The Closest among Neighbours

Gospel of the Fifteenth Sunday in Ordinary Time

I – Divine Sagacity in Face of a Snare

The parable of the Good Samaritan, narrated in the Gospel of this Fifteenth Sunday in Ordinary Time, has gone down in history as a symbol of the mercy brought to earth by Our Lord Jesus Christ. It is such a simple narrative that after a single reading we believe that we have understood everything. Nevertheless, it contains such wisdom and wealth of nuance that it would be impossible to explain its intricacies in the limited space of an article. In fact, the clearer a passage of Scripture seems, the more marvels and mysteries it contains.

On this occasion, we will consider it from a perspective which, while complementing previously considered viewpoints, will help us to advance in our spiritual life.

An ill-intentioned question

The most representative class of Jewish thought at that time was composed of scribes and Pharisees, who, as we have seen in other articles, fostered a much greater appreciation for the exterior formalities of religion than for the intention and spirit with which it was practised.

In this scene narrated by St. Luke, a scholar of the Law, most certainly a Pharisee, heard Our Lord’s words to the seventy-two disciples, who had just returned from their first apostolic mission. According to the original Greek, the Evangelist qualifies him as “a certain scholar of the Law,”¹ giving the idea of someone who has no particular prominence. However, being a legist, he must have considered himself to be well acquainted with the Scriptures and the divine precepts, for he knew all the requisites so as not to incur legal impurity, what was sin and was not, and how to make reparation for infractions, and so forth.

As he watched the Redeemer surrounded by His followers, this scribe was probably envious and, wishing to distinguish himself, wanted to “test” Him. To do so, he raised the problem of what should be done to attain eternal life.

Now, that question would only make a modicum of sense in the context of the constant discussions among the Chosen People concerning the different interpretations of the Mosaic prescriptions and customs. But, even so, it was not justified, for if a master of the Law did not know the answer, he would be unworthy of the title he carried, discrediting himself and the one who had formed him.

Therefore, the question put by the Pharisee was not sincere, but was a snare set to discredit Jesus before the people. However, he did not imagine he would be obliged to publicly acknowledge as Master the very one whom he intended to denigrate…

Responding with simplicity… without responding

Our Lord does not respond directly to the doctor of the Law, but employs a divine method: with the simplicity of an innocent child who finds himself in a difficult situation, He returns the question with another – a useful strategy against those who make captious inquiries.

With just a few words, He puts him against the wall, as if to say: “You, being a legist, must recall what the Law says in this regard.” And, for good measure, He also points out the inanity of the question by stressing: “How do you read it?” After all, the scribe knew the entire Law and believed that it alone brought salvation. Thus, it was sufficient to state what it contained.

A law known, but not practised

Put on the spot, the man was obliged to repeat, word for word, what he had read in the Law. All the more so, since undoubtedly everyone present was looking at him, awaiting a response to the obvious question that he himself had raised.

It can be seen that the scholar of the Law speaks confidently and even proudly, although any child would have been able to give the same explanation, for it was a synthesis of the Decalogue that every Jew was obliged to repeat morning and evening.

The response was correct; this is what the Law prescribed… but Our Lord’s strategy was much subtler, it was divine! His words seemed to say to His interlocutor: “Why did you ask Me, if you already knew? Put it into practice!” In reality, He was highlighting that the letter of the law itself does not justify, but rather the grace obtained by Redemption. And for grace to attain its complete efficacy, it is necessary to fulfil the Law. This was precisely what the scribes and Pharisees were lacking: they did not have true love, for they concerned themselves with externals, such as repeating the text of a commandment, without, however, living it.

The legist had just proclaimed: “Love the Lord, your God, with all your heart.” In other words, he acknowledged that love was needed, which is an act of the will. Then he had added “with all your soul, with all your strength, and with all your mind,” indicating the need to apply oneself entirely to loving God. Finally, he had concluded: “And your neighbour as yourself.” Nevertheless, the Pharisees respected neither the first nor the second precept, for they only loved themselves. For them God mattered little, and their neighbour even less.

A subject poorly understood by the decadent Chosen People

The doctor of the Law was in a bad position. Our Lord’s answer had discreetly revealed that, although he knew the Law fully, he did not practise it, and he now realized this. In trying to demonstrate his supposed superiority over Jesus, he had discredited himself in front of everyone and perhaps even lost his authority as a teacher! The best way, now, would be to acknowledge his error and ask the Saviour for pardon.

However, in addition to being learned, he was cunning. Not wanting to look bad before public opinion and wishing to assuage his own vanity, he dared to make another attempt to justify himself. And he was once again devastated…

As a good Israelite, he had placed all the substance of his reply in that which corresponds to the first three Commandments of the Law of God. Nevertheless, this Law contained a part less clear for the Jews of the time: “Love… your neighbour as yourself.” This was a much disputed matter among scholars, since, beginning with the Fourth Commandment, the Decalogue was subject to differing interpretations. So the scribe seized the opportunity to present this difficulty to Our Lord.

The Old Testament did not furnish a precise notion on the practice of love of neighbour. In fact, the Jewish people lived segregated from other peoples, to avoid losing their faith or deteriorating in contact with pagan nations. As a result, they believed that their neighbour could only be a relative, or, at most, another Jew. In the same way, they considered themselves the sole heirs of the Kingdom of Heaven and lacked the zeal for the salvation of souls that would characterize the Catholic Church, born from the pierced side of the Redeemer.

Now, in asking “Who is my neighbour?” the doctor of the Law once again sought to lay a trap for the Divine Master, for he hoped that He, given His preaching of a marked universal character, would declare as neighbour any human creature whatsoever. If He did so, He would oppose the reigning pharisaic conception, stirring up antipathy and provoking a scandal that would hinder His mission.

However, unwittingly, the scribe gave Him a unique opportunity to clearly explain this important concept, linked to the seven Commandments of the Decalogue that refer to one’s neighbour. For this, Eternal and Incarnate Wisdom created a most beautiful parable.

II – The Parable of the Good Samaritan

In this narration, Our Lord once again uses incomparable astuteness and subtlety. First of all, in order to provide a grace for that poor scholar of the Law, who, although he planned to debate with the Redeemer to demonstrate his own wisdom, receives an extraordinary lesson without in any way being humiliated. In fact, while Jesus tells the parable, prepared from all eternity in His divine mind and now revealed in human language to do good to the people present and to posterity, His principal aim is the conversion of His interlocutor.

To do this, He composes an impressive scene, which captures the Middle Eastern temperament of His listeners and compels their attention. It is the story of a man who was attacked while going from Jerusalem to Jericho. This route involves a descent from an altitude of ten thousand metres along the slopes of the mountain, over a course of more or less thirty kilometres. Many priests and Levites who performed duties in the Temple of Jerusalem lived in Jericho and often made the journey. It was not uncommon for criminals to attack people who passed by that way; the description was not something alien to His listeners. Due to this risk, it was a good practice to always travel in the company of others, a recommendation not followed by the victim of the parable, who was despoiled of his goods and virtually left for dead. The details given by Our Lord were of such a nature as to arouse compassion in everyone, or at least have an impact upon them.

Omitting sacred obligations out of egoism

When it came to saying the truth, Our Lord proclaimed it just as it was, sparing no one, a logical attitude from One who is Truth. If He thus described the priest’s behaviour, it undoubtedly meant that this was how the sacred ministers of the time behaved in such circumstances… It was the sad reality of a hierarchy that had, for the most part, prevaricated long ago.

Now the priest was the representative of God’s love. This particular minister was probably going down to Jericho because he had just finished serving in the Temple, where, in the exercise of his duties, he should have been available to minister to others and do them good. This was his vocation! However, when he leaves the sacred precinct, alone, he perceives at a distance the situation of that poor man and avoids him, being unwilling to help him. He does not even look directly at him; he only casts a sidelong glance.

Imagine that he were still in the Temple, watched by the public eye; if he failed to help someone in need, he would lose his reputation as a good priest. Accordingly, out of self-love, he would be capable of untiring assistance. But, since no one saw him on that deserted route, he went his way and left the other forsaken… an absurdity!

By natural law alone, it was his obligation to go to the aid of that dying man. All the more so being a priest, due to his office, it was his duty to help him, even if it were just to say a word of encouragement to him before he died.

The descendants of Levi formed the priestly tribe, whose members were dedicated to the service of worship and sacred ministry. One of these, also a representative of God’s love and obliged by lineage, to assist others, passes by the assaulted man, displaying the same attitude as the priest. Both figures from the official religion show themselves to be dishonourable, leaving it clear that their practice of the Law was only a facade.

The priest and the Levite belonged to a social lineage comparable to that of the doctor of the Law, who must have immediately placed himself in that context and thought: “What if I were the victim? The priest passes by and does not help me; the Levite passes by and does not help me… What bad people!”

Perfect compassion and charity

Following the two representatives of the Hebrew religion, Our Lord introduces a Samaritan into the parable, a member of a people hated by the Jews and considered worse than pagans, due to their separation from the true religion. They were not to be so much as greeted…

But, contrary to the previous characters, the Samaritan “approached the victim” and, filled with compassion, took it upon himself to treat his wounds with oil and wine, according to the custom of the time. Furthermore, he put him on his own animal and took him to an inn, where he provided for all the expenses involved in his recovery. It was impossible to be more charitable! Although he was considered contemptible for being a Samaritan, he showed unmatched goodness, which no one could deny.

The story touched everyone. How was this Samaritan, belonging to a false religion, capable of this extraordinary compassion, while the other two, of priestly lineage, had behaved so reprehensibly?

The neighbour of the victim

It is not unreasonable to hypothesize that the doctor of the Law had already experienced similar situations, in which he had acted like the priest and the Levite towards people in need of assistance. Perhaps Our Lord was warning him: “It is not enough to fulfil the Law, if you do not take care of your neighbour.” Thus, with the narration concluded, the Divine Master once again questions him.

The answer was obvious. He had no choice but to opt for the third as the neighbour. However, he did so without even mentioning the name Samaritan, for it would be a humiliation and he feared being expelled from the synagogue. He merely said: “The one who treated him with mercy.”

While the scribe considered only those of his race as neighbours, and even tried to accuse the Redeemer of breaking the divine precepts by receiving everyone, the first lesson the latter gave him was to have him cite the Law and then to show him that, under the Law, charity must be universal. Our Lord came bringing a new regime in human relationships and, by means of a specific example, indicated how kindness and esteem could be established with the help of grace.

Jesus further taught him that precept alone is not enough, nor is mere external ritual; what matters is an upright intention. A common glass filled with crystalline water is worth more than a beautiful goblet filled with turbid water. God is not as interested in external acts as in what we have inside. This is the difference between the man who holds fast to the “dispensation of death” (2 Cor 3:7) of which St. Paul speaks, based solely on the letter of the Law and not on the Spirit, and the one who lives by the Law of grace inaugurated by the Saviour.

Nevertheless, perhaps the core of the teaching from today’s Gospel is not found in these two very important lessons.

III – “Go and Do Likewise”!

There is a detail sometimes overlooked in commenting on this parable. The Divine Master concludes as follows: “Go and do likewise.” Naturally, all of us should have pity on those in need. However, recognizing that we too have been “robbed”, we need to love with even greater intensity those who show us mercy. