Chapter 2

LIBERATION THEOLOGY: THE BIBLICAL ANCHORAGE

Introduction

1 ibemtion theology bases its claims mainly on four themes of the

Bible - the Kingdom of God as the ultimate plan of God's creation, the

exodus as the new paradigm for liberation, the notion of poverty and the image

of God as a God of justice - which together with other themes constitute the

central message of Jesus' teachings. Liberation theology makes use of these

ideas as central reference points in its advancement. The image of God to be

found in the Bible is that of a God who liberates, who is compassionate and

concerned with justice. Each of these themes, needs to be looked into in some

detail.

The Kingdom of God is one of the central themes in Jesus' teachings.

How thii Kingdom of God can be made meaningful to the contemporary world

has proved to be a contentious issue. To grasp its full import, the term 'Kingdom

of God' has to be studied in the context of attempts made to translate it into

modem idiom. One has to find out what it meant for Jesus and what it can

mean for the world today; that is to say, it has to be analysed as it is employed in

the Bible, and as interpreted by the liberation theologians as a dynamic world

transforming reality.

The Kingdom of God in the Old Testament

Although the phrase "the Kingdom of God" does not occur in the Old

Testament, the kingship of God is frequently stressed, especially in the psalms.

Most exegetes agree that the term "malkut" translated as 'Kingdom' is associated

with Yahweh. Now, the God of Israel- Yahweh - manifests Himself in terms

of an active power operating through history: not in terms of a kingdom, literal

or figurative, constituted by that power. When the kingship of Yahweh is

described "the emphasis is on kingly rule and domination rather than on a 2

territory or a place." There are various dimensions to this kingship as He is the

great king over all the earth (PS 47:2), He rules over all (Ps 103:19), and His

kingly control encompasses past, present and future (Ps 145: 13). Along with

thii general notion, God is also king of the covenant people and, exclusively,

Jacob's king (Is 41:21). The covenental kingship gives hope during national 3

decline and even in exile. The reign of God will be realised through the

"Messiah" who will bring salvation and blessing to aU people (Is 2: 1-4; 49: 7;

Mic 4: 1-5). Israel's experience of Yahweh, as the personal God and as the Lord

of history who cares, protects, forgives and makes a covenant with his people,

was unique to them. As a king, "Yahweh", creates a people, directs and

organises their ranks, redeems them, imparts justice to them all. This religious

experience might be said to prefigure the idea of the Kingdom of God as it is

fully and finally evolved under the new covenant.

The Kingdom of God in the New Testament

4 The phrase "the kingdom of God" occurs frequently in the NT,

especially, in the synoptic Gospels where it is the central theme in the

proclamation of Jesus. The fourth Gospel (St. John's) rarely uses the term and

when it does, the term is synonymous with "eternal life" (Jn 3:15). The "Acts of

the Apostles" preaches the kingdom (Acts 8:12; 1923) and Paul speaks of

inheriting the kingdom (1 Cor 6 9 ; Gal 521) ; for Paul, the kingdom of God is

also a "present" reality (Rom 14:17; 1 Cor 420) . The expectation of God's 5

coming rule pervades and dominates the whok New Testament.

Jesus never defined the kingdom of God or the reign of God in the

concrete but presented hi message in "kingdomn parables which, it must be 6

admitted, were the most effective means of putting over the idea to the

unlettered and the uninitiated among hi audience.

In the Bible the jubilee tradition is interpreted as a "great year of favour,"

the ultimate visitation of God, a time of great solace and salvation to His people.

Jesus announced this final visitation of God not as a future event but as having

occurred with his advent, once and for all. And so he said: "the kingdom of God

is at hand" (Mk 1:14). In Lk 1721, it is a present reality, one that is within our

reach (Lk 17:21). Thii effective presence is manifested through exorcisms

(Mt 12:28), healings and forgiving of sins. However, not all Gospel passages

support the idea that the kingdom of God has, indeed, been actualised. Though

it is made manifest in Jesus' m i n w , its fulfilment is still to come and much of

Jesus' teaching points to thii (Mk 9:l ; Mt 6:lO; Lk 11:2). "This creates the 7

tension of the "already" and the "not yet". Traditional theology stressed the 8

"not yet" to the detriment of the "already".

Thii kingdom of God is a gracious gift from Above. It is God who gives

the kingdom (Lk 12:31). It is a good offered to men and at the same time a 9

challenge to the people (Mt 25: 1430) as the parable of the talents and of the

treasure in the field (Mt 1344) make clear. The kingdom of God is "a purely 10

religious kingdom" and Jesus rejects outright all suggestions of a splendid

earthly kingdom (Lk 19:ll; 23:42; 24:21).

The "kingdom of God" or the "reign of Godn is a "saving event for the 11

sinners" and not a judgement of vengeance for them. Jesus' invitation to the

people for repentance invokes God's mercy and not Hi anger as John, the

Baptist, did. The revelation of God's love for sinners is a sign of Hi reign. The

reign of God "demands rather a radical decision for God. The choice is clear; 12

either God and hi reign or the world and its reign." Nothing should prevent

one from making thii choice.

Albrecht Ritsehl (1822-89) was the first scholar to examine Jesus' own

understanding of the kingdom and interpret it in ethical terms, according to 13

which all must strive to achieve the goal set by the kingdom. In reaction to this,

Johannes Weiss (1863-1914) argued that the background of Jesus' kingdom

preaching is the Jewish expectation of the manifestation of God's activity in the

future. Albert ~chweitzerl~ dewloped the ideas of Weiss and traced the Jewish

understanding to the apocalyptic literature. According to Schweitzer's

"consistent eschatology," the kingdom of God was for Jesus a universal

catastrophe along the lines of Jewish apocalyptic thinking and so no longer 15

meaningful to the present day world. Charles Ilodd5 speaks of a "realised

eschatologyn according to which the kingdom of God was a present reality for

Jesus and so for the believers, too.

It is clear that the "kingdom of God" is open to a variety of 16

interpretations. AU agree that Jesus preached the "kingdom of God" and

demanded a response from the hearers so that the ultimate goal of the kingdom 17

is to transform the whole creation.

The Theology of Liberation and "the Kingdom of God"

The theology of liberation tries to see the "kingdom of God" in the

context of "hiirical liberation." In order to understand the kingdom of God in

terms of the new theology, one has to have a certain knowledge of "doingn that

theology and the preconceptions on which it is based. It is important to look at

the changes that have been taking place in the past two hundred years in man's 18

self- understanding and hi rok in hiitoy.

19 A new hiirical situation wanants a new human self-understanding and

a re-thinking and a re-reading of the Bible. Thii new historical situation has

emerged from the industrial revolution which revealed man's ability to transform

nature, and the French Revolution which proved man's potential to change the

social and political order. The new human self-understanding is, thus, backed by

the awareness of man's capacity to transform both nature and the socio-political 20

order. Thii means that man has an active role in the transforrnation of hiitoy.

It implies a new manner of being a human person whereby individuals

have greater command over themselves and over their lot in h i r y . It implies,

also, a new way of b e i i a Christian in thii world. In thii context, the theology

of liberation occupies itself with the question posed by the poor and the

oppressed as they struggle to free themselves from the shackles of injustice and

try to create a just and equitable society. It is not to the "non-believern but to the

"non-person" to which liberation theology addresses itself. In the light of this

new historical situation, liberation theology attempts to rethink the concept of the

kingdom of God in its h i r ica l , social, political dimension and in its

transforming power.

Gutierrez on the "Kingdom of God"

To Gustavo Gutierrez, the idea of the kingdom of God is bound up with

the notion of "salvation" which embraces all of human history, transforming it

and leading it to its fullness in Christ. The opposite of the "kingdom" is "sinn

which is seen as a radically inb-hiirical reality - the kind of evil that Jesus 21

sought to eradicate through Hi m i n i . For Gutierrez, history itself is the 22

location of God's self-communication and of Christs' liberating act. The

kingdom of God is to be understood in the global sense and meaning of history,

both in the present and in its ultimate end. The "kingdomn as the goal of all

hi ioy, has deep consequences and strong implications for social and political

praxis in the present. Gutierrez cannot accept the idea of two histories - one sacred and the other profane--but only one which he calls "Christo-finalised"

23 hiioy.

Thii history has two aspects - a call to divine filiation, a vocation by

which human persons become God's chiklren, and a call to human fellowship by

which the human family draws together individuals the world over into one vast

spiritual kinship as brothen and sisters. These two aspects constitute the basii of

Gutierrez's idea of the kingdom of God.

