UNDERSTANDING FILIPINO VALUES,

A WINDOW FOR MISSION

Lowel J. Domocmat
MDiv Student
Adventist International Institute of Advanced Studies
Philippines

Abstract

This paper sets to describe the four prevailing Filipino values, namely: amor
propio (self-esteem), hiya (shame, shy, timid), utang na loob (emotional debt or
obligation), and pakikisama (getting along together) and their relevance to the mission of
sharing the Gospel of salvation in the Philippines. Understanding these values are
effective aids in doing mission to the “unreached” populace of the country. This will help
missionaries1 both in their interpersonal relationships and in the formulation of “programs
to reach” suited to Filipino psyche.

1
Missionaries (or missionary) refer to persons, either foreigners or Filipinos who
are involved in sharing the Gospel of salvation to others.
 Introduction

It is said that “THE BEST WAY to appreciate a country is to live in it and to learn
about its history and culture.”2 The Philippines is an archipelago composing of 7,100
islands.3 It has a total population of 88,574,614 as of 2007. The populace is composed of
81.04% Roman Catholics ; 5.06% Islam; 2.82% Born-again Christians (Pentecostals);
and the remaining 11.08% are Iglesia ni Cristo (Church of Christ - 2.3%), Philippine
Independent Church (2%), Mormon (.5%), and other religions, such as Buddhism and
Hinduism (3%).4 Though it is claimed that the Philippines serves as “the citadel of
Christianity between the largest Christian West and largely non-Christian East” there
remains a vast mission field for the Three Angels’ messages.5

The Philippines is a country in which its population and national language are
both called Filipino. There are 110 estimated languages6 in the Philippines of which
Filipino is the national language. This language is composed of elements from the
different languages spoken in the Philippines.7 As to the people, a Filipino anthropologist

2
Sonia M. Zaide, The Philippines: A Unique Nation (Manila, Philippines: All
Nations Pub. Co., Inc., 1994), 1.
3
Ibid, 6. Others counted as 7,107 islands. Tomas D. Andres and Pilar B. Ilada-
Andres, Understanding the Filipino (Quezon City, Philippines, New Day Publishers,
1987), 10.
4
“Demographics of the Philippines,” available from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Demographics_of_ the_Philippines; Internet; accessed 13 April 2008.
5
Zaide, 6.
6
“Language scholars consider two varieties of the same language as dialects if
they are mutually intelligible; when two languages are not mutually intelligible, however,
they are considered separate languages.” Andrew Gonzales, “A Nation of Many
Tongues,” chap. in A Timeline of Philippine History, vol.10 of Kasaysayan: The Story of
the Filipino People, ed. Henry S. Totanes (Philippines: Asia Pub. Company Limited,
1998), 264. Thus, the estimated 110 languages spoken in the Philippines which are not
mutually intelligible are considered as different languages. Further, this count of
languages was done in 1993.
7
In spite of the 110 languages in the Philippines Tagalog was chosen by the
National Language Institute in 1937 as the national language for the reason that it was the
language of the capital city, Manila. Tagalog was then called as the Wikang Pambansa
after 1939. Tagalog was renamed Pilipino in 1959. It was later on called Filipino in the
1971-1973 Constitutional Convention due to the inclusion of some elements found from
the other languages in the country. The 1986 Constitutional Convention recognized the
existence of the Filipino language and thus ratified it as the national language. Today,
Filipino is the lingua franca spoken in the Philippines especially in urban areas. Ibid.,
expressed his difficulty in defining the word “Filipino.”8 However, in his later work, he
defined Filipino as “a natural-born citizen of the Philippines who shows the passions,
attitudes, and emotions of a people whose culture is a unique integration of the
indigenous and oriental and occidental cultures.”9

Four Prevalent Filipino Values

The Gospel mission work in the Philippines requires that one understands the
behavior of the people. Knowing the psycho-social framework of Filipinos is an asset
that will aid both in understanding their minds and in communicating the Gospel message
to them. For this reason, let us study four positive Filipino values prevalent throughout
the country, specifically in the lowland areas. They are amor propio (self-esteem), hiya
(shame, shy, timid), utang na loob (debt of gratitude or obligation), and pakikisama
(getting along together).10 These four values are under the category of social
acceptance.11 The social acceptance is defined in the following:

265.
8
Tomas D. Andres, Understanding Filipino Values, A Management Approach
(Quezon City, Philippines: New Day Publishers, 1981), 3.
9
Tomas D. Andres, Positive Filipino Values (Quezon City, Philippines: New Day
Publishers, 1999), 4. In clarifying the rich historical descent of the term “Filipino”
Andres declared: “Historically the term ‘Filipino’ began in 1543 when the Spanish
explorer, Ruy Lopez de Villalobos, decided to name these islands of ours in honor of the
prince who was soon to become King Philip II. Later, the name was applied to the whole
archipelago—Las Islas Filipinas. The term ‘Filipino’, however, was not applied to the
natives and indigenous people of the islands who were then called Indios. During the
Spanish regime, those who had come or just arrived from Spain were called Españoles or
Spaniards. Spaniards who were born in the peninsula of Spain and who had lived long in
the Philippines were called Filipinos Peninsulares. Those who were second-generation
Spaniards or born in the Philippines of Spanish descent were given the name Filipinos
Insulares….
Towards the close of the 19th century, the nationalist movement headed by Jose P.
Rizal and Marcelo H. Del Pilar started using the term ‘Filipino’ to include themselves and
their countrymen….
It was on October 31, 1896 that the term ‘Filipino’ was officially used to refer to
all the inhabitants of the Philippines….” Ibid, 3.
10
There are other positive Filipino values, such as pakikiramay, bayanihan,
paggalang, and others, but are not included in this paper due to constraints in time and
space.
11
There are three that primarily motivate and control Filipino values, namely:
social acceptance, economic security, and social mobility. Of these three, the social
 A basic postulate with regard to social life in the Philippines is that
interpersonal relations should go on without too much friction…. Therefore, the
attempt to make relations run smoothly is a primary social value in the
Philippines…. Also there is a tendency for the Filipino to “agree” with someone
to avoid dispute, and in some cases not to do anything about the agreement.12

Pakikisama

The first Filipino value to reflect on is pakikisama (getting along together). It is a

very significant Filipino trait.13 Pakikisama is the desire for “smooth interpersonal
relations.”14 At its finest pakikisama “aims for unity, peace and cooperation.”15

acceptance plays the prominent role. Rank X. Lynch, “Social Acceptance Reconsidered,”
chap. in Philippine Society and the Individual: Selected Essays of Frank Lynch, rev. ed.
edited by Aram A. Yengoyan and Perla Q. Makil (Quezon City, Philippines: Institute of
Philippine Culture, Ateneo de Manila University, 2004), 34.
12
Fred Eggan, “Philippine Social Structure,” chap. in Six Perspectives on the
Philippines, ed. George M. Guthrie (Manila, Philippines: Bookmark, Inc., 1968), 9, 10.
13
Tomas D. Andres and Pilar B. Ilada-Andres, Understanding the Filipino
(Quezon City, Philippines, New Day Publishers, 1987), 75. However, Frank Lynch made
Smooth Interpersonal Relations (SIR) a category of which is acquired and preserved by
means of pakikisama, “euphemism” and the “use of a go-between.” He defines SIR as
“getting along with others in such a way as to avoid outward signs of conflict…. It means
being agreeable, even under difficult circumstances, and of keeping quiet or out of sight
when discretion passes the word. It means a sensitivity to what other people feel at any
given moment, and a willingness and ability to change track (if not direction) to catch the
lightest favoring breeze.” Lynch, 36.
However, the pakikisama spirit is also the one causing problems to Filipino
youths. To get along with their peers the youths would just do what the majority are
doing (i.e. cigarette smoking, drinking beers and liquors, using drugs, and doing crimes).
14
Guthrie argues that there are four significant concepts in understanding Filipino
behavior pattern, namely: amor propio (self-esteem), hiya (embarrassment), utang na
loob (obligation), and pakikisama (getting along together). George M. Guthrie, “The
Philippine Temperament,” chap. in Six Perspectives on the Philippines, ed. George M.
Guthrie (Manila, Philippines: Bookmark, Inc., 1968), 60, 63. Among the four, Tomas
Andres observes that the two dominant values of Filipinos are utang na loob and amor
propio. To some extent a Filipino can even give his life in exchange with these values.
Andres, Understanding Filipino Values, 103.
15
Evelyn Miranda-Feliciano, Filipino Values and our Christian Faith (Manila,
Philippines: OMF Literature Inc., 1990), 22.
Nevertheless, it is also the yielding of one’s ideas, desires, and even standards to the
majority though it might contradict his own.16 With the desire not to be different and in
contrast to the will of the majority the tendency is to go with the crowd or sumabay sa
agos (go with the current). It is further observed that a Filipino can sacrifice other values
for the sake of another person’s good feelings. This leads him to agree with others in
spite of some reservations.17 To some extent, what others say becomes more important
than what the person thinks is right. Thus, he remains passive for fear of being
misunderstood.18
The next Filipino value is one that is created because of the pakikisama spirit of
another person.

