Matthew 25:35).