According to Gutierrez, the kingdom of God is a "gift" as well as a "task".

As a call to divine filiation the kingdom of God is a "gift" from God and this gift

24 imposes a "task" - to create an authentic community of brothers and sisters.

As the gift of divine filiation, the kingdom is accepted and adualised by cawing

out the task of creating a profound human fellowship in history. As the final goal

of hiiy, the Kingdom takes over and transforms the whole of history.

God's kingdom is identical with God's will which is hi reign of love in the

world. Thii love is a love which calls all human persons to total communion with

h i and with one another. The will of God is negated by situations of massive

poverty and oppression. In situations of this kind, to do the will of God would 25

mean, necessarily, to struggle for liberation.

The kingdom of God is the background against which the situation of

oppression and domination is denounced as sinful and incompatible with its

coming and in the light of which, on the other hand, evey achievement of

brotherly love and justice among human persons is announced as a step towards

total communion with God. Seen from the perspective of the kingdom of God,

the stmggle for liberation is no longer only a response to the economic, social

and political situation of poverty and oppression. It is not an expression of the

human being's awareness of the necessity of transforming hiiy. Rather, it is

fidelity to God's will and fidelity to Jesus' practice whose proclamation of the 26

kingdom revealed God as Father and human beings as brothers and sisters.

God, the Liberator: the Exodus"

The God of the Bible reveals Himself through historical events rather than

through direct interventions and dired inspi/ations. In this revelatory process,

three basic attitudes may be distinguished:

He is a God who liberates.

He is a God of justice.

He is a God of compassion.

It is pertinent to inquire into each aspect of this God-image as He reveals

himself through h i i r y , and, definitively and uniquely, in the person of Jesus

Christ.

The Exodus - Revelation of God's True Name The Book of Exodus, the second Book of Torah, "is the organic

28 continuation of the first bookn Genesis. It describes the Israelites' bondage in

29 k t , their deliverance, and the liberation journey to the promised land. The

book focuses on two important events: a) the Israelites' deliverance from k t

through God's mighty intervention and the miraculous crossing of the Red Sea

(Ex 1:l-18:26), b) the covenant at Mount Sinai (Ex 19:l-4038).

It describes how the God of Israel, through Moses, the chosen leader, 30

fulfills his threefold promise - to deliver Israel from the bondage of Egypt. to

re- instate them in hi favour and to bring them to the promised land. "Exodus"

is often used in a broad sense for the whole complex of events from the

deliverance to entry into the promised land. As such, it forms the high point of

OT redemptive hiistoy, as the means through which God constituted Israel as his 31

vehicle for the redemption of all mankind.

The exodus narration is considered by liberation theologians as a key text

in the Old Testament that reveals the true nature of God. The exodus event

reveals a God who responds to the cries of a people living under oppression and

is determined to change their destiny. The Book of Exodus reveals thii God as

one who:

- has seen the miserable state of hi people in Egypt.

- has heard their cry.

- has come down to rescue them (Ex 3:7-8).

Through the exodus event God made his name known as the liberator.

In order to fulfii his task God chooses Moses, one of the oppressed, to be hi

lieutenant, the agent of liberation. "So now go. I am sending you to Pharaoh to

bring my people the Israelites out of Egypt" (Ek 3:lO). But Moses was reluctant

to accept thii mission; God reassures and encourages him by saying: "I will be

with youn (Ex 3:12). Thii phrase, "I will be with you," expresses the leitmotif of

all God's redeeming actions in hiiory, to Joshua-a national leader (Josh 1:19),

to Gideon-a judge (Judg 6:16), to David and Solomon-kings (1 Kgs 1:37), to

Jeremiah* prophet (Jer 1:8), and to the Church - the true inheritor of hi 32

mission (Mt 28:20).

The Biblical God is a God who is always with his people and who reveals 33

himself under a new name not known beforehand-"I am who I amn (Ex 3:14).

Again He is a God who delivers (Ex 6:6); his name is the hope for the oppressed

people in Egypt and he wants to keep this meaning for ever. Thii God is on the

side of the oppressed and he declares his intention to liberate them. The

revelation of God's name as deliwrer-liberator is born out of the events of the 34

Exodus.

The experience of this liberating God should be a real experience of

liberation; othenrrise, it will not be a real experience. Conversely, the experience

of liberation should be an experience of the liberating God; otherwise, it will not

be a true liberation. It is a proclamation that only God can truly give liberation.

Wi was the experience of Israel (Ex 3:15). And Israel became one nation when

God delivered them from bondage. The whole of Israel's history was later

reinterpreted on the basii of this exodus event.

"Not only does God reveal himself, he reveals who he is. He is the

deliverer from whatever oppression afflicts hi people. He brought Israel . . .

from slavery in Egypt . . . His vey faithfulness in the past was a guarantee that

he would be there in whatever future need Israel had. Yahweh is Israel's 35

deliverer from oppression throughout time."

The Exodus: A Political Action

Gutierra considers the Exodus, the liberation from Egypt, as a historical

fact and considers it as a recreation of a people after the fust creation of human

beings. Further "The Liberation of Israel," according to Gutierrez "is a political

action."36 It is a breaking away from the situation of misery and "the beginning 37

of the construction of just and comradely society." It is the beginning of the

creation of a "new order." The early chapters of Exodus describe Egypt where

the Jewish people live as the "land of slavery" (Ex 13:3, 20:2, Jer 5:6),

characterised by repression (Ex 1: 10-ll), and alienated work (Ex 5:64)

humiliations (Ex 1:13-14), and enforced birth controls policy (Ex 1:15-22). God

appoints Mcses to liberate them and to lead them to the new land.

38 After surveying the literature on the theology of liberation Brown points

out that the greatness of the Exodus event for liberation theologians cons'& in

the idea of a God who takes sides to free the poor and the oppressed. The

conception of "the exodus as a socio-political revolution by and for the poor and 39

oppressed has long been typical of liberation theology."

George Pixley has done a thorough explication of the Evodus and

commented on almost all liberation theologians who have dealt with exodus

events. The Exodus story, according to Pixley, has undergone a four-stage

evolution. The first stage corresponds to the historical fact; a heterogeneous

group of peasants in Egypt with some immigrants from the east, under the

leadership of the levite Moses escaped from Egypt. In the second stage, the

levites joined the rebellious and Canaanite peasants, then known as Israel, and

the exodus was a struggle against the exploitation of the illegitimate ruling ckss.

In the thud stage, Israel was a monarchy and the exodus was a struggle between

two peoples - Israel and Egypt. In the final stage, according P iey , in the second temple period, the exodus was converted into a foundation for a

40 depoliticised Jewish community. According to Jon D. Levenson, for P i ey , the

Book of Exodus is "an artful but ultimately unsuccessful attempt to disguise the 41

reality of the exodus as a class struggle and social revolution." For him, the

exodus was in the nature of an insurrection. In saying this, P i y might be

thought to be stretching the fads to fit them into a liberationist perspective.

On closer scrutiny, it will be seen that the early chapters of Exodus do not 42

speak of social revolution or a class struggle within the Canaanite society. The

Exodus speaks of the miraculous escape of the oppressed people to their native 43

land. It is a fad that "the society that the Book of Exodus mandates is still one

in which there were slaws, some for a limited period, others for life."@ When

we consider Ex 23:9 "Do not oppress an alien; you yourselves know how it feels

to be aliens, because you were aliens in Egyptn it is clear that the exodus was

somethiig to do with aliens rather than the emancipation of slaves. The very

purpose of the exodus event Sallah et ammi we ya a bd uni "let my people go

that they may serve me" denotes that freedom in the sense of selfdetermination,

is not the point of the exodus but senrice-the service of the God of Israel is the

main thrust of the exodus event.

45 Jon Levenson argues that the exodus event is not based on a principled

46 opposition to slavery but on the chosenness of Israel. God took notice

(Ex 2:23-25) of the suffering of Israel because He remembered the "covenant".