Utang na Loob

The social interaction of Filipinos centers on the “obligation system” which means
that if someone helps you voluntarily, you are morally bound to repay that person. It is
called utang na loob (debt of gratitude).19 Utang na loob is “a feeling of indebtedness
which is incurred when one receives a favor, service or good, and a deep sense of
obligation to reciprocate.”20 Further, it is an inner law of being dictating the recipient of a
good act or deed to behave generously to one’s benefactor.21 The utang na loob identifies
the integrity of a Filipino in the context of his social relationship.22
Moreover, one who fails to give significance of the utang na loob has without
dangal (honor) or karangalan (dignity). Dangal is a “sterling character-firm in
conviction, fair in judgment, careful in words.” Filipinos who are marangal (dignified or

16
Andres, Positive Filipino Values, 150; Feliciano, 22.
17
Guthrie, 63. The effect of this is the outlook that frankness and outspokenness
are manifestations of uncultured behavior. He states that “Pakikisama takes many forms
which may involve extravagant praise of another, the use of metaphorical language rather
than frank terms, not showing one’s own negative feelings or depressed spirits, smiling
when things go wrong, and above all, never expressing anger or losing one’s temper.
Avoiding stressful situations can be made easier by keeping things vague and by letting
ambiguities stand…. The common element in many activities is the desire to maintain
good feelings and non-stressful relationships.” Ibid, 63-64.

18
Andres, 4.
19
Eggan, 9, 11.
20
Andres, 24-25.
21
Feliciano, 70.
22
Ibid.
honorable) do not break the utang na loob principle. Rather they are concerned to the
wellbeing of their kapwa (fellows).23

However, there are cases when a person does not like to incur utang na loob. To
remove himself from the obligation system he would reject any voluntary help offered to
him or if he had accepted already, he will repay it immediately by means of a good deed
or a sum of money. Nevertheless, to the older generation Filipinos, giving a sum of
money or some goods to reciprocate the help received is not an act of emancipation from
the utang na loob but a way of expressing thanks and that the utang na loob is still there.

There are also instances on which the utang na loob transcends any immediate
repayment such as the help received in times of a great need or crisis situations (i.e. birth,
christening, wedding, sickness, accident, funeral, and the like). It takes even the next
generation to repay the debt.24

Hiya

Unlike in the West, the social status of Filipinos is significant. This is enunciated
in a Tagalog maxim which says, “Hindi baleng huwag mo akong mahalin; huwag mo
lang akong hiyain,” that is, “It doesn’t matter if you don’t love me; just don’t shame
me”25 expresses the high place of hiya26 (shame) among Filipinos. The social esteem is
worn away at the time a person does a wrong act known to other people. The person
becomes kahiya-hiya (shameful) to the society he lives in.
To a Filipino his image as a person to the society is very important. This leads
him to avoid anything that may cause him hiya (shame). Thus, he will do his best to
abide by the norms of the society.

23
R. Rafael L. Dolor, “Confucianism and Its Relevance to the Filipino Family,”
Diwatao 1/1 (2001), available from www.geocities. com/philodept/
diwatao/confucianism.htm; Internet; accessed 24 July 2008.
24
“Generally, the lifetime indebtedness aspect of utang na loob draws from the
fact that it is difficult to measure one’s debt of gratitude. It is an indebtedness that is
harder to pay than money owed. Nothing is said about it. Nothing is counted or
quantified. Everything is played by ear as the poor recipient is never sure whether what
he has done suffices to repay his debt. Thus, he is bet to be at the back and call of his
benefactor. Unless the benefactor outrightly tells him to stop, or releases him from the
burden of a self-imposed obligation.” Feliciano, 72.

