The Challenge Of Compassion
Preaching
The Parables Of Jesus
Applications For Contemporary Life
Just then a lawyer stood up to test Jesus. "Teacher," he said, "what must I do to inherit eternal life?" He said to him, "What is written in the law? What do you read there?" He answered, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and with all your mind; and your neighbor as yourself." And he said to him, "You have given the right answer; do this, and you will live."
But wanting to justify himself, he asked Jesus, "And who is my neighbor?" Jesus replied, "A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell into the hands of robbers, who stripped him, beat him, and went away, leaving him half dead. Now by chance a priest was going down that road; and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side. So likewise a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. But a Samaritan while traveling came near him; and when he saw him, he was moved with pity. He went to him, and bandaged his wounds, having poured oil and wine on them. Then he put him on his own animal, brought him to an inn, and took care of him. The next day he took out two denarii, gave them to the innkeeper, and said, 'Take care of him; and when I come back, I will repay you whatever more you spend.' Which of these three, do you think, was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?" He said, "The one who showed him mercy." Jesus said to him, "Go and do likewise."
Theme
In his First Letter to the Corinthians (13:13), Saint Paul writes, "And now faith, hope, and love abide, these three; and the greatest of these is love." Love is a difficult concept that has given hope and frustration to humans throughout history. In song we have heard love called "a many splendored thing" and we believe it to be true. The Greeks used three different words, eros, phileo, and agapeo, to capture the multiple ideas of the term of love. While love can be understood in many ways, it seems that Jesus, when describing what is necessary for eternal life, suggests that love of God and neighbor cannot be surpassed. Love of God is expressed in prayer, service, and obedience to God's will. Love of neighbor is even more multi-faceted, consisting of reconciliation, service and ministry, the tough love of challenge and compassion. The parable of the Good Samaritan challenges us to be compassionate and to demonstrate such love indiscriminately.
Spiritual Food For The Journey
In the nineteenth century the garden paradise of Molokai, one of the Hawaiian Islands chain, was a place of suffering, pain, and isolation. Ship captains were hired to transport those afflicted with the dreaded disease of leprosy to this lonely and rocky place. Many captains refused to dock to unload their passengers, but rather, got as close to shore as they dared with shoal water present and threw the lepers into the sea. Those that were strong enough swam to shore; the others drowned. The isolation of the leper was universal and total until the twentieth century. People feared what they did not understand or comprehend.
It is unfortunate but true that contemporary society, with all its advances in science, technology, medicine, and knowledge, has become apparently more intolerant of people. Although leprosy has been controlled as a life-threatening illness, the numbers of "lepers" in today's world has actually increased. The names of these outcast men and women are familiar to all of us -- minority peoples, the infirmed and aged, the poor and social rejects, the chronically ill, especially those with AIDS, and those who hold different religious and political ideas than ourselves. When we encounter today's "lepers" we are challenged in the same way that the priest, Levite, and Samaritan were challenged on the road to Jericho. We can pass by and show no concern or we can get involved, make the effort, and aid those in distress. The choice will always be ours!
Our struggle to act with justice toward the "lepers" of contemporary life is compounded by the tendency to stereotype people and associate only with those who meet the criteria that we have set. We are often willing and even eager to assist those who may need our assistance, but we often have strings attached to our actions; we want something in return. We take the idea that there is no such thing as a free lunch and thus demand some compensation for what we do. We will act and assist when the person is intelligent, rich, influential, or famous enough to attract our efforts. If the individual in need cannot produce for us, then we simply pass the person by. We discriminate in our hearts and manifest that feeling in our actions.
Jesus calls us to imitate the actions of the Good Samaritan, who was despised by all Hebrew society and in the Jewish mind was the least likely to act and demonstrate compassion. Yet, it is the outcast who acts rightly when others, concerned possibly more for their own needs than right action, failed in their responsibility to be a neighbor. Let us consider our actions, act rightly, and refuse to stereotype others. Let us be compassionate toward all in keeping with Jesus' message of love and peace.
Application Of The Parable To Contemporary Life
Sermon Openings
1. Once upon a time there was a great teacher, a guru, who had many followers. People came from far and wide to listen, learn, and be enlightened by this man. There were one-on-one classes and apprenticeships for those who came to learn. When the students had finished with their lessons, the guru sent them into the world to share their knowledge with others as masters in their own right. Just before each student left, the guru would give each a special gift -- the teacher taught each student the mantra of life and death. Phrase by phrase the guru taught them until they had memorized it by heart. Then he gave them a warning that as long as they said this mantra faithfully, they would be blessed. Its power would give them insight, clarity of thought, and allow them to discern the truth when surrounded by lies. Its power as well would keep them from despair and give them hope in the midst of misery and hopelessness. Their faith would be strengthened and one day their souls would find everlasting life. The disciples were grateful and humbled by this great gift. They were warned, however, that they were never to teach the mantra to anyone; it was for them alone, the enlightened of the world.
For many years students finished their studies with the guru, were given the mantra, and then went into the world to share their wisdom and to pray the mantra in secret. One day a young man, who had been taught the mantra and was humbled by the gift, came to the master guru ready to enter the world. However, when the teacher warned him not to share the mantra with anyone, he asked why. The master responded, "If you share this mantra with others, then what it was to do for you will be handed over to them, and you will live in darkness, even when the light is all around you. You will know only despair and misery of body and soul for the rest of your life. You will stumble over the truth and be endlessly confused. But worst of all, you will lose your faith and your soul. You will be damned forever."
The disciple turned white and was visibly shaken by the master's words. Nevertheless, he decided that he must do what he must do. He went to the nearest city and gathered multitudes around him. He taught them all many things and the people were enthralled with his stories and wisdom. Then he taught them the mantra line by line, just as the master had taught him. The people left muttering the mantra to themselves.