The suffering, according to Levenson, did not qualify Israel for the exodus event;

at the same time, Israel's groaning, crying, suffering and bondage caused God to

remember the covenant. One cannot equate the chosenness of Israel with

preferential option for the poor. A mere political interpretation of the exodus

event without considering the other aspects goes contrary to the meaning and

spirit of that event. But, Gutienez contends that "to affirm that all human reality

has a political dimension in no way means, as the term itself indicates, to reduce 47

everything to this dimension." He is trying to emphasise a long neglected

aspect as he is aware that "while the social dimension is of the utmost 48

importance, it is only one side of liberation,"

The Exodus: A Reinterpretation

The exodus event's significance echoes throughout the Bible. Joshua

leads the people through the parted waters of Jordan (Josh 4) into the promised

land -a minor image of crossing the Red Sea. Prophets Isaiah (43: 14-21) and

Ezekiel (20: 3 2 4 ) speak of return from captivity - a new exodus - a mirror 49

image of the old. This reappropriation of the exodus event goes beyond the

Bible. The rabbies, the teachers of the Jewish people, consider the exodus event

50 an archetypal model of human redemption. The philosopher Emst Bloch

speaks of an "exodus principle" in the exodus event which he later transforms 51

into the "principle of hope." It is an attempt to inspire and instill hope in the

exiles of our times. It proclaims the message that "The lsraelits were men and

women like us, they had their sorrows and joys and they had an intense desire 52

for life."

According to Gerhard Von Rad, the theme of deliverance from Egypt has

been "theologically worked up into a sublimk chorale. In the deliverance from

the Egypt, Israel saw the guarantee for all the future, the absolute surety for

Yahweh's will to save, something like a warrant to which faith could appeal in 53

times of travail."

Liberation theokqans see the exodus as a paradigm of God's will for the

oppressed. They replace the people of Israel with the poor and the oppressed

everywhere. The exodus event inspires spiritual and political revolution. When

the American revolution broke out ". . . it was the Book of Exodus to which the

founding fathers turned for inspiration and hope, comparing George Washington

to Moses, King George Ill to Pharaoh, the British to the Egyptians, and the 54

Atlantic ocean to the Red Sea."

55 In his celebrated speech in Memphis, Tennessee, Martin Luther King

said: "I just want to do God's wiU. And He's allowed me to go up the mountain,

and I have looked over, and I've seen the promised land. I may not get there

with you. But I want you to know, tonight, that we, as a people, will y t to the 56

promised land . . ." Here King identifies hiis people with the suffering Israelites.

King brought the past to the present to convey the plight of hii people. He

compared American black experience to the experience of ancient Israel.

While presenting his dodoral thesis, Gutierrez said: "The theme of exodus

has been and still is an important theme for us but it is an over-statement to say 57

that it was the major theme in our theology of liberation;" he prefers to see

exodus as a "political action." Through the exodus event God presents Himself

as a "god who is with us in order to free us" from every kind of bondage and

oppression.

The Notion of Poverty in the Bible

Poverty is one of the central themes in both the Old Testament and the

New Testament. The Bible treats the concept briefly yet with great richness of

implication. We are invited to take a definite attitude towards the issue of

poverty. Poverty is referred to in different words and the meanings are not

a h y s the same.

Poverty in the Old Testament

Poverty in the OT denotes lack of material gods , powerlessness and

oppression. The poor in Israel were not a homogeneous class; it included "small

farmers, day labourers, construction workers, beggars, debt slaves, village 58

dwellers." The legal texts speak of the legal codes drawn up to ensure the

well-being of the poor through the redistribution of goods and food and by

regulation of slave ownership. Prophetic texts speak of those who were

exploited by the big landowners and the ruling class. The wisdom tradition says

that poverty is the result or undesirable consequence of laziness. But the Book

of Ecclesiastes puts forward the view that poverty is the result of political and

economic exploitation.

The OT uses a number of Hebrew words for the poor and b d f g h

po~erty-eb~on,' dal, , mahsor, misken,° miskenu, ani, anawim, and I 59

ms. Biblical authors make a seledive use of these words. For exampk, 'ras' is

a wisdom word and is not found in the prophetic books. This selectivity suggests

that even when the Biblical writers use the same words, they may not mean the 60

same thing by the same words.

Poverty in the New Testament

The NT's idea of poverty is centred on the words and works of Jesus

Christ. In life He belonged to a lower chss and made no attempt to escape or 61

hide the fad. Himself a poor Nazarene, he was committed to the "poorest of 62

the poor." The Gospels had their origin in the communities of the poor

(1 Cor 1: 26-27). But the New Testament lacks a general word for poorlpoverty. 63

"Ptochos" is the word most commonly used in the New Testament for 'poor' M

and means, oppressed, poor. In ancient Greek, the word Penes was widely

used to indicate one who has few material resources and has to live frugally.

Other related terms include: Penichros (poor), hysterematos (want), endees

(needy). Usually, these words denote persons lacking the necessities of life and

poverty a fad evidenced by manifestations of hunger, thirst, nakedness, 65

homelessness, unemployment. The NT gives a diversity of perspectives 66 67

regarding poor/poverty. Socio-economic and Anthropological studies

continue to refine the various perspectives and theological meanings of

poorlpoverty.

Poverty: Gutierrez's View

Poverty is an ambiguous term. In contemporay Christian spirituality

poverty has become a central, if, controversial, theme. For his part, Gutierrez 68

gives three different notions of poverty, such as material poverty. spiritual and

biblical conceptions of poverty.

Material poverty

In Gutierrez's scheme, poverty designates, in the first place, material

poverty which means "the lack of economic goods necessary for a human life

worthy of the name."69 This kind of poverty has been considered degrading and

ordinary men of conscience reject it outright. And even those who have little

understanding of the root cause of this material poverty would agree that we

should fight it as a social evil. Archbishop Vallejos proposes two methods - to

love and organise. In his speech to the poor, the Archbishop said:

I want to inspire hope in you. To tell you you should love the land

with its fruits - your seed, your animals, your tools . . . I want to

tell you you should love your culture, your songs, your language.

your way of doing things, your family, your landscape. That, along

with the other poor, you should make preparations and organise,

because in unity alone is there strength. That, sooner or later, you

or your children will possess the entire land because God has given

it to all as a gift and task God is the sole owner of the fields.70

Thus the Archbishop asked the poor to love the earth and its gifts and to

organ'w themselves that they may be the creators of their own histoy.

Today, the consciousness is growing across classes and nations of the

different degrees and forms of poverty, ranging from deprivation of basic

necessities to marginalisation in social and political life. As Gutierrez puts it:

"The life of the poor is one of hunger and exploitation, inadequate death care

and lack of suitable housing, difficulty in obtaining an education, inadequate 71

wages and unemployment, struggles for their rights and repression." He

describes the present day poverty as "collective poverty" which helps to create

solidarity among the poor themselves and to organise them against those who

benefit from their miserable de-humanising conditions.

Thanks to the works of sociologists and social activists, there is now a

better appreciation of these de-humanising conditions. Peter C. Phan observes

that "the pain of starvation, from which the hungry die, is a horrible suffering.

Of all human calamities famine is the principle one, and most of deaths [in the 72

third world] is, no doubt, by starvation." According to Gutierrez the problem of

material poverty is not simply an economic and social matter; it is an

all-embracing human problem. As he puts it, "The universe of the poor is

inhabited by flesh-and-blood human beings, pervaded by the forces of life and 73

death, of grace and sin."

Material poverty is a sub-human condition. It denies the individual the

status of a person. Concretly, to be poor means to die of hunger, to be .Illiterate,

to be exploited by others, not to know that you are being exploited, not to know 74

that you are a person."

75 Material poverty is a scandalous condition. To aspire after it goes

against the biblical teaching and is tantamount to promoting exploitation and

injustice. Poverty leads to cruel and inhuman death and is against the will of

God who wants us to live.76 But Christians "often have a tendency to give

material poverty a positive value, considering it almost a human and religious

ideal. It is seen as austerity and indifference to the things of thii world and a 77

precondition for a life in conformity with the Gospel." Those who are subject

to it will never see it as a blessing in disguise but as an infirmity, a sub-human

condition that has to be denounced together with the mechanisms that generate 78

the poverty; the ideal is to create a just society by uprooting poverty and

strengthening the bonds of universal brotherhood.

Spiritual Poverty

Poverty is closely related to contemporary Christian spirituality. Religious

communities make an ideal of imitating the poverty of Christ. There has been an

earnest endeavour to imitate and personalise the attitude of Christ towards

poverty.

The concept of spiritual poverty is less clear than material poverty. It is 79

often seen as an "interior attitude of unattachment to the goods of this world."