25
Lynch, 34.
26
There are various terms of hiya in the Philippines. Let us look at some of the
major languages: bain in Ilocano, baeng in Pangasinense, dine in Kapangpangan, huya in
Ilongo, and ulaw in Cebuano. Andres, 137.
 It is argued further that:

Hiya is a strong cultural force to achieve social acceptance that engenders

behaviors towards smooth interpersonal relationships. Hiya has made the Filipino
learn the “art of how not to offend somebody.” Hiya is a positive factor for the
Filipino to gain acceptance and respect necessary to overcome shortcomings.
Hiya is a painful feeling or emotion excited by a consciousness of guilt,
shortcomings, impropriety for have done something unworthy. Hiya makes the
Filipino try hard to see that he does things right so he won’t be put to shame
(emphasis mine ).27

Besides its English common equivalent as shame, it is also being “shy, timid,
sensitive.”28 This explains the lack of voluntariness29 and the passive behavior of
Filipinos.

To sum up there are two nuances of hiya, first is the “uncomfortable feeling that
accompanies awareness of being in a socially unacceptable position”, and secondly is the
feeling of “performing a socially unacceptable action.”30 In other words, hiya is the “fear
of losing face” or the “fear of rejection.”31

Amor Propio

Closely related to hiya is the amor propio.32 It is the sensitivity to personal affront
or simply the self-esteem. Its main point is the necessity of an individual to be treated as
a person and not as a thing or a property. However, the sense of amor propio (personal
worth) of a person is vulnerable to the way he is viewed by others, specifically in the area
of negative comments. Thus, the person is vigilant on his standing in his group. For this
reason, a person will have difficulty accepting mistakes. Consequently, a correction is
given in acute deference and an oblique conveyance of criticism.

27
Ibid, 138, 139.
28
Ibid.
29
Lynch, 43.
30
Ibid, 42.
31
Andres further defines hiya as an “emotion arising from a relationship with a
person of authority or with society, inhibiting self-assertion in a situation which is
perceived as dangerous to one’s ego. It can be fear of losing self-respect. Hiya sums up
the Filipinos’ long-standing complex brought about by years of submission to foreign
rule, mainly Spanish and American. ” Andres.

32
J. Bulatao, “Hiya,” Philippine Studies 12 (1964): 424-438.
 Although the prevailing element of amor propio is a “sense of individual dignity”
in some instances it is connected with “insecurity,” “indolence,” “arrogance,” or
“irritability.”33 As observed by Frank Lynch34, however, amor propio is “not aroused by
every insult, slighting remark, or offensive gesture. The stimuli that set it off are only
those that strike at the individual’s most highly valued attributes.”35 For instance, a
fisherman will not be offended by a negative comment on how he fishes and takes care of
his boat, but he would be highly offended and caused you trouble if the comment is about
him being an irresponsible father and provider of his household. The rule of thumb is,
“when there is emotional involvement, there is amor propio, and to prick amor propio is
to ask for trouble.”36

To sum up, Filipinos have a high regard for social acceptance. They desire
smooth interpersonal relations, pakikisama, which are revealed in their passive agreement
with others to avoid conflict. Besides, Filipinos make an effort to do things right (in the
judgment of the majority) to evade hiya. Moreover, to maintain their amor propio they
give more weight to what others say about them than to what they think of themselves.
They want to be treated by others as a person and live in their society with honor. Lastly,
if Filipinos are helped especially in a time of great need they are morally obliged to
reciprocate the utang na loob.

Relevance of these Values to Missionaries

These four prevailing values are effective aids in doing Gospel mission in the
Philippines. The knowledge of these values will help missionaries to understand how
Filipinos behave and thus will conduct themselves in such a manner as not to offend but
to foster friendship in the mission field. Secondly, these values provide some light in
contextualizing the explanation of some Christian doctrines. Lastly, they (the values)

33
Guthrie, 61.
34
Frank Lynch was an American anthropologist and a sociologist in the
Philippines. After finishing his doctorate in anthropology in the US, he came back to the
Philippines in 1959 to join the faculty of Ateneo de Manila. He was instrumental in
establishing the Department of Sociology and Anthropology (DSA) and the Institute of
Philippine Culture (IPC) of the university. Perla Q. Makil, “‘Alaala’ of Frank Lynch,
S.J.,” chap. in Philippine Society and the Individual: Selected Essays of Frank Lynch, rev.
ed. edited by Aram A. Yengoyan and Perla Q. Makil (Quezon City, Philippines: Institute
of Philippine Culture, Ateneo de Manila University, 2004), 4-5.

