THIRTEENTH SUNDAY AFTER PENTECOST

23 AUGUST 2026

COLLECT OF THE DAY

God of our holy and righteous ancestors:
accept us as a living sacrifice
and transform us by your Spirit,
that, being members of one body,
we will offer our gifts in Christ’s service;
who lives and reigns with you and the
Holy Spirit, one God, now and for ever.
Amen.

Exodus 1:8– 2: 10

CLIMATE CHANGE, MIGRATION AND EXPLOITATION

Exodus 1: 8- 10

Over the last few months South Africa has seen a rise in Xenophobic violence. Marches have taken place and foreign nationals violently thrown out of their places of work and homes. “Mabahambe” they shout “Let the foreigners leave” Some of the same themes are reflected in our Old Testament lesson.

“Then a new king arose over Egypt, who did not know Joseph.” (v. 8)

The phrase “did not know Joseph” is more than a statement about historical ignorance. Joseph had been instrumental in saving Egypt during famine and had held a position of great authority. The new Pharaoh represents a deliberate political break with the past. The contribution of the migrant community is forgotten, and the Israelites are now viewed not as neighbours or fellow inhabitants but as a potential threat.

In South Africa during the apartheid years many South Africans fleeing from oppression were hosted by neighbouring countries. We have forgotten the past and the way in which African solidarity supported South Africa. Communities can quickly forget the contributions of migrants and minorities when
political circumstances change. People who were once welcomed for their labour can become scapegoats when fear and insecurity rise.

“Look, the Israelite people are more numerous and more powerful than we.” (v. 9)

Pharaoh’s language is the language of fear and threat. He does not describe the Israelites as individuals but as a dangerous collective. Their numerical growth is interpreted as a political and security problem. In South Africa foreigners are lumped together no matter which African country they come from, and any crime committed by one person is blamed on the whole foreign migrant community, even if they have nothing in common with each other.

There is also an irony here. The Israelites’ flourishing is a fulfilment of God’s promise to Abraham that his descendants would become numerous. What Pharaoh sees as a problem is, from the biblical perspective, life and blessing flourishing. The reality is that often migrants come with great entrepreneurial passion and tough survival skills.

“Come, let us deal shrewdly with them, or they will increase…” (v. 10)

Pharaoh constructs a political strategy designed based on fear to control the population. Oppression is therefore not presented as accidental; it is deliberately organised by those in power. In South Africa it is the case that we see social media used to distort facts and amplify negative messages very effectively. Our attention is being diverted away from corruption and poor service delivery and the blame for all social ills being placed with foreigners.

Pharaoh’s concern is also revealing: he fears that the Israelites might join Egypt’s enemies and leave the country. Migration is thus portrayed simultaneously as a security threat and as something Pharaoh wants to control.

These verses can be read alongside contemporary experiences of climate migration and xenophobia. When droughts, floods, food insecurity and other environmental pressures force people to move, migrants can easily be portrayed as the problem rather than recognising the wider systems that have produced vulnerability. The increase of migrants to South Africa from Malawi, Zimbabwe and Mozambique follows Cyclone Freddy (2023 and the worst drought in 100 years in 2024).

Xenophobia follows a pattern :fear → othering → scapegoating → political control → oppression.

The biblical narrative challenges this logic. The Israelites are not disposable people whose value depends upon their usefulness to the Egyptian economy. They are people whose lives and flourishing matter to God.

When people are displaced by crisis, do we see them as a threat to be controlled, or as neighbours whose dignity and flourishing are part of God’s purposes? 

EXTRACTION: EXPLOITATION OF PEOPLE AND CREATION

Exodus 1:11–2:10

Empire, extraction and forced labour

Pharaoh’s response to the growing Israelite population is to put them to work building Pithom and Rameses. The language of “forced labour” and making their lives “bitter with hard service” describes an economic system in which human beings are treated primarily as resources for imperial production.

The environmental parallel is striking. Imperial systems often exploit both people and land for the purposes of accumulation. The Israelites’ bodies become instruments of Pharaoh’s building programme, just as forests, minerals, rivers and agricultural land can become merely “resources” for economic development. Exploitative labour practices underpin our modern capitalist values where profit is more important than people.

The phrase “store cities” is significant. Pharaoh is accumulating wealth and supplies while the workers themselves experience deprivation. The passage therefore raises questions about development that benefits the powerful while imposing its social and ecological costs on the poor.

Exodus 1:15–21 — The midwives resist a culture of death
“The midwives feared God; they did not do as the king of Egypt commanded them.”

Pharaoh’s next strategy is directed specifically at reproduction. He commands the Hebrew midwives, Shiphrah and Puah, to kill male Hebrew babies.

Their response is one of the earliest examples in Scripture of civil disobedience against an unjust authority:
The midwives become protectors of life against a system organised around death.

Justice begins with recognising that life is valuable beyond its economic usefulness. Pharaoh values people according to what they can produce for his empire; the midwives recognise the intrinsic value of vulnerable human life.

When the first strategy fails, Pharaoh commands that every Hebrew boy is to be thrown into the Nile. The Nile, which should be a source of life, becomes an instrument of death. The river that sustains Egypt’s agriculture and civilisation is turned into a weapon against the vulnerable.

The Nile itself becomes part of the story of liberation. Pharaoh believes he controls the river, but the river ultimately becomes the means through which Moses is preserved.

Exodus 2:1–4 — A mother entrusts life to the river
Moses’ mother places him in a papyrus basket and puts him among the reeds on the bank of the Nile. There is beautiful imagery here. The mother does not abandon her child to nature; she places him within the protective ecosystem of the riverbank.
The natural world is therefore not merely a backdrop to the story. The river, reeds and water participate in the drama of salvation.
“When she opened it, she saw the child. He was crying, and she took pity on him.”

Pharaoh’s daughter comes down to the river, sees the basket and discovers the child.

She recognises vulnerability and responds with compassion.
Environmental justice similarly requires us to look beyond statistics and categories. “Climate migrants”, “flood victims”, “poor communities” and “environmental refugees” can become abstract categories. Justice begins when we see the person and hear the cry.

WOMEN AS AGENTS OF RESISTANCE

Exodus 2:7–9 — Women create a network of resistance

The passage brings together several women: Moses’ mother, his sister, the Hebrew midwives and Pharaoh’s daughter. They occupy very different social positions, yet their actions intersect to preserve life.

Ecological transformation rarely comes from one heroic individual. It emerges through networks of people who protect life, often from positions that the dominant system considers insignificant. The women demonstrate courage; practical wisdom; solidarity; protection of vulnerable life; resistance to unjust power; creative use of available resources.

Moses is eventually brought into Pharaoh’s household. The child whom Pharaoh sought to destroy is raised within the very household of the ruler responsible for the oppression. This is one of the great ironies of Exodus. Oppressive systems can contain contradictions that eventually undermine them. The structures that seek to control life cannot ultimately control the future.

The passage ultimately proclaims that God’s purposes for life cannot be defeated by systems of exploitation and death. The liberation story begins not with Pharaoh’s army but with ordinary people—especially women—who choose to protect life.