"Good Samaritan" is a great example of a Gospel concept that has embedded itself into our culture. Even people hostile to or ignorant of the Gospels in American society have heard the term. Generally speaking, in American culture, it speaks of any passer-by who goes above and beyond what is the normal standard of decency when they perceive a need or crisis in someone else, particularly if they do not know that person. We have hospitals named "Good Samaritan." We have suites of laws called "Good Samaritan" laws governing the expectations and liabilities of random acts of mercy. It even has a sarcastic use when pointing out selfish behaviour by calling up the most unselfish of examples.
The problem with this cultural picture lies in its connotation of extraordinary and above-and-beyond. In the context of the Gospel, Jesus is not pointing out the example as an act of supererogation (a fifty-dollar word for above-and-beyond), but as normative behaviour (yes, you read that right, NORMATIVE). In our Gospel reading at Mass today (Luke 10.25-37, which may be found here along with today's other readings), Our Lord is in yet ANOTHER Q&A session with scribes, Pharisees, and Mosaic/Jewish legal experts. On the surface we have a question, "Rabbi, what must I do to inherit eternal life?" That question alone was a powderkeg among the schools of Jewish thought at the time because there was no consensus as to whether eternal life for humans even existed. Jesus, in a move Socrates probably would have envied, turned the question on the lawyer's head and asked him to tell Jesus what it said in the Mosaic tradition. When the lawyer spouted off his answer and Jesus said, "Good. You're right. Now go do it," there was a bit of loss of face. The intent was not to write to Dear Abby to solve a problem but to put this teacher from Galilee to the test. To save face, the lawyer decided to squeeze out some sort of midrash and challenged Jesus on the definition of neighbour, and hence we get the familiar parable.
OUR issue in interpreting this parable is that for us we view this as the ultimate story in "doing good." We feel good that a societal outcast went above-and-beyond to help out a total stranger in need. And we miss the point, which is the definition of the word "sin" in Greek (ἁμαρτία), to "miss the mark." Jesus' point here was not to give an example to aspire to, but to show:
That anyone close by in need is a neighbour.
That we MUST love our neighbour as ourself.
That loving our neighbour means that above-and-beyond is really not that, but a normative expectation for a citizen of the Kingdom of God.
Truth be told, we who call ourselves Christian fail this expectation more often than not. How many times do we look away from a beggar on the street? How many times do we turn our back on someone in distress? Do not get me wrong, this is not a call to get in over our head: even the Good Samaritan referred his neighbour to more expert care, but he made the move to get the wounded man to where he could be helped.
These "acts of mercy" are the expectation, not the exception. The heart of the matter is that we should care about those around us, even those who are our sworn enemies. Jews and Samaritans. Conservatives and Liberals. Citizens and Illegals. When we see a need, we either meet it or facilitate getting the help. Because God loves them, we are called to love them. And that means stepping out of our comfort zone for them. All the time.
Comments