35
Lynch, 43.
36
Ibid, 44.
assist in the formulation of “programs to reach” the Filipino minds.

The pakikisama of a Filipino should be reciprocated by the pakikisama of the

missionary. The result is that friendship and confidence are built between the two in the
Filipino mission field. In fact, a Filipino hard heart can be melted by a genuine
pakikisama37.

Moreover, pakikisama causes utang na loob38. Utang na loob is made by a freely

given and unconditional help to a felt need especially at the time of a person’s crisis. In
doing this the missionary creates a “golden” link to the Filipino people. But it should be
noted that the help is given in genuine motive—love. Though Solomon is speaking in the
context of loving enemies, doing good is heaping “burning coals” on the head of the
people (Proverbs 25:22). The reward the Lord gives, I believe, is turning an enemy into a
friend. In Filipino mentality, doing good is having the pakikisama spirit and becoming
kind to the giver is performing the moral of utang na loob.

In stating the method of Christ in reaching the people, Ellen G. White says:

Christ's method alone will give true success in reaching the people. The Saviour
mingled with men as one who desired their good. He showed His sympathy for
them, ministered to their needs, and won their confidence. Then He bade them,
“Follow Me.”39

There is an intimation of pakikisama and utang na loob from the statement of Ellen G.
White on the method of Christ. The pakikisama is depicted in the Savior’s mingling with
people. Whereas the utang na loob is created by showing sympathy and ministering to
the needs of the people. These two values are potential tools in reaching Filipinos.
However, some if not most Filipino missionaries miss the significance of using the

37
This is illustrated by the following story. The merchant came to deliver the
blanket order of the wife. Because the husband was not consulted of the order, he refused
to accept the blanket. Whatever persuasion by the merchant the man was hard of his
word. The man was then rushing to put his tobacco produce under the shade for the rain
was about to fall. The merchant without uttering a word rushed to help the man. After
everything was carried under the shade, the man told his wife to pay the blanket. What
made the man to change his mind? It was because of the pakikisama spirit manifested by
the merchant. The merchant was marunong makisama (knows how to get along with).
38
A gentleman and a lady were paired to visit some of their interests in their
Voice of Youth Crusade. Arriving at the house of one of their interests, they noticed that
the daughter who was an active participant in the children’s story hour was sick. Instead
of giving a Bible study, the lady partner who was a nursing student gave a sponge bath.
39
Ellen G. White, The Ministry of Healing (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press,
1942), 143.
psychology of pakikisama and utang na loob. One probable reason is because they live
inside this culture that they overlooked their significance to mission.

The other two, amor propio and hiya inform missionaries as to how Filipinos
behave and what they value. Knowing these will aid them in having smooth interpersonal
relations with their mission field. Though Filipinos differ on what they value, yet
generally, they give high worth to their families. Thus, speaking a negative comment on
the family of a person is an insult to his amor propio. In order to avoid this dilemma the
missionary should be tactful in his dealings.

Generally, Filipinos are not frank but mahiyain (shy and timid). Because of this
trait Filipinos are oftentimes passive yet their passivity is not a message of dislike. They
usually do not ask questions and argue their points. However, it does not mean that
Filipinos just accept ideas. They are also thinkers.

On the theological side, the concept of hiya (shame) is the better way to explain
sin as compared to guilt to Filipino minds. It is observed by Jerald Whitehouse that the
dynamic of shame is predominant to Eastern cultures (as compared to guilt, which is
Western). He further suggests the “shame-honor” and not the “guilt-innocence” to
explain atonement and sin.40 Both shame (hiya) and honor (dangal) are values of
Filipinos.

Doing mission to Filipinos is challenging. It is challenging in a sense that one

needs to learn Filipino values in order to create a smooth interpersonal relationship and at
the same time to contextualize the Western explanation of faith to suit the understanding
of the Filipino people. This principle is plain in the letter of Paul to the Corinthians. The
Apostle Paul says:
20
To the Jews I became like a Jew to win over Jews; to those under the law I
became like one under the law—though I myself am not under the law—to win
over those under the law. 21 To those outside the law I became like one outside
the law—though I am not outside God's law but within the law of Christ—to win
over those outside the law. 22 To the weak I became weak, to win over the weak. I
have become all things to all, to save at least some. 23 All this I do for the sake of
the gospel, so that I too may have a share in it. (1 Corinthians. 9:20-23, NIV)

Mabuhay.

40
Jerald Whitehouse, “Communicating Adventist Beliefs in the Muslim Context,”
Journal of Adventist Mission Studies (2006) 2:78-80.