For liberation and postcolonial critics, the Exodus narrative is more than a simple account of historical events, but a narrative that continues to be revelatory and speaks to those who identify with the Israelite’s experience of ‘bondage’ because of their shared vantage point. The Exodus narrative is thus the paradigm of how God’s concern for the poor is made manifest in His will. J Severino Croatto develops Paul Ricoeur’s hermeutical theory of a “surplus of meaning,”[1] arguing that the biblical narrative is essentially an interpretation, distanced from the historical events, and that new layers of meaning are place “in front of” the text as the passage of time allows historical meanings to accrue.[2] In a similar manner to Gadamer’s proposition that meaning is created as a result of a fusion of the horizons of the text and reader,[3] Croatto notes that texts have different meanings in different settings and contexts. Croatto, reading as a Latin American theologian, finds within the Exodus narrative God’s plan of liberation for the poor of Latin America.[4]
Throughout, liberation and postcolonial exegesis of Exodus tends toward radical reform of the oppressive socio-political structures. Lohfink’s interpretation of the adoption of Moses in Exodus 2:1-10 is one that sidelines the personal charity of the Pharaoh’s daughter to Moses as having little or no value to the remaining poor.[5] Whilst liberation theologians are not seeking to undermine or discourage acts of Christian charity, their position does seem to oppose the position of Blessed Mother Teresa of Calcutta, who argued that an accumulation of individual personal acts of Christian charity, of themselves, have the potential to reform the world’s social ordering.[6] Indeed, the solidarity Moses feels with the poor of YHWH (the “anawim” ענוים),[7] and his subsequent relentless efforts to mediate with political authorities on behalf of the poor arguably attests to Mother Teresa’s argument for charitable reciprocity – that he to whom mercy has been shown will ultimately show mercy to others.
Postcolonial and liberation theological approaches to the Exodus are not a single monolithic entity but a vast array of approaches and individuals seeking to read the individual scriptures from varying different perspectives. Some scholars have found a proto-marxism in a perceived egalitarianism in the Early Israelite society, often portrayed as being “classless”[8] with legal protection of the vulnerable,[9] whilst others regard this as an anachronistic and unlikely imposition.[10] Indeed, a demythologised version of the “tenth plague,” (the killing of the first born Egyptian sons), could potentially be interpreted as lending support to violent uprising again oppressive regimes,[11] something which the vast majority of liberation theologians regard as ethically reprehensible.
Nevertheless, postcolonial and liberation perspectives on the Exodus narrative have drawn attention to the centrality of the notion of liberation in the Pentateuch and the identity of the Jewish people.[12] Gerhard von Rad’s thesis that Deuteronomy 26:5-10 is one of the oldest creeds of the Israelite people, is accepted by the vast majority of Old Testament scholars,[13] and is an overt celebration of Israel’s liberation from Egypt by YHWH, cementing the Exodus as a unique and central feature of the Jewish religion.
Christian liberation and postcolonial criticism is rooted in Biblical depiction of the ministry of Christ, particularly the interpretation of the temple incident and Christ’s coming “as but bringing a sword,”[14] as indicating Christ’s bringing of social revolution and liberation for the poor. Through Christ’s ministry, the gentiles have been “grafted in” to the elect people Israel,[15] and can thus claim the Exodus story as their own and continue the Exodus from oppression in the present day, as the chosen people of God.
[1] Mc Fadden G. Ricoeur Paul: Interpretation theory and the surplus of meaning. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism. 36.3 (1978): 365-367.
[2] Collins JJ. The Bible after Babel: Historical Criticism in a Postmodern Age. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005): p54.
[3] Briggs RS. What does Hermeneutics have to do with Biblical interpretation? The Heythrop Journal. 47.1 (2006): 55-74.
[4] Croatto JS. Exodus: A Hermeneutics of Freedom. (Maryknoll: Orbis Catholicus, 1978): p15.
[5] Lohfink NF. op cit. p41.
[6] Kellog SE. A visit with Mother Teresa and the Missionaries of Charity in Calcutta. American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine. 11.5 (1994): 5-11.
[7] Exodus 2:12-13.
[8] Miller JM, Hayes JH. History of Ancient Israel and Judah. (London: Westminster John Knox, 1986): p77.
[9] Oosthuizen MJ. Scripture and context: the use of the Exodus theme in the hermeneutics of liberation theology. Scriptura. 25.1 (1988): 7-22.
[10] Collins JJ. op cit. p56.
[11] Stevenson A. Let My People Go. Journal of Religion and Abuse. 6.1 (2004): 77-82.
Villa-Vincencio C. Exodus and revolution. Journal of Theology for Southern Africa. 57.4 (1986): 77-78.
[12] Smith AD. Chosen Peoples. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003): p116.
[13] Schweiker W, Matthewes CT. Having. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004): p63.
[14] Mt 10:34, Is 61:1, Lk 22:35-38 et al.
[15] Wilson MR. Our Father Abraham. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1989): p.ii.