The poor person is not one who is deprived of goods but one who is not

attached to them. He will not allow the goods to rule hi heart. The poor in this

sense are not those who have no material goods but those who cultivate a

detachment from them. Thus, one may be materially rich and spiritually poor;

conversely the poor can be materially poor and, at the some time, rich at heart. 80

But this line of interpretation of "the poor in spirit" may lead to comforting and

tranquilising conclusions. The Bible, at any rate, cannot be thought to

recommend the sort of sub-human poverty which is a "scandalous situation" and

opposed to the God of life.

Spiritual poverty is not simple detachment but a total availability to the

Lord. In thii sense, it is a "spiritual childhood - an ability to receive. not a

passive acceptance - defines the total posture of human existence before God,

persons, and things. "81

Guiterrez also speaks of evangelical poverty which is appropriate to a

particular vocation and not obligatory to all Christians. It is confined to the

narrow limits of the religious life. He describes evangelical poverty as "a counsel

appmpriate to particular vocation and not a precept obligatory for all 82

Christians." In thii context he warns against a possible misunderstanding:

"We often confuse making a vow of poverty with a life of poverty. We often

confuse possession of absolute essentials with comfortable ensconcement in the 53

world. We often confuse instruments for service with power leverage." AU

these concepts make for ambiguities and uncertainties in the understanding of

spiritual poverty.

Biblical Poverty

The next line of thinking on the question of poverty concerns the biblical

understanding of thii notion. According to the Biblical interpretation, Gutierrez

says, the poor person is the "client" of Yahweh and poverty is "the ability to

welcome God, an openness to God, a willingness to be used by God, a humility

before ~ o d . " ~ Gutierrez shows that the various words used in the Bible to refer

to the poor together indicate a degrading sub-human situation. The poor are 85

portrayed as "indigent, weak, bent over, wretched." Thus understood, the

words ought to have the effect of stimulating protest in the reader, challenging

him to take a stand against poverty because, it is, as he puts it, a "scandalous

condition."

The Bible, according to Gutierrez also makes clear the cause of poverty -

the injustice of the oppressors (Job 242-12). The prophets criticized every form

of poverty and the method used for keeping people in poverty (Hos 12:8; Amos

8:5, Is 3:14, Jer 527, 6:12). There is evidence of strid legislation for fighting

poverty (Dt 2419-21, Lev 19:9-10, Ex 23:12, Dt 5:14), of the practice of

relieving the burden of the people during sabbath and the jubilee year

(Ex 21:2-6, Dt 15: 1- 18, Lev 2510).

The Bible also understands poverty as "spiritual childhood". Repeated

infidelity to the covenant on the part of the chosen people forced the prophets to

speak of a "remnant" which is faithful to God and which will be the "Israel."

From this "remnant" will come the Messiah. From the time of prophet Zephania

(7th centuy BC) those who awaited the Messiah were known as the "poorn

(Zeph 312-13). Thus the term acquired a spiritual meaning and came to be

seen as an ideal. In Zephania 2:3 poverty "is opposed to pride, to an attitude of

self-sufficiency; on the other hand, it is synonymous with faith, with 86

abandonment and trust in the Lord."

Jeremiah calls himself poor when he sings before God (Jer 20:13). Thus

spiritual poverty became a precondition to approaching God (Ps 662). The

Psalms also contain numerous instances of this idea. To know Yahweh is to seek

hi (Ps 9:114), to entrust oneself to him (Ps 10:14, 34:9), to hope in him

(Ps 25:3-5) to fear him (Ps 25:12-14); the poor are the just ones, the whole ones

(Ps 34:20, 2237, 37:17). The opposite of the poor is the proud, helpless ones

(Ps 10:12, 18:28, 37:10, 8614).

In the NT, Mt 5:l gives striking expression of the idea of spiritual poverty.

Here the "blessed" are the poor of Zephaniah, the persons who are "totally at

87 the disposition of the Lord." This total dependence is the precondition to

receiving the word of God which comes to the people as a gift. The poor are

blessed not because the injustice they suffer will be compensated in the kingdom

of God but because the reign of the kingdom of God has begun in a special way

by the incarnation and the new d i n s a t i o n will establish justice. The poor may

now take comfort in the thought that they are soon to be liberated from the

exploitation that had hitherto prevented them from being really human.

According to Guiterrez, the above two notions of poverty, as "a 88

scandalous conditionn and an "attitude of openness to God," converge in the

third notion of poverty as "a commitment of solidarity and protest."

Poverty: A Commitment of Solidarity and Protest

It has been pointed out that material poverty is a "scandalous condition"

and that spiritual poverty is an attitude of openness to God. The first of these

conceptions is subtly deceptive and the second, partial and insufficient.

According to the Biblical teaching, material poverty has to be rejected and

spiritual poverty is a total availability to the Lord. The supreme exemplar of

poverty of either kind is Christ who emptied himself (Phil 2:6) and became poor

(2 Cor 8:9). This is his kenosis (Phil 2:6-11). But Jesus did not take up the sinful

human condition to idealise it.

For Jesus, "poverty is an a d of Love and liberation. It has a redemptive 89

value." Thecause of hi poverty was love for mankind (Jn 3:16). "Christian

poverty has meaning only as a commitment of solidarity with the poor, with 90

those who suffer misey and injustice." It is a protest and an attempt to abolish

it. Jesus became poor in order to be with the poor. He became poor because

He loved the poor. "Christian poverty, an expression of love, is solidarity with 91

the poor and is a protest against poverty" Christian poverty is an imitation of

the "poor Christ."

The early church community "held everything in commonn (Ads 244,

433). These early Christians were anxious to see that there were no "poorn

amongst them (Acts 4: 34-35). They tried to eliminate poverty from their

community and did so. The church in the modem world presents an altogether

different picture. The p w r are in it everywhere, and in large numbers.

Solidarity and comm*hent are conspicuously lacking in the wealthier section of

the faithful. Some of the more thoughtful among them are moved to lament the

plight of the poor with passion and eloquence: "The "poor person" today is the

oppressed one, the one marginated from society, the member of the proletariate

struggling for the most basic rights; the exploited and the plundered social class,

the country stnrggling for its liberation. To be with the oppressed is to be against m

the oppressor." To be in solidarity with the poor involves a personal risk, even

a risk to one's life. The commitment to the poor, even in hostile conditions, is

the sign of the Church's authentic mission proclaimed by Jesus.

Optlon for the Poor

The meaning of poverty is central to the theology of liberation and

"preferential optionn for the poor is now a commonly accepted strategy in the

Church. The Medellin Conference adopted "a clear and prophetic option 93

expressing preference for and solidarity with the poor." The very word

"preference" denies all exclusiveness and seeks rather to call attention to those

who are fust with whom we should be in solidarity. Gutierrez is careful to

maintain the delicate balance between the universality of God's love and God's

"predilection for those on the lowest rung of the ladder of histoy. To focus

exclusively on the one or the other is to mutilate the Christian message. 94

Therefore, evely attempt at such an exclusive emphasis must be rejected."

Puebk chose the formula "preferential option for the poor," the

motivation of which is the awareness that "the vast majority of our fellow

humans continue to live in a situation of poverty and even wretchedness that has 95

grown more acute."

Gutienez notes that the word "option" is often misunderstood. The

Christian "optionn towards the poor is not optional in the sense that one is free

to make it or not to make it. People belonging to the categoy of poor and

non-poor have to make thii option. Before Vat 11, Pope John XXIII spoke of the

"church of the poor." "In the face of the underdeveloped countries, the church %

is, and wants to be, the church of all and, especially, the church of the poor."

The early Church, as has been pointed out, had been noted for its

commitment to the poor. The fathers of the early Church were deeply

committed to thii ideal. Gregoy of Naziams says: "The main part of charity is

the love for the poor and mercy and compassion for our fellow brotheren . . . we

must . . . open the doors to all the poor and all those who are victims of 97

d i i e r s , whatever the cause may be . . ." John Chrysostom, patriarch of

Constantinople, went further when he said: "not giving part of one's possessions 98

to others is already a kind of robbery." In St. Augustine's (354-430) opinion,

the "failure to share [one's] surplus with the needy is like to theft."99

In modem times, the turning point in the Church's official policy comes

with Vat 11. Again, at Puebla, Pope John Paul I1 endorsed a preferential option

for the poor. CELW Documents speak of the "preferential option for the poor:"

"The option for the poor is preferential in the sense that it is more central or 100

enjoys a higher priority than other pastoral options . . . "

Vatican Instruction I1 substituted "preferential love" for "preferential

option" fearing that the concept of "option" would encourage partisan choice

resulting in conflict. But John Paul 11's encyclical "Solicitude Rei Socialis" is quite

clear on the understanding of the terms "optionn and "love" in this context:

Here I would like to i n d i t e one of them: the option or love of

preference for the poor. This is an option or special form of

primacy in the exerc'w of Christian Charity to which the whole

tradition of the church bears witness. It affects the life of each

ChiMan in as much as he or she seeks to imitate the life of Christ,

but it applies equally to our social responsibilities and hence to our

manner of living, and to logical decisions to be made concerning 101

the ownership and use of goods.

According to Michael Novak, a Catholic intellectual, "the option for the 102

poor" is the right option to make. Ultimately, the option for the poor is,

according to Gutierrez, the option for God and is based on the Bible where a im

prediction for the poor is evident. The rationale of this commitment

"is grounded," according to Gutierra, "in the final analysis, in the God of our

faith."lW The poor deserve preference not because of their poverty but because

God has a preference for them.

Poverty, in the final analysis, denotes a sub-human and scandalous

condition. Whii living with the poor Gutierrez discovered that:

a ) poverty is destructive and has to be destroyed "not something to

be accepted or condoned by occasional acts of charity or justified 105

on the basii of biblical passages." Further, he points out that

b) "poverty is not accidental but structural . . . The poor do not exist

by a decree of fate . . ." The poor are there because of the present

day system; they are oppressed, exploited, and the fruits of their

labour are snatched from them. Their humanity is degraded. Yet

another recognition is that

C) "the poor is a social class. The poor belong to those levels of

culture that are not respected by others, to races against whom 106

diirimination is practised . . . [a class that] is exploited." So,

the Church has to make a preferential option for the poor.

107 Thii option is based on and supported by the teachings of the Church and the

Bible: "To speak of a "preferential option for the poor" is not to speak of an

exclusive option for the poor," as though God loved only the poor and hated 108

everybody else, especially, the rich." According to Sobrino the four traditional 109

signs of the Church are equally well suited to the "church of the poor." "The

poor" are, so to speak, evangelising the Church challenging and summoning it to

conversion-a new social order envisaged by God.

The God of Justice

The Hebrew word for justice is 'mispat' of which the root word 'spt' is

multifarious in meaning. According to various contexts, it can mean "to rule, to

govern, to command (an army), to judge (in a forensic sense), to arbitrate (in a

diipute), to warn, to punish, to vindicate." "Consequently, the substantive mispat

yields a variety of meanings such as "justice", "judgement", "rights", 110

"vindication", "deliverance", "custom", "norm". Usually, mispat is translated

as justice. Justice is one of the main themes in the Bible. In the Bible, the

Israelites are described as a people who had an unparalleled thirst for justice.

?he Nomadic History of lsrael and the Theme of Justice

The nomadic lifestyle of Israel's ancestors seems to have instilled a 111

profound sense of justice in the people. AU members of the tribe considered

themselves equal since they claimed to be descendants of a common ancestor.

Political power and wealth took second place to moral values. The belief that all

were created in the "image of God" guaranteed the rights of everyone and

demanded the same responsibility from everyone. The nomadic life and the

desert demanded each other's help. What counted was generosity, hospitality

and a feeling of solidarity. The consciousness that they were living at the

"margin of societyn and being quite different from others naturally impelled them

to cling to each other and to help each other."' Israel emerged as a radically

egalitarian community, one that was averse to hierarchical systems of

domination. "Yahwism", the unique experience of Yahweh as the only living

God of Israel, is considered to be an isolate source and agent of change in the 113 114

hitory of Israel. Yahwism is central to Israel's unique culture. Thii is the

root of Israel's egalitarian society which also produced a feeling of solidarity

within the society. The experience of slavery and injustice caused a deep-seated 115

hatred towards tyrants and a thirst for freedom and justice.

Justice and the Bible

The biblical idea and meaning of justice (Hebrew: sedek, sedakah) can be

gathered from contexts dealing with judgement and righteousness. Thus, a

righteous measure (weight) is what it is supposed to be (Dt 25:15, Lev 19:36, Job

31:6, Ezk 4510). R 23:3, Dt. 3319, Ns 4 6 , 51:21, etc. contain the idea that

"righteous" or "just" is that which meets a standard. In common usage, "sedek

is applied to the legal process. Judges should Judge with justice (Lev 19:15,

M 1:16). "Malfeasance of legal process throws justice to the ground (Arnos 5:7) 116

and turns its fruit to poison (Arnos 6:12)." In the legal context, "just" means

free of a charge, or absence of any charge, or not guilty (1553:11, Gen 38:26, Is

43:9,26). Thus a saddik is a just man. A just man's conduct is in conformity

with the law (Prov 11: 4f; 19:12,28; Gen 18:17; Ezek 3:16-21, 18:524). A just 117

man is a friend of God (Prov 18:10, Gen 7:l; 18:23- 32; Ezek 18:5-26).

Justice and the Knowledge of God

In Wis 1:15, justice is wisdom put into practice. The knowledge of justice

should lead to the practice of justice. Justice should be concretly involved in

one's conduct towards God (religious deeds), towards oneself (distributive 118

aspect), and towards one's neighbour (juridical-legal aspect). Justice in the

Bible is a principle by which we judge all interpersonal relationships. People

know Yahweh because He delivered them from Egypt (Ex 6: 6.7). The ad of

deliverance, which is an act of justice, revealed Yahweh. Ezekiel uses the

following expression seventy-eight times: 'You shall know that I am Yahweh 119

when I do such and such a thing . . ." Again, according to Ezekiel (3427).

"they shall know that l am the Lord, when I break the bars of their yoke . . . "

For Hosea (6:6) justice is intervening on behalf of the poor; and according to the 120

Psalms (37:21) a just man has compassion and gives to the needy.

According to Jer 22: 13-16, to practice justice and right and to defend the

cause of the poor and the needy is to know God. In Hosea 4:12, to know God

is interhuman justice. The knowledge of God and injustice cannot go together.

For Amos, Hosea, Isaiah and Micah there is only one main theme: justice and

right. To know God is, virtually, to have compassion for the needy and to do

justice to them. Again, Hosea 2: 21,22; 4: 1,2; 6:6 associates knowledge of God 121

and compassion.

In is 11:9 and Hab 2:14, knowledge of God is synonymous with justice.

Hosea 14:4 defmes God as "the one in whom orphans find compassion." Amos

5:23-25 stresses the need for interhuman justice. in Is 1:10 God even rejeck

prayers and demands, instead, that justice should be done: "The question is not

whether someone is seeking God or not but whether one is seeking Him where 122

God himself said that he is." It is important to note that not only Hosea,

Jeremiah and Isaiah but nearly all other prophets, too, took it for granted that to

know God and to do justice to the needy are one and the same thing.

Such is the conclusion reached by Miranda in hi "Marx and the Bible"

which makes a close study of the matter. Miranda says that western innslations

of the Bible, especially since the sixteenth centuy, have robbed biblical texts of

their point and force. What the Hebrew texts connote as "justice", the

translations render as "almsgiving". According to Miranda, one cannot claim to

know God, to love or to worship Him except by doing justice. Justice is not just 123

one of the ways but the unique way to God's service and God-realisation.

Justice, God and Neighbour

A diinctive characteristic of the Biblical God is His relationship with the

"neighbourn. This God identifies Himself with the poor, the needy, and the

alien. He lends a ready ear to the supplications of these people (Dt 24:19;

Ex 22: 21-23). In the Bible, the transition is easily made from knowing and

loving God to establishing "just relationships among persons," and recognising 124

"the rights of the poor." In other words, one comes to the knowledge of God

as an active power and presence in hiiory ("he reigns for ever" Ps 146:7), by

the doing of justice. And we know this justice by having an encounter with God

and allowing our being to be touched by him. The "Jacob episode" in Genesis

(25:19, 3320) illustrates this idea wy clearly. The name Jacob, literally

meaning 'cheat', perfectly fits in with the character of that person. He had an

encounter with God in which he overcame hi pride and self-righteousness and

accepted the new name ''Israel" which means 'God perseveres' or 'shall prevail'.

After the encounter with God he was ready to enter into a new relationship with

hi brother Esau (Gen 32:23-32). The relations between the brothers that had

once been vitiated through greed and cunning was now re-established on the 125

secure foundation of justice because Jacob had an experience of God. The

incident bears out the fact that knowkdge of God leads to ads of justice towards

others.

The SabbaticalJubilee Tradition and Justice

In ancient Israel, social status was invariably linked to ownership of

property so that thaw who lost their property might be said to have lost 'caste',

ending up as wage labourers or slaves. The result was an ever-widening gap

between the rich and the poor. The poor, orphans, widows, etc. were the ones

most exposed to gross injustice even though a law had been devised to give

special protection to them (Ex 23:l-3, 6-8).

The time of the great prophets (Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and Daniel),

which sociologists call "Early Capitalism," indicates a shift in social relations.

During that period, land, instead of providing livelihood, became capital. A

reorientation took place from personal values to economic profit and naturally, 126

the interests of the entrepreneur got the upperhand. This gradually paved the

way for the establishment of an aristocracy in which the peasants were

dependent on and exploited by the aristomk. To prevent such a society

becoming a permanent order a law was formulated (Lev 25). The aim was to

ensure periodic restoration of the ideal order and to give everyone an

opportunity to reunite with hi family and original property. Accordingly, all

those who had been enslaved were released to unite with their families. Thii

law was aimed at the reconstruction of the entire society on the basis of 127

covenantal egalitarian principles.

Justice and Jesus

Jesus inaugurates Hi m'kion by invoking the messianic expectation of

Deutro-Isaiah. Thii text of Isaiah carries a direct reference to the Jubilee

proclamation which consists in the liberation of the "afflicted", "brokenhearted",

"liberty to the capitivesn (Is 61:l-3) and an year of favour for the poor. Here,

Jesus proclaims himself as the Messiah who would restore the rule of justice and

side with the poor and the oppressed against their oppressors. He meant to

bring about a transformation of the human m d u r e s in favour of justice and the

poor. It is a fad that the Gospels did present Jesus as the righteous judge. He

condemns the false justice of the pharisees and denounces the hypocritical

observances of a "human and haughty religion" (Mt 23).

Jesus's inaugural speech provides a definition of the ideal of justice

(Mt 5: 17-48, 6:l-18). He rejects even those who perform miracles in Hi name,

when they are guilty of injustice (Mt 7:23). In 1 Cor 11:20-22, in the context of

Lord's supper, Paul says: "it is not the Lord's supper that you eat [while] . . . one

is hungry." That means the hungry people before them rob God's supper of its

meaning or render fruitless the supreme a d of eating God's supper.

In 1 Jn 478 , one who loves one's neighbour is, thereby, said to know

God and, conversely, one who knows God, must of necessity, love one's

neighbour as well. God is knowable only through knowledge and love of the

neighbour, so that, for John, this love is of the very essence of justice. God is for

ever hidden from the one who tries to get close to Him while keeping his 12.8

distance from the neighbour.

Social Justice

129 In the various teachings of the Church in recent times there is evidence

of a renewed awareness of the need for justice in personal and social relations.

The Church sees the practice of justice to be in conformity with the Gospel 130

message. Justice is a form of love. Promotion of justice ". . . supposes that we

are launching something historically new; it supposes that we have the humility

to be learners. It supposes, too, that we are willing to run the present or 132

foreseeable risk that the promotion of justice brings with i t . . ."

Liberation theology claims to find its anchorage in the Bible and, drawing

attention to the central scriptural themes, inspires a vivid sense of biblical faith as 132

"praxis in the service of justice." But, for its supporters and opponents alike,

there seem to be good grounds for criticising the way it handles its biblical

credentials. There are some who would challenge its "arbitrary" and overly

"political" use of biblical texts. Alfredo Fierro critic'ws Liberation theology for its

"selective" use of certain Biblical themes such as exodus, prophetic criticisms of 133

society, Jesus' encounter with the authorities, etc. In such cases, in hiis

opinion, there is no attempt made to go into the details of the biblico-social

structures and biblical hiioy; and, hence, there is little biblical exegesis. Fierro's

observation is fair enough; yet, one must remember, that the new theology is

attempting to correct, as they put it, the misreadings of the dominant theologies

of the past.

The Bible has been analysed to lay bare the "original historical

struggles"134 of the biblical ancestors and the human and religious ideas upon

which they based their lives. Biblical struggles also yield certain valuable lessons

for those involved in current social struggles. The Bible contains narratives of a

variety of hiiorico-social conflicts and the politics involved in them makes them

particularly relevant today. The Bible does not present any chasm between 135

"religion and the rest of life." In it, the religious life is inseparable from the

politics and the socio-economic life of the people. There is no division between

"thought" and "practice", though the conhry of this has been propagated by

western idealism. The Bible, as we have it today, has evolved from intense

socio-politicaleconomic struggles of the bygone ages; in other words, biblical

136 137 literature itself is "the produd of struggle" and "it has liberative potential.

Liberation theologians are trying to "interpret life" with the help of the Bible or,

conversely, they might be said to mix life in with the Bible.

Thii new awareness has led to the discovery of a new dimension of

scriptural meaning and the presence in it of the liberating God. It means a

judgement on the social order, a new hope for the future, a new experience of

God and understanding of Christian faith. In this context, the four biblical

themes - the kingdom of God, God as liberator with exodus as a prototype of liberation, the notion of poverty and God's command to "do" "justice" - most

often recur in the writings of the liberation theologians.

The kingdom of God gives new hope to the people. Jesus preached not

himself but the kingdom of God; it dominated his teachings and gave 138

"meaningfulness to all hi activity." The kingdom of God comes as a "grace"

and as the result of God's initiative. This recognition, by itself, would make

nonsense of the charge that liberation theology identifies the kingdom of God 139

with human activity. It is meant to be expressed in deeds - a transformation

of the wretched, oppressive and hostile situations. Today, people find

themselves in an oppressive situation and 'the kingdom of God' holds out the

hope of liberation from everything that dehumanises them. The idea of the

kingdom of God gives people the strength to fight against the oppressive

situations because from faith they know that God the liberator is on their side.

God and Hi revelation in hitory is a much discussed topic in recent

theological scholarship. God reveals himself through and in h i i r y . The very

expression "the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob" indicates that God revealed

himself gradually to successive generations. God initiates h i r y by creation.

With exodus, He recreates history, liberates lsrael from the land of bondage and

leads them to the promised land. God liberates and saves, not after death but

here and now, in the life on earth. God acted to save people from hunger and

misery. The exodus provides liberation theology with a striking paradigm for the

liberating power of God. It moulded a new consciousness and gave a new hope 140

to the oppressed Israelites. The exodus event shows that God's liberative

activity has a political charader in history, embracing the whole life of a 141

people under subjection. Through exodus, God, liberated lsrael physically

from the land of bondage; similarly, liberation theologians hope and work for a

new exodus-a new liberation from oppressive systems.

Liberation theologians consider poverty a "scandalous situationn. God, in

the Bible, identifies himself with the poor and the oppressed. Love of God and

love of the neighbour cannot be separated one from the other. God, according

to the Bible, "puts on" our humanity so that every individual should be

considered as the "temple of God." The description of the last judgement

(Mt 25) summarises vividly this gospel ideal. It indicates that to "know God" and

"do justicen is one and the Only by doing justice can one claim to

know God. Yahweh, the God of Israel, reveals Himself as the God who

descends into history to do justice (Is 42:5.7).

Finally, it must be remembered that biblical passages do often lend

themselws to different interpretations. The very biblical themes that liberation

theologians most often use may themselves be cited to show that liberation does

not come about through struggle and oppression. The exodus, for example, is

not a case of overthrowing oppressors. The oppressed people, the Jews, instead

of overthrowing the oppressed regime, fled Egypt under the leadership of Moses

to establish a new order elsewhere. Again. no prophets call for a concerted

political action to overthrow the rich and the rulers; instead, they call for the

conversion of the powerful and the wealthy. Bearing this in mind, liberation

theologians are discussing the political dimensions and political implications of

the Bible. They go beyond the polltical questions and consider politics as only 143

one dimension of faith. The Bible, so they argue, defends the poor,

denounces injustice and calk for the creation of a "new society".

Notes

1 Arthur F. McGovem, "The Bible in Latin American Liberation

Theology," The Bibk and Liberation, eds. Norman K Gottwald and Richard A.

Horsley (New York: ORBIS, 1993) 7485.

2 Rino F~icheUa and Rene Latourelk (ed.), A h'ctionary of Fundamental

Theobgy (Bangalore: St. Pauls, 1994) 588.

Sinclair B. Fergusson and David F. Wright (eds.), The Mw Dic6'onaty

of Theobgy, rpt. (Illinois: lntenmristy Press, 1991) 367.

Mark and Luke use the term ihe "Kingdom of Godn while Matthew,

whose Jewish respect for the name of God caused him to avoid "Godn and use,

instead, "heavenn meaning exactly the same thing as Mark and Luke. Hans

Kiing prefers "reignn to "kingdomn. He uses reign of God for Kingdom of God.

For further explanation see, Hans Kiing, 73e Church 71.

Gustaf Dalrnan (1855-1941) using his profound knowledge of

Aramaic showed that "kingdom of Godn and "kingdom of heavenn are

synonymous. The term "malkuth" translated as "kingdom" according to

Dalman, refers to sovereignty and not tenitoy. R. J. Coggins, J. L Houlden

(eds.), A Dictionaty of Biblicallnte~pretation 374.

R. J. Coggins and J. L Houlden, A Dicb'onay o f Biblical

Intepretation 374. 6 B. Scott, Jesus: Symbol Mker for the Hngdom (Philadelphia:

Westminster, 1981) 11.

Rino Fwhella and Rene Latourelle (eds.), A Didonay of Fudamental

Theobgy 588.

' G. Lohfmk, J e m and Communify (London: Macmikn, 1983) 103.

Rudolf Schnackenburg, God's Rule and Kingdom (New York: Herder

K G., 1963) 85.

lo Hans Kiing, The Church 77.

l1 /bid 79.

l2 Ibjd 81.

13 R. J. Coggins and J. L. Houlden (eds.), A Dictionary of Biblical

Interpretation 374-75.

l4 ~lbert Schweilzer, The Quest of Historical Jesus: A CriticaIStudy of its

R ~ E S from Reirnarus to Wrede (London: Adam and Charles, 1973) 10.

l5 ~harles H. Dodd, The Apostolic Reaching and Its Developments (New

York: Anchor Doubleday, 1936).

l6 Hans Kiing gives the following meanings:

a) It is eschatolog'~cal in that it is the fully realised, final and absolute

reign of God at the end of time, which, as an event, is now "at

hand."

b) The reign of God "appears as a powerful sovereign a d of God

himself."

c) The reign of God "is rather a purely religious kingdom."

d) The reign of God "is rather a saving event for sinners."

e) The reign of God "demands rather a radical decision for God."

Hans Kiing, 77?e Church 69-83. See a h , Oscar Cullmann, Chnd and

7irne: The Rimitive Gbnception of Time and History (London: SCM Press,

1957); Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics (New York: Torch Books, 1%2). 17 Rino Fwchella and Rene Latourelle (eds.), Dictionary of Fundamend

Theokqy 594.

l8 Joseph W. Wans (ed.), On the Philosophy of History of Jacques

Marifah (bndon: Geoffrey Bks, 1959).

19 Karan Armstrong. A History o f God (London: A Mandarin Paperback.

1994) 337. Karan explains how the process of technicalisation produced an

entirely different society on a new idea of humanity, 337-396.

20 Gustavo Gutierrez, A T h e o k of Libemtion 127.

21 Gustavo Gutierrez, The Power of the Poor in Histoy 62.

* Hans Kiing, Does God &sf? See, for Hegel's conception of world h i i r y as the "realization of the kingdom of God on earth," 154-156.

" Gustavo Gutierrez, The Power o f the Poor in History 64. 24 Gustavo Gutierrez, We Drink From Our Own Welk 104.

25 Gustavo Gutierrez, The Power of the Poor in History 122.

26 Gustavo Gutierrez, "Finding Our Way to Talk About God," Inuption of

the Third WorM, eds. Fabella and S. Torres (New York: ORBIS, 1983) 232.

27 "Exodusn literally means "way out". The term, in English Bibles, is

ultimately derived from the Greek 'exodus'-departure (Ex 9:1), the name given

to the book in the septuagint. In the Hebrew Bible, the book is known from its

first two words W2 6Ueh Semot-these are the names, following the ancient

custom of naming a text. See lsidor Singer (ed.), The Jewish Encyclopedia,

Vol. V. (New York: Funk and Wagnak, 1916) 293. Also, William La Sor

Sanford, Old TeshmentSurwey (Michigan: W . B. Eerdmans, 1985) 2%. 28 lsidor Singer (ed.), The Jewish ficyclopaedia, Vol. V 2%.

29 For further explanation on promised land, its meaning and theology,

etc. Encyclopedia Judica, Vol. VI (Jerusalem: Keter Publishing House Ltd.,

1971) 1042.

30 For a detailed study, see Stephen Bigger (ed.), Creating the OM

Testament (Oxford: Basil Bhckwell, 1989).

31 William La Sor Sanford, OM Testament Survey 131. 32 Topel John L, The Way to Peace, Liberation Through the Bible (New

York: ORBIS, 1979) 9.

33 "1 will be present on the one who will be presentn-God reveals "1, the

ever present, will be with you in your battles, always," or "1 will be with you as

your Deliverer, your ever-ready Helper." See, John M. Oesteriaher, The

Unfinished Diahgue (New York: Seabuny, 1986) 37.

For fu" deWtls, s ee Topel John L The Way to perm-

Through h e Bibk (New York: ORBIS, 1979) 2-3. :. .

35 /bid 10. ' _ .~ \ '4 . +.

36 Gustavo Gutierrez, A Theology of Liberation 88. , ... ! ,

37 Ibid 88. '. . .~.. .. 38 Robert McAfee Brown, Theology in a New I@yc Responding to

Liberation memes (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1978) 88.

39 Jon D. Levenson, "Euodus and Liberation." Horizons in Biblical

T h e o b (13.2, 1991) 136.

40 George V. Pixley, On Exodus: A Liberation Perspective (New York:

ORBIS, 1987) xviii-xx.

41 Jon D. Levenson, Evodus and Liberation: Horizons in Bibhcal

T h e o b ( 1 3 , 2 , 1991) 136. 42 Baruch Halpesn, "The Emergence of Israel in Canaan," SBLBS (29,

1983) 84.

43 John Hanard Yoder, "Producing the Meaning of Liberation,"

Sopurners (5, 7 , 1976) 26-29.

Jon D. Levensbn, ''Exodus and Liberation," Horizons in Biblical

Theo&(13,2, 1991) 137.

45 hid 161.

46 The chosenness of Israel is because of the identity of Israel as a

biological family. Michael Wysechogrod, The Body of Faith (New York:

Seabuny, 1983) 36.

47 Gustavo Gutierrez, The Truth Shall Make You Free 130.

hid 132.

49 See, W. Eichrodt, Theolbgy of the Old Testament (Philadephia:

Westminster Press, 1961) 36. 50 Lyle Eslinger, "Freedom or Knowledge, Perspective and Purpose in the

Exodus Narrative," Journal for the Study of OM Testament (52, 1991) 43.

/bid 44.

52 liunga, Bakole W. A., Paths offiberation, trans. Matthew J . O'Connell

(New York: ORBIS, 1984) 41. 53 Gerhard Von Rad, Old Testament Theology, trans. D. M . G. Glatker

(New York: Harper and Row) 176.

Gordis Robert, A Faith for Modems (New York: Block Publishing Co.,

1961) 34.

55 It was king's last speech.

56 David J. Garrow, Bearing the Cross (New York: William Marrow,

1986) 621.

57 Gustavo Gutierrez, The Truth Shall Make You F E ~ 29. 58 The Anchor Bibk Dictionav, Vol. V, 402.

a) It occurs 61 times in the OT and means economically or legally

di iessed, destitute beggar.

b) Dal occurs 48 times and means poor, weak, inferior, lacking.

C) Dalla occurs 5 times and means a social ckss, representing the

lowest orders of the society.

d) Mahsor occurs 13 times and means lack of, or need for, material

goods.

e) Nisken appears only 4 times, used in comparative statements

meaning wisdom aimed poverty.

f ) Miskenut appears only once in Dt 8:9 meaning scarcity of material

goods.

g) Ani occurs 80 times in the OT. Thii most common term means

economically poor, oppressed, exploited, suffering.

h) Anawim occurs 24 times and means poor, pious, humble.

i) Ras occurs 22 times. It refers to someone who is politically and

economically inferior and someone who is lazy.

59 For an ethyrnologcal analysis, see, The Anchor Bible Didiondry,

Vol. V, 402-413.

60 For example in prophets 'dal' is an object of exploitation. lbid 403.

For further reading, T. Donald, "The Semantic Field of Rich and Poor in the

Wisdom Literature of Hebrew and Accadian," Or Ant (2, 1%4) 27-41.

J. Gibson, Canannite Mjn!hs and Legends (Edinburgh: Edinburgh

University Press, 1977).

J. Kennedy, Sfudies in Hebrew Synonyms (London: Macmillan, 1898).

J. D. Pieins, "Poverty in the Social Work1 of the Wise," JSOT ( 37,

1987) 61-78.

61 John, L Mekenzic, Dicfionaly of the Bible (Bangalore: Asian Trading

Corporation, 1983) 683.

62 Jose Cardenans Pallares, A Poor f i n Called Jesus: Reflections on the

GospelofMrk, trans. R. Barr (New York: ORBIS, 1986) 2.

The Greek word ptochas occurs 34 times in the NT and means poor,

oppressed and literally "beggar. "

64 Penes, the common word for poor used only once in the NT,

2 Cor 8:9.

The Anchor Bibk Dictionary, Vol. V , 414-421.

&~cha th f f and W. Stegemann (eds.), God of the Lowly: Seio-H'irical

Interpretation of the Bible (New York: ORBIS, 1984) 68.

67 B. J. Malina, "Interpreting the Bible with Anthropology: The Case of

the Poor and the Rich," Journalof ReLgon and Culture (21, 1986) 149.

Malina has argued from hi anthropological perspective that in

Biblical cultures, religion, politics and economics have a close relationship with

kinship institutions. k a result even "wealthyn, "sonless" widows would be

referred to as "poor widows" (LK 214-5) which meant the inability to take an

active part in social life, lack of self-respect, etc.

Gustavo Gutierrez, A Theology of Liberation 162-64.

69 lbid 163.

70 Cited by Gustavo Gutierrez, We Drink From Our Chvn Web 156.

71 Gustavo Gutierrez, We Drink from Our Own WeUs 124.

72 Peter C. Phan, Social Thought (Wilmington: Glazier Michael,

1984) 119.

73 Gustavo Gutierrez, We Drink from Our Own Web 125. 74 Gustavo Gutierrez, A T h e o h of Liberation 163.

75 For further explanation, see, lbid 165-168.

76 bid xxiii.

77 lbid 163.

78 R~eblaandBeyond, No. 1160-1161.

79 Gustavo Gutierrez, A Theology o f Liberation 164. 80 Mt. 5:3.

Gustavo Gutierrez, A Theology of Liberation 171.

82 Ibid 164.

Gustavo Gutierrez, The Power of the Poor in Hisow 1%.

84 Gustavo Gutierrez, A Theo&y o f Liberation 169.

85 /bid 165.

/bid 169.

87 /bid. 169.

98 Puebk documents (Nos. 28-32 speak of poverty as a scandal). 89 Gustavo Gutierrez, A Theology o f Liberation 172.

90 lbid 172.

91 Ibid 172.

/bid 173.

93 Puebla and Beyond, No. 1134.

94 Gustavo Gutierez, A Theology of Liberation xxvi. 95 Puebla and Beyond, No. 1135.

% Address of the Pope on September 11, 1962. Cited by Gustavo

Gutierrez, A T h e o b of Liberation xxvi.

97 Cited by Peter C. Phan, Socia/ Thought 122.

98 Cited by lbid 138.

99 Cited by /bid 226.

1 0 0 Dennis P. Mccann, "The Preferential Option for the Poor," The

hferential Option for the Poor, ed. Richard John Neuhans (Michigan:

Eerdmans, 1988) 36. 101 Pope John Paul 11, Sollcitudo Re; Socialis No. 42.

'" Richard John Neuhans (ed.), The Referential Option for the Poor 35. '" lbid 53. 1 W Gustavo Gutierrez, A T h e o k of Li&mtion xxvii.

105 Robert McAfee Brown, Gusfaw Gutierrez: An lnboduction to

Li&ration T h e o b 32.

'06 Ibid 32.

lo' The Roman Catholic Bishops of USA in their pastoral letter

"Economic Justice for AU" in 1984, calls for a preferential option for the poor

and gives three reasons for thii option (a) The example set by Jesus, He

identified himself with the poor, (b) The teaching of Christ: He taught human

beings to serve the poor, (c) The close connection between the Gospel and the

poor that demands a connection between the church and the poor. Cf. /bid 59.

'08 /bid 60. 1 0 9 The Council of Constantnople (381) described the signs of the true

church as "one, holy, catholic and apostolic church." Jon Sobrino, The Tme

Church and the Poor (London: SCM Press, 1985) 99.

1 1 0 See, for further explanation, The Anchor Bible Dicr7onary. 111 For a detailed study on the tribes of Israel, see Norman K Gotwakl,

The Tribes of Yahweh: A S o c i o l q of the Religion of Liberated Ismel,

1250-1050 BCE(New York: ORBIS, 1979).

Norman K Gohvald, "Theological Issues in the Tribes of Yahweh,"

eds. Normank Gothwald and Richard A. Honley, The Bibk and Liberation

(New York: ORBIS) 229. 113 Norman K. Gathuald, "Domain Assumptions and Societal Models in

the Study of Pre-rnonarchie Israel," VT (28, 1974) 93. 114 For further explanation, see Normank Gothvakl, The Tribes of

Yahweh A Sociobgy of the Religin of Liberated Israel 1250-1050 BCE

210-33+.

Epzztaii Leom, Social Justice in the Ancient Near East and the People

of the Bibk (London: Seon Press, 1986) 86-104.

John, L Mckenzie, Dictionary o f the Bible 739.

117 For further explanation see, Xavier, Leon Dufour, Dictionary of

Biblical Theobgy, trans. P. Joseph Cahill, S. J. (Bangalore: Asian Trading

Corporation, 1973) 283-286. 118 See Angelo Di Berardino, Encyclopedia of the Early Church, trans.

Adrian Walford, Vol. I (Cambridge: James Clarke and Co., 1992) 461.

119 [bid 461.

l2'See Jose P. Miranda, Mam and the Bible: A CCrque of the Philosophy

of Oppmsion, tram. John Eagleson (New York: ORBIS, 1974).

121 Ibid 46.

'22 bid 57.

la lbid 14-15.

124 Gustavo Gutierrez, A Theokgy of Liberation 110. 125 See, Horacio Simian Yofre, "'Justice', Biblical Themes," Reitgous

Education, ed. J. S. Marino (Alabama: Birminham, 1983) 96-233.

126 J. L Mays, "Justice, Perspectives from the Prophetic Tradition,"

Interpretation (37, 1983) 5-1 7.

127 P. HoUenbach, "Liberating Jesus for Social Involvement," Biblical

T h e o b &IUetin (15, 1985) 51-57. 128 Jose P. Mranda, Marx and the Bible: A Critique of the Philosophy of

Qupression 65.

129 Pope John XXIII, "Mater et Magistran (1961). See, John Desrochers,

7he SocMl Teaching of the Church (1982) 116-17. 130 Paul VI, &fogesima Adveniens (l971), lbid 203-04. 131 Jon Sobrino, 73e h e Church and Poor 47-53.

13' Rid 72.

133 Norman K GothwaM, "The Exodus as Event and Process: A Test

Case in the Biblical Grounding of Liberation Theology," The Future of

fiberation T h e o b , eds. Mare H. Ellis and Otto Maduro (New York: ORBIS,

1989) 250-260.

134 See for details, Alfredo Fierro, The Militant Gospelc A Critcal

Inb-oduction to Political Theobes (New York: ORBIS, 1977) 12981.

135 Norman K Gottwald, Richard A. Horsley (eds.), The Bible and

Liberation (New York: ORBIS, 1993) xiii.

136 /bid xiv.

137 Iturneleny J. Mosala, "Biblical Hermeneutics and Black Theology in

South Africa: The Use of the Bible," Bible and Liberation 51-73. 138 Norman K. Gothwald, Richard A. Horsley (eds.), The Bibk and

fiberation (New York: ORBIS, 1993) xvi. 139 Jon Sobrino, Christobgy at the Crossroads: A Latin American

Pezspective (London: SCM Press, 1978) 41.

'40 Leonardo Boff, "Salvation in Jesus Christ and the Process of

Liberation," Concilum (96) 81-88. 141 Rubem Alves, A T h e o k of Human Hope Corpus Books

(Washington DC: Corpus Books, 1%9) 89. 142 Jose Miguez Bonino, Doing 771eok in a Rewlutionay Situation

(Philadelphia: Fortress, 1975) 134-35.

'" Gustavo Gutierrez, "Liberation Praxis and Christian Faith," Frontiers of Theokqy in Latin America 128.