A number of the master's disciples were in the crowd and they were horrified at the man's actions. He had disobeyed the master and betrayed his community by giving away the wisdom of the mantra to unenlightened people. These people immediately went back to the master and told him what had happened. They asked the guru, "Are you going to punish the student for what he has done?" The master looked at them sadly and said, "I do not have to for he will be punished terribly. He knew what his fate would be if he shared the mantra of life with those who were unenlightened. For him it has become the mantra of death. He will live in darkness and despair, without hope or knowledge of the truth. He will live isolated and alone, without comfort of faith and will even lose his soul. How could I punish him further?" And with these words the old master gathered his few belongings, looked at his students sadly, and said, "I am going to that man who gave away my gift of the mantra of life and death." "Why?" they said in unison. "Because," he said, "out of all my students he alone learned wisdom and compassion. Now that man is my master." And he left them to follow the man who walked now in darkness and despair, the one who had chosen compassion over wisdom and knowledge.1
The student had the strength of his convictions and chose to enlighten others, to provide them with what they needed. Similarly the Good Samaritan disregarded convention and acted with compassion to the traveler on the road. The Samaritan was a good neighbor; he acted rightly and did not discriminate in his heart. Jesus asks us to do the same!
2. Lieutenant Billy Mills, USMC, was a good runner, but he wasn't a world class runner -- at least that is what everyone thought. In 1964 the United States Olympic track and field team had been selected for the Tokyo games. Three athletes had been chosen through a system of qualifying trials for each event. Originally Billy Mills was not a member of the team, but an injury to one member of the 10,000 meter squad gave Lieutenant Mills a chance for glory -- he would make good.
Atypical to most Olympic track events, the 10,000 meters in 1964 did not require a qualifying race to narrow the field. There were 38 runners entered for the grueling 6.2 miles, 25 laps around the newly constructed red clay track in the Olympic stadium. All would run together, the world class and the unknown.
The race was run on October 14, 1964. Some of the best runners in the world were entered in the field. There was the 1960 Olympic champion Peter Bolotnikov of the Soviet Union. Ron Clarke, the world record holder from New Zealand, was one of the competitors as well. Gerry Lindgren, a student at Washington State University, was the American hopeful. After fifteen laps of the race only four of the 38 competitors had any chance of winning. A little-known Tunisian runner, Clarke, Bolotnikov, and Billy Mills were ahead of the field running in a tight pack. No one ever gave Mills, part Sioux Indian, even a thought in this race, yet there he was in a position possibly to win the coveted gold medal. The four lead runners jockeyed for position on the track, still damp from an early morning rain. The final lap of the race approached and the gun was sounded indicating the stretch run. The four lead runners began an all-out sprint. Bolotnikov fell back; it was now between the Tunisian, Clarke, and Mills. The Tunisian forged ahead. With 100 meters to go Billy Mills was ten meters behind. Somehow his adrenalin kicked in and he surged ahead. Mills broke the tape first, eclipsing the Olympic record by eight seconds. Billy Mills was given a chance; he made good on the opportunity.
The parable of the Good Samaritan presents a case where three people, a priest, a Levite, and a Samaritan, had an opportunity to be neighbor to the injured traveler on the road. Three had the opportunity, but only one took advantage and did the right thing. We are presented with many chances in our lives to make good on opportunities to be neighbor. The challenge of the parable calls for our response.
Points Of Challenge And Questions To Ponder
1. Do we allow the compassionate side of our existence to blossom forth or do we keep it bottled up? Do we play favorites with the compassion that we exhibit? Are certain people accepted and others rejected in our day-to-day activities?
2. Are we guilty of stereotyping others? Are some people acceptable and others unacceptable simply because of race, religion, sex, creed, or political stance? Do we consciously or unconsciously play favorites with others?
3. When we are given the opportunity to act so as to make the life of another better, do we follow through or simply pass the situation by? Can others count on us to assist them along the journey of life or are we so self-centered that the concerns and needs of others hold little weight with us?
4. When we have been tested by God with a difficult situation, how have we responded? Do we see these tests as opportunities for growth or are they simply obstacles and annoyances that need to be negotiated along the journey of life?
5. How do we treat the contemporary "lepers" in our society? Are we willing to stop and do what is right or are we too busy or afraid that our actions will prove problematic for us in the future? Do we have the courage to be compassionate, to do the right thing, and not count the cost?
Exegesis And Explanation Of The Parable
Like the parable of the prodigal son, Luke's tale of the Good Samaritan has challenged and instructed the Christian community since the time of Christ. The parable is situated by the evangelist in his travel narrative, which establishes the priority of loving God and one's neighbor. The placement of the parable at this strategic position in the Gospel illustrates the scandal that radical obedience to Jesus' commands requires. Like the prodigal son, this parable emphasizes the importance of the individual as one who needs our care. It is the very life blood of the Christian tradition to maintain the supreme value of people as children of God. Clearly Jesus teaches this virtue in this famous parable.
All Christians are severely challenged by this famous parable. First, followers of Jesus intuitively realize that the credibility of Christian faith as a whole stands or falls on one's active love of neighbor. Moreover, the parable of the Good Samaritan forces the believer to identify with the story, because we have all at times passed our neighbors by on the other side. The implicit but pointed accusation in the parable makes its message ever real to all people of Christian faith. Additionally, the parable accentuates Luke's theme of universalism and challenges us to make the Samaritan a paradigm of Christian conduct.
In order to understand the power and significance of the parable of the Good Samaritan it is essential to understand the background that Jesus' listeners possessed about the region and the situation. The road from Jerusalem to Jericho was a notoriously dangerous path which descended 3,600 feet over a seventeen-mile stretch. The road was narrow, rocky, and attracted brigands of all sorts who preyed on innocent travelers. Saint Jerome called it "The Red or Bloody Way." In 1118, during the period of the Crusades, the Knight Order of Templars was formed to defend pilgrims on this path. As late as the nineteenth century, pilgrims received protection from Turkish soldiers along the way.
The enmity that existed between Jews and Samaritans needs to be explained. Samaritans were descendants of a mixed population occupying the land following the conquest of the region by the Assyrians in 722 B.C. They opposed rebuilding the Temple and Jerusalem (Ezra 4:2-5 and Nehemiah 2:19), constructing instead their own place of worship on Mount Gerizim. Two hostile incidents illustrate the tension between these two peoples. About 128 B.C. a force of Jews, led by John of Hyrcanus, destroyed the Samaritan Temple. In 6 A.D. Samaritans desecrated the Jerusalem Temple by sneaking in at night and strewing human bones in the precincts. Even Scripture, Luke 9:52-53, John 4:9, and John 8:48, makes reference to this enmity.
It should also be noted that sectarian exclusiveness was common to peoples of the first century. In the Dead Sea Scrolls there are references to the Essene community being told to "hate all the sons of darkness." A rabbinical saying of the period stated that all heretics, informers, and renegades should be pushed into a ditch and never helped out.
This pericope can be conveniently divided into two sections: 10:25-28, which describes how the lawyer tested Jesus, and 10:29-37, the parable of the Good Samaritan. While the story of Jesus' encounter with the lawyer coordinates well with the parable of the Good Samaritan, the story is not simply an introduction to the parable, but stands on its own merit in raising and fully answering the question of how one can attain eternal life.
The lawyer's question, "What must I do to inherit eternal life?" is a test for Jesus. The idea that one knowledgeable in the law (Jewish lawyers were well versed in sacred and civil law) would choose to ask another, especially a layman like Jesus, a question about the way to eternal life, clearly demonstrates that the lawyer's motive was to test Jesus. Christ's honor was challenged by the question. Was the lawyer testing Jesus to see whether he would give the response expected by the lawyer, or was the test simply to challenge Jesus' claim to be the Son of God? Christ gains the upper hand, however, by forcing the lawyer to answer his own question and challenging him to put his answer into practice. In saying, "How do you read it?" the challenge is thrown back to the lawyer. In essence Jesus is saying, "You should know the answer to your question. You are an expert in the law and the answer is found there!"
Jesus' counter question elicits from the lawyer two commands from the Mosaic Law. The first, love of God with one's whole heart, strength, soul, and mind, establishing the sovereignty of God over the whole of life, is taken from the expanded Shema (Deuteronomy 6:4-9), which faithful Jews recited twice daily. The second command, love of neighbor as self, is taken from the so-called Holiness Code of Leviticus (chapters 17-26). In effect this code demands of the Hebrew the same attitude toward one's neighbor as toward Yahweh.
Contemporary scholars debate whether the dual commandment of love of God and neighbor was present in pre-Christian Judaism. A form of the double commandment is found in Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, but some exegetes believe this reference to be erroneous. It is clear, however, that Jesus was the catalyst for the development of the double command in the Christian tradition.
Scholars have debated the origin of this parable. Some exegetes believe that the polished literary style of the story leads to the conclusion that the parable has Greek origins. Others, however, suggest that the parables particular to Luke have such common characteristics as to originate with the evangelist himself. However, this latter conclusion stands contrary to Luke's otherwise known faithfulness to sources, as visible in his close association with Mark. Still others say that the Palestinian background to the parable suggests a distinct line of tradition other than Luke.
Various allegorized explanations of this parable have been presented from the time of Marcion and Irenaeus through the Medieval period and Reformation, until the nineteenth century. In a Christological dimension, Christ has been seen as the Good Samaritan. An ecclesiological explanation portrays the inn as the Church. The most famous allegory given to the parable was presented by Saint Augustine, who said the traveler represents Adam, Jerusalem is the heavenly city of peace, and Jericho is a city representative of mortality. The robbers represent the devil and his angels and their actions of stripping and beating the traveler symbolize the loss of immortality and tendency to sin respectively. The condition of the traveler, half dead spiritually due to sin, yet half alive due to knowledge of God, is also recognized by Augustine. As in the ecclesiological dimension the inn represents the Church while the two denarii represent the two commandments of love.
Jesus' purpose in presenting this parable has also been a subject for scholarly debate. It appears that Jesus intended to shock his hearers since Jews would have expected their priests and Levites to excel in an active love of neighbor. Jesus wanted his listeners to realize that love of neighbor involves an active, self-giving commitment. Those who first heard this parable were probably shocked when Jesus introduced a Samaritan into the story. It seems clear that Christ chose an extreme example in the Samaritan. People would have expected the three-fold people on the road to be a priest, Levite, and Israelite (lay person). Jesus' use of a Samaritan is masterful. By comparing the failure of God's ministers with the unselfishness of the hated Samaritan, Jesus' hearers should be able to measure the absolute and unlimited nature of the duty of love. It appears clear as well that Jesus told this parable to make an unescapable existential call to conversion.
Contemporary exegesis of this parable demonstrates its purpose in smashing stereotypes of the period. If an Israelite had been substituted for the Samaritan there would still be a contrast, but it would not be as dramatic. The Samaritan's actions on the road shatter the stereotypes of social boundaries and class divisions and render void any system of religious quid pro quo. It is important to note that the parable does not identify the traveler by national origin or social status. The Samaritan reaches out without regard to the traveler's origin or position in life; he acts with compassion simply because the person needs attention. In making the hero of the story a Samaritan, Jesus challenged longstanding enmity between Jews and Samaritans and demolished all boundary expectations -- social position, race, religion, or national origin. For Jewish listeners this meant abandoning their nationalistic feelings of religious superiority, reversing value judgments, and radically changing their attitudes toward their "neighbor." Eternal life is a quality of life characterized by showing mercy for those in need, regardless of their race, religion, or origin. Mercy does not think of reward, but only sees need and responds with compassion.
While on first reading it appears that the priest and Levite were cold and unconcerned about the wounded traveler, it is important for the contemporary reader to understand how these two might have felt when they came upon the scene. During Jesus' time priests took turns by lot at performing the ritual sacrifice in the Temple. One might wait many years (even a lifetime) for perhaps one turn to perform this ritual. When a priest was called forth he had to prove himself clean and worthy. If he had touched anyone with blood or a dead person, he would defile himself and be unable to offer the sacrifice, thus forfeiting his chance to minister. Thus, the priest had everything to lose by stopping; the demands of ritual purification "demanded" that he pass by. The Levite was in a similar situation, although not as drastic. If he defiled himself he would be unable to perform his duties, namely his paid services to priests and the people, until he was ritually purified. This would be an inconvenience and lead to loss of income. It is important to understand as well, however, that the regulations against defilement that placed the priest and Levite in awkward positions were also present with the Samaritan. Yet, these restrictions did not hamper his actions of mercy and compassion in any way. Rather than follow the way of Jesus to the cross, the priest and Levite chose to go their own way, away from the kingdom, and its emphasis on pity and compassion.
Some scholars in the past have emphasized the anti-Semitic overtones of the parable, but contemporary exegesis disputes this claim. Past scholarship emphasized the contrast between the right actions of a non-Jew against the apparent insensitivity of two (the priest and Levite) in the ruling class of Jewish society. While the contrast is intentionally striking and strong, a conclusion that the parable is anti-Semitic can only be drawn through allegorizing the pericope, an idea, as stated before, that has little support in contemporary scholarship.
Christ's teaching in the parable of the Good Samaritan is three-fold. First, the story says that we must help others, even if they have brought trouble upon themselves. Hearers of the parable would most certainly have concluded that the traveler was foolish; traveling alone on a dangerous road invites problems. Second, the parable teaches that any person in need, regardless of social status or national origin, is our neighbor. Lastly, the parable teaches us that our assistance must be practical and active; it cannot be restricted to mere feelings of pity and compassion. In a very interesting turnabout from the original question and confrontation, Jesus assists the lawyer to answer his own question. Since the name Samaritan is so repulsive to the lawyer, he responds to Jesus' question of who is neighbor with a generic but nevertheless accurate answer -- "The one who showed him mercy." Without knowing it the lawyer has found the correct answer and conversion.
Context Of The Parable
Context In The Church Year
The liturgical cycle presents the Christian community with many challenging ideas and themes from Scripture. The parable of the Good Samaritan gives us the opportunity to check how we are doing in our relationships with others, especially those who might be different from us in various ways. The sinful tendencies of contemporary life require that we periodically conduct a self-evaluation to see if our actions have fallen into these vices. The need to treat all people fairly and to demonstrate love and compassion are virtues that are sorely needed in our world. In the Church's wisdom we are presented with this famous parable that challenges the contemporary tendency to play favorites and restrict our efforts on others' behalf to those we like and with whom we feel comfortable. The message of the parable of the Good Samaritan needs to be repeated on regular intervals so that the Christian community, as a group and individually, can look inside and see where improvement is necessary.
Context With Other Gospels
The parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:29-37) is unique to Luke's Gospel. It is one of the parables of mercy that gives Luke's account a distinctive tone and helps to create a particular picture of Jesus. The so-called "L" parables (those unique to Luke) present Jesus as a historically significant figure. Additionally, these parables are all set in contemporary situations, presenting their message without the need for imagination.
Although the parable itself is unique to Luke, the preface, 10:25-28, the encounter between Jesus and the lawyer, has similarities with passages in Mark and Matthew. In Mark 12:28-31 a scribe asks Jesus which is the greatest commandment. This query is the third in a series of debates, the first two of which deal with tribute money (12:13-17) and resurrection (12:18-27). Matthew 22:34-39 has the question on the greatest commandment come from the lips of a Pharisee who is a lawyer. Both of these accounts place the encounter at a time immediately prior to the crucifixion, while Luke's version places it at the outset of his journey from Galilee to Jerusalem. Luke follows Mark and reproduces the first two debates, but not the third. While some scholars say Luke has re-worked Mark, most suggest that Luke 10:25-28 is the evangelist's version of a story he has omitted at a later point in his Gospel. Exegetes suggest that Luke's treatment is more forceful and of greater significance than Mark who closes the debate with a rather pious exchange (12:32-34). Only Luke includes the parable of the Good Samaritan as part of Christ's response to the initial question. Thus, contemporary exegetes generally conclude that Luke 10:25-37 is an independent tradition.
Context With First And Second Lessons
First Lesson: Deuteronomy 30:9-14. The Hebrew Torah is filled with laws which formed the basis for life for the Jewish people. Following the dictates of the law was crucial; the law guided individuals in the conduct of their personal lives and provided a map for how society operated in general. Moses emphasizes in this passage from Deuteronomy that the law is not distant, but rather is written in the mouths and hearts of the people. There is no need to look for the law and its fulfillment in distant places; it is very near.
The priest, Levite, and Samaritan each had the opportunity to discover the proximity of the law of compassion and love. Two saw the law as distant, as abstract regulations and dictates which kept one from action. The Samaritan, on the other hand, somehow was able to see the closeness of the law in the face of the traveler on the road. Each of us has that same opportunity of discovering the proximity of the law and its exercise in assisting our neighbor. The decision to act is always voluntary, but it is clear that the Samaritan's act of compassion is the road that Jesus suggests.
Second Lesson: Colossians 1:1-14. Saint Paul tells the Christian community at Colassae that Jesus is the physical image of the invisible God. Christ is the center of all things; his primacy cannot be challenged. As Jesus is the image of God, so in the absence of Jesus' physical presence we become the image of Christ to our world. We can never hope to measure up fully, but the great challenge for the Christian is to make every effort toward being Christ-like, in word and deed.
The parable of the Good Samaritan gives us the opportunity to contemplate what type of image we have portrayed in our daily encounter with family, friends, neighbors, and fellow workers. The Samaritan ignored the possible ramifications of his action and acted with compassion and mercy. He did not ask questions of the traveler, he simply aided one who was clearly in need. The Samaritan became the image of Christ to the injured traveler. We are challenged in our lives to act similarly.
____________
1. Paraphrased from Megan McKenna, Parables: The Arrows of God (Maryknoll, New York: Orbis Books, 1994), pp. 158-160.
But wanting to justify himself, he asked Jesus, "And who is my neighbor?" Jesus replied, "A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell into the hands of robbers, who stripped him, beat him, and went away, leaving him half dead. Now by chance a priest was going down that road; and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side. So likewise a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. But a Samaritan while traveling came near him; and when he saw him, he was moved with pity. He went to him, and bandaged his wounds, having poured oil and wine on them. Then he put him on his own animal, brought him to an inn, and took care of him. The next day he took out two denarii, gave them to the innkeeper, and said, 'Take care of him; and when I come back, I will repay you whatever more you spend.' Which of these three, do you think, was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?" He said, "The one who showed him mercy." Jesus said to him, "Go and do likewise."
Theme
In his First Letter to the Corinthians (13:13), Saint Paul writes, "And now faith, hope, and love abide, these three; and the greatest of these is love." Love is a difficult concept that has given hope and frustration to humans throughout history. In song we have heard love called "a many splendored thing" and we believe it to be true. The Greeks used three different words, eros, phileo, and agapeo, to capture the multiple ideas of the term of love. While love can be understood in many ways, it seems that Jesus, when describing what is necessary for eternal life, suggests that love of God and neighbor cannot be surpassed. Love of God is expressed in prayer, service, and obedience to God's will. Love of neighbor is even more multi-faceted, consisting of reconciliation, service and ministry, the tough love of challenge and compassion. The parable of the Good Samaritan challenges us to be compassionate and to demonstrate such love indiscriminately.
Spiritual Food For The Journey
In the nineteenth century the garden paradise of Molokai, one of the Hawaiian Islands chain, was a place of suffering, pain, and isolation. Ship captains were hired to transport those afflicted with the dreaded disease of leprosy to this lonely and rocky place. Many captains refused to dock to unload their passengers, but rather, got as close to shore as they dared with shoal water present and threw the lepers into the sea. Those that were strong enough swam to shore; the others drowned. The isolation of the leper was universal and total until the twentieth century. People feared what they did not understand or comprehend.
It is unfortunate but true that contemporary society, with all its advances in science, technology, medicine, and knowledge, has become apparently more intolerant of people. Although leprosy has been controlled as a life-threatening illness, the numbers of "lepers" in today's world has actually increased. The names of these outcast men and women are familiar to all of us -- minority peoples, the infirmed and aged, the poor and social rejects, the chronically ill, especially those with AIDS, and those who hold different religious and political ideas than ourselves. When we encounter today's "lepers" we are challenged in the same way that the priest, Levite, and Samaritan were challenged on the road to Jericho. We can pass by and show no concern or we can get involved, make the effort, and aid those in distress. The choice will always be ours!
Our struggle to act with justice toward the "lepers" of contemporary life is compounded by the tendency to stereotype people and associate only with those who meet the criteria that we have set. We are often willing and even eager to assist those who may need our assistance, but we often have strings attached to our actions; we want something in return. We take the idea that there is no such thing as a free lunch and thus demand some compensation for what we do. We will act and assist when the person is intelligent, rich, influential, or famous enough to attract our efforts. If the individual in need cannot produce for us, then we simply pass the person by. We discriminate in our hearts and manifest that feeling in our actions.
Jesus calls us to imitate the actions of the Good Samaritan, who was despised by all Hebrew society and in the Jewish mind was the least likely to act and demonstrate compassion. Yet, it is the outcast who acts rightly when others, concerned possibly more for their own needs than right action, failed in their responsibility to be a neighbor. Let us consider our actions, act rightly, and refuse to stereotype others. Let us be compassionate toward all in keeping with Jesus' message of love and peace.
Application Of The Parable To Contemporary Life
Sermon Openings
1. Once upon a time there was a great teacher, a guru, who had many followers. People came from far and wide to listen, learn, and be enlightened by this man. There were one-on-one classes and apprenticeships for those who came to learn. When the students had finished with their lessons, the guru sent them into the world to share their knowledge with others as masters in their own right. Just before each student left, the guru would give each a special gift -- the teacher taught each student the mantra of life and death. Phrase by phrase the guru taught them until they had memorized it by heart. Then he gave them a warning that as long as they said this mantra faithfully, they would be blessed. Its power would give them insight, clarity of thought, and allow them to discern the truth when surrounded by lies. Its power as well would keep them from despair and give them hope in the midst of misery and hopelessness. Their faith would be strengthened and one day their souls would find everlasting life. The disciples were grateful and humbled by this great gift. They were warned, however, that they were never to teach the mantra to anyone; it was for them alone, the enlightened of the world.
For many years students finished their studies with the guru, were given the mantra, and then went into the world to share their wisdom and to pray the mantra in secret. One day a young man, who had been taught the mantra and was humbled by the gift, came to the master guru ready to enter the world. However, when the teacher warned him not to share the mantra with anyone, he asked why. The master responded, "If you share this mantra with others, then what it was to do for you will be handed over to them, and you will live in darkness, even when the light is all around you. You will know only despair and misery of body and soul for the rest of your life. You will stumble over the truth and be endlessly confused. But worst of all, you will lose your faith and your soul. You will be damned forever."
The disciple turned white and was visibly shaken by the master's words. Nevertheless, he decided that he must do what he must do. He went to the nearest city and gathered multitudes around him. He taught them all many things and the people were enthralled with his stories and wisdom. Then he taught them the mantra line by line, just as the master had taught him. The people left muttering the mantra to themselves.
A number of the master's disciples were in the crowd and they were horrified at the man's actions. He had disobeyed the master and betrayed his community by giving away the wisdom of the mantra to unenlightened people. These people immediately went back to the master and told him what had happened. They asked the guru, "Are you going to punish the student for what he has done?" The master looked at them sadly and said, "I do not have to for he will be punished terribly. He knew what his fate would be if he shared the mantra of life with those who were unenlightened. For him it has become the mantra of death. He will live in darkness and despair, without hope or knowledge of the truth. He will live isolated and alone, without comfort of faith and will even lose his soul. How could I punish him further?" And with these words the old master gathered his few belongings, looked at his students sadly, and said, "I am going to that man who gave away my gift of the mantra of life and death." "Why?" they said in unison. "Because," he said, "out of all my students he alone learned wisdom and compassion. Now that man is my master." And he left them to follow the man who walked now in darkness and despair, the one who had chosen compassion over wisdom and knowledge.1
The student had the strength of his convictions and chose to enlighten others, to provide them with what they needed. Similarly the Good Samaritan disregarded convention and acted with compassion to the traveler on the road. The Samaritan was a good neighbor; he acted rightly and did not discriminate in his heart. Jesus asks us to do the same!
2. Lieutenant Billy Mills, USMC, was a good runner, but he wasn't a world class runner -- at least that is what everyone thought. In 1964 the United States Olympic track and field team had been selected for the Tokyo games. Three athletes had been chosen through a system of qualifying trials for each event. Originally Billy Mills was not a member of the team, but an injury to one member of the 10,000 meter squad gave Lieutenant Mills a chance for glory -- he would make good.
Atypical to most Olympic track events, the 10,000 meters in 1964 did not require a qualifying race to narrow the field. There were 38 runners entered for the grueling 6.2 miles, 25 laps around the newly constructed red clay track in the Olympic stadium. All would run together, the world class and the unknown.
The race was run on October 14, 1964. Some of the best runners in the world were entered in the field. There was the 1960 Olympic champion Peter Bolotnikov of the Soviet Union. Ron Clarke, the world record holder from New Zealand, was one of the competitors as well. Gerry Lindgren, a student at Washington State University, was the American hopeful. After fifteen laps of the race only four of the 38 competitors had any chance of winning. A little-known Tunisian runner, Clarke, Bolotnikov, and Billy Mills were ahead of the field running in a tight pack. No one ever gave Mills, part Sioux Indian, even a thought in this race, yet there he was in a position possibly to win the coveted gold medal. The four lead runners jockeyed for position on the track, still damp from an early morning rain. The final lap of the race approached and the gun was sounded indicating the stretch run. The four lead runners began an all-out sprint. Bolotnikov fell back; it was now between the Tunisian, Clarke, and Mills. The Tunisian forged ahead. With 100 meters to go Billy Mills was ten meters behind. Somehow his adrenalin kicked in and he surged ahead. Mills broke the tape first, eclipsing the Olympic record by eight seconds. Billy Mills was given a chance; he made good on the opportunity.
The parable of the Good Samaritan presents a case where three people, a priest, a Levite, and a Samaritan, had an opportunity to be neighbor to the injured traveler on the road. Three had the opportunity, but only one took advantage and did the right thing. We are presented with many chances in our lives to make good on opportunities to be neighbor. The challenge of the parable calls for our response.
Points Of Challenge And Questions To Ponder
1. Do we allow the compassionate side of our existence to blossom forth or do we keep it bottled up? Do we play favorites with the compassion that we exhibit? Are certain people accepted and others rejected in our day-to-day activities?
2. Are we guilty of stereotyping others? Are some people acceptable and others unacceptable simply because of race, religion, sex, creed, or political stance? Do we consciously or unconsciously play favorites with others?
3. When we are given the opportunity to act so as to make the life of another better, do we follow through or simply pass the situation by? Can others count on us to assist them along the journey of life or are we so self-centered that the concerns and needs of others hold little weight with us?
4. When we have been tested by God with a difficult situation, how have we responded? Do we see these tests as opportunities for growth or are they simply obstacles and annoyances that need to be negotiated along the journey of life?
5. How do we treat the contemporary "lepers" in our society? Are we willing to stop and do what is right or are we too busy or afraid that our actions will prove problematic for us in the future? Do we have the courage to be compassionate, to do the right thing, and not count the cost?
Exegesis And Explanation Of The Parable
Like the parable of the prodigal son, Luke's tale of the Good Samaritan has challenged and instructed the Christian community since the time of Christ. The parable is situated by the evangelist in his travel narrative, which establishes the priority of loving God and one's neighbor. The placement of the parable at this strategic position in the Gospel illustrates the scandal that radical obedience to Jesus' commands requires. Like the prodigal son, this parable emphasizes the importance of the individual as one who needs our care. It is the very life blood of the Christian tradition to maintain the supreme value of people as children of God. Clearly Jesus teaches this virtue in this famous parable.
All Christians are severely challenged by this famous parable. First, followers of Jesus intuitively realize that the credibility of Christian faith as a whole stands or falls on one's active love of neighbor. Moreover, the parable of the Good Samaritan forces the believer to identify with the story, because we have all at times passed our neighbors by on the other side. The implicit but pointed accusation in the parable makes its message ever real to all people of Christian faith. Additionally, the parable accentuates Luke's theme of universalism and challenges us to make the Samaritan a paradigm of Christian conduct.
In order to understand the power and significance of the parable of the Good Samaritan it is essential to understand the background that Jesus' listeners possessed about the region and the situation. The road from Jerusalem to Jericho was a notoriously dangerous path which descended 3,600 feet over a seventeen-mile stretch. The road was narrow, rocky, and attracted brigands of all sorts who preyed on innocent travelers. Saint Jerome called it "The Red or Bloody Way." In 1118, during the period of the Crusades, the Knight Order of Templars was formed to defend pilgrims on this path. As late as the nineteenth century, pilgrims received protection from Turkish soldiers along the way.
The enmity that existed between Jews and Samaritans needs to be explained. Samaritans were descendants of a mixed population occupying the land following the conquest of the region by the Assyrians in 722 B.C. They opposed rebuilding the Temple and Jerusalem (Ezra 4:2-5 and Nehemiah 2:19), constructing instead their own place of worship on Mount Gerizim. Two hostile incidents illustrate the tension between these two peoples. About 128 B.C. a force of Jews, led by John of Hyrcanus, destroyed the Samaritan Temple. In 6 A.D. Samaritans desecrated the Jerusalem Temple by sneaking in at night and strewing human bones in the precincts. Even Scripture, Luke 9:52-53, John 4:9, and John 8:48, makes reference to this enmity.
It should also be noted that sectarian exclusiveness was common to peoples of the first century. In the Dead Sea Scrolls there are references to the Essene community being told to "hate all the sons of darkness." A rabbinical saying of the period stated that all heretics, informers, and renegades should be pushed into a ditch and never helped out.
This pericope can be conveniently divided into two sections: 10:25-28, which describes how the lawyer tested Jesus, and 10:29-37, the parable of the Good Samaritan. While the story of Jesus' encounter with the lawyer coordinates well with the parable of the Good Samaritan, the story is not simply an introduction to the parable, but stands on its own merit in raising and fully answering the question of how one can attain eternal life.
The lawyer's question, "What must I do to inherit eternal life?" is a test for Jesus. The idea that one knowledgeable in the law (Jewish lawyers were well versed in sacred and civil law) would choose to ask another, especially a layman like Jesus, a question about the way to eternal life, clearly demonstrates that the lawyer's motive was to test Jesus. Christ's honor was challenged by the question. Was the lawyer testing Jesus to see whether he would give the response expected by the lawyer, or was the test simply to challenge Jesus' claim to be the Son of God? Christ gains the upper hand, however, by forcing the lawyer to answer his own question and challenging him to put his answer into practice. In saying, "How do you read it?" the challenge is thrown back to the lawyer. In essence Jesus is saying, "You should know the answer to your question. You are an expert in the law and the answer is found there!"
Jesus' counter question elicits from the lawyer two commands from the Mosaic Law. The first, love of God with one's whole heart, strength, soul, and mind, establishing the sovereignty of God over the whole of life, is taken from the expanded Shema (Deuteronomy 6:4-9), which faithful Jews recited twice daily. The second command, love of neighbor as self, is taken from the so-called Holiness Code of Leviticus (chapters 17-26). In effect this code demands of the Hebrew the same attitude toward one's neighbor as toward Yahweh.
Contemporary scholars debate whether the dual commandment of love of God and neighbor was present in pre-Christian Judaism. A form of the double commandment is found in Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, but some exegetes believe this reference to be erroneous. It is clear, however, that Jesus was the catalyst for the development of the double command in the Christian tradition.
Scholars have debated the origin of this parable. Some exegetes believe that the polished literary style of the story leads to the conclusion that the parable has Greek origins. Others, however, suggest that the parables particular to Luke have such common characteristics as to originate with the evangelist himself. However, this latter conclusion stands contrary to Luke's otherwise known faithfulness to sources, as visible in his close association with Mark. Still others say that the Palestinian background to the parable suggests a distinct line of tradition other than Luke.
Various allegorized explanations of this parable have been presented from the time of Marcion and Irenaeus through the Medieval period and Reformation, until the nineteenth century. In a Christological dimension, Christ has been seen as the Good Samaritan. An ecclesiological explanation portrays the inn as the Church. The most famous allegory given to the parable was presented by Saint Augustine, who said the traveler represents Adam, Jerusalem is the heavenly city of peace, and Jericho is a city representative of mortality. The robbers represent the devil and his angels and their actions of stripping and beating the traveler symbolize the loss of immortality and tendency to sin respectively. The condition of the traveler, half dead spiritually due to sin, yet half alive due to knowledge of God, is also recognized by Augustine. As in the ecclesiological dimension the inn represents the Church while the two denarii represent the two commandments of love.
Jesus' purpose in presenting this parable has also been a subject for scholarly debate. It appears that Jesus intended to shock his hearers since Jews would have expected their priests and Levites to excel in an active love of neighbor. Jesus wanted his listeners to realize that love of neighbor involves an active, self-giving commitment. Those who first heard this parable were probably shocked when Jesus introduced a Samaritan into the story. It seems clear that Christ chose an extreme example in the Samaritan. People would have expected the three-fold people on the road to be a priest, Levite, and Israelite (lay person). Jesus' use of a Samaritan is masterful. By comparing the failure of God's ministers with the unselfishness of the hated Samaritan, Jesus' hearers should be able to measure the absolute and unlimited nature of the duty of love. It appears clear as well that Jesus told this parable to make an unescapable existential call to conversion.
Contemporary exegesis of this parable demonstrates its purpose in smashing stereotypes of the period. If an Israelite had been substituted for the Samaritan there would still be a contrast, but it would not be as dramatic. The Samaritan's actions on the road shatter the stereotypes of social boundaries and class divisions and render void any system of religious quid pro quo. It is important to note that the parable does not identify the traveler by national origin or social status. The Samaritan reaches out without regard to the traveler's origin or position in life; he acts with compassion simply because the person needs attention. In making the hero of the story a Samaritan, Jesus challenged longstanding enmity between Jews and Samaritans and demolished all boundary expectations -- social position, race, religion, or national origin. For Jewish listeners this meant abandoning their nationalistic feelings of religious superiority, reversing value judgments, and radically changing their attitudes toward their "neighbor." Eternal life is a quality of life characterized by showing mercy for those in need, regardless of their race, religion, or origin. Mercy does not think of reward, but only sees need and responds with compassion.
While on first reading it appears that the priest and Levite were cold and unconcerned about the wounded traveler, it is important for the contemporary reader to understand how these two might have felt when they came upon the scene. During Jesus' time priests took turns by lot at performing the ritual sacrifice in the Temple. One might wait many years (even a lifetime) for perhaps one turn to perform this ritual. When a priest was called forth he had to prove himself clean and worthy. If he had touched anyone with blood or a dead person, he would defile himself and be unable to offer the sacrifice, thus forfeiting his chance to minister. Thus, the priest had everything to lose by stopping; the demands of ritual purification "demanded" that he pass by. The Levite was in a similar situation, although not as drastic. If he defiled himself he would be unable to perform his duties, namely his paid services to priests and the people, until he was ritually purified. This would be an inconvenience and lead to loss of income. It is important to understand as well, however, that the regulations against defilement that placed the priest and Levite in awkward positions were also present with the Samaritan. Yet, these restrictions did not hamper his actions of mercy and compassion in any way. Rather than follow the way of Jesus to the cross, the priest and Levite chose to go their own way, away from the kingdom, and its emphasis on pity and compassion.
Some scholars in the past have emphasized the anti-Semitic overtones of the parable, but contemporary exegesis disputes this claim. Past scholarship emphasized the contrast between the right actions of a non-Jew against the apparent insensitivity of two (the priest and Levite) in the ruling class of Jewish society. While the contrast is intentionally striking and strong, a conclusion that the parable is anti-Semitic can only be drawn through allegorizing the pericope, an idea, as stated before, that has little support in contemporary scholarship.
Christ's teaching in the parable of the Good Samaritan is three-fold. First, the story says that we must help others, even if they have brought trouble upon themselves. Hearers of the parable would most certainly have concluded that the traveler was foolish; traveling alone on a dangerous road invites problems. Second, the parable teaches that any person in need, regardless of social status or national origin, is our neighbor. Lastly, the parable teaches us that our assistance must be practical and active; it cannot be restricted to mere feelings of pity and compassion. In a very interesting turnabout from the original question and confrontation, Jesus assists the lawyer to answer his own question. Since the name Samaritan is so repulsive to the lawyer, he responds to Jesus' question of who is neighbor with a generic but nevertheless accurate answer -- "The one who showed him mercy." Without knowing it the lawyer has found the correct answer and conversion.
Context Of The Parable
Context In The Church Year
The liturgical cycle presents the Christian community with many challenging ideas and themes from Scripture. The parable of the Good Samaritan gives us the opportunity to check how we are doing in our relationships with others, especially those who might be different from us in various ways. The sinful tendencies of contemporary life require that we periodically conduct a self-evaluation to see if our actions have fallen into these vices. The need to treat all people fairly and to demonstrate love and compassion are virtues that are sorely needed in our world. In the Church's wisdom we are presented with this famous parable that challenges the contemporary tendency to play favorites and restrict our efforts on others' behalf to those we like and with whom we feel comfortable. The message of the parable of the Good Samaritan needs to be repeated on regular intervals so that the Christian community, as a group and individually, can look inside and see where improvement is necessary.
Context With Other Gospels
The parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:29-37) is unique to Luke's Gospel. It is one of the parables of mercy that gives Luke's account a distinctive tone and helps to create a particular picture of Jesus. The so-called "L" parables (those unique to Luke) present Jesus as a historically significant figure. Additionally, these parables are all set in contemporary situations, presenting their message without the need for imagination.
Although the parable itself is unique to Luke, the preface, 10:25-28, the encounter between Jesus and the lawyer, has similarities with passages in Mark and Matthew. In Mark 12:28-31 a scribe asks Jesus which is the greatest commandment. This query is the third in a series of debates, the first two of which deal with tribute money (12:13-17) and resurrection (12:18-27). Matthew 22:34-39 has the question on the greatest commandment come from the lips of a Pharisee who is a lawyer. Both of these accounts place the encounter at a time immediately prior to the crucifixion, while Luke's version places it at the outset of his journey from Galilee to Jerusalem. Luke follows Mark and reproduces the first two debates, but not the third. While some scholars say Luke has re-worked Mark, most suggest that Luke 10:25-28 is the evangelist's version of a story he has omitted at a later point in his Gospel. Exegetes suggest that Luke's treatment is more forceful and of greater significance than Mark who closes the debate with a rather pious exchange (12:32-34). Only Luke includes the parable of the Good Samaritan as part of Christ's response to the initial question. Thus, contemporary exegetes generally conclude that Luke 10:25-37 is an independent tradition.
Context With First And Second Lessons
First Lesson: Deuteronomy 30:9-14. The Hebrew Torah is filled with laws which formed the basis for life for the Jewish people. Following the dictates of the law was crucial; the law guided individuals in the conduct of their personal lives and provided a map for how society operated in general. Moses emphasizes in this passage from Deuteronomy that the law is not distant, but rather is written in the mouths and hearts of the people. There is no need to look for the law and its fulfillment in distant places; it is very near.
The priest, Levite, and Samaritan each had the opportunity to discover the proximity of the law of compassion and love. Two saw the law as distant, as abstract regulations and dictates which kept one from action. The Samaritan, on the other hand, somehow was able to see the closeness of the law in the face of the traveler on the road. Each of us has that same opportunity of discovering the proximity of the law and its exercise in assisting our neighbor. The decision to act is always voluntary, but it is clear that the Samaritan's act of compassion is the road that Jesus suggests.
Second Lesson: Colossians 1:1-14. Saint Paul tells the Christian community at Colassae that Jesus is the physical image of the invisible God. Christ is the center of all things; his primacy cannot be challenged. As Jesus is the image of God, so in the absence of Jesus' physical presence we become the image of Christ to our world. We can never hope to measure up fully, but the great challenge for the Christian is to make every effort toward being Christ-like, in word and deed.
The parable of the Good Samaritan gives us the opportunity to contemplate what type of image we have portrayed in our daily encounter with family, friends, neighbors, and fellow workers. The Samaritan ignored the possible ramifications of his action and acted with compassion and mercy. He did not ask questions of the traveler, he simply aided one who was clearly in need. The Samaritan became the image of Christ to the injured traveler. We are challenged in our lives to act similarly.
____________
1. Paraphrased from Megan McKenna, Parables: The Arrows of God (Maryknoll, New York: Orbis Books, 1994), pp. 158-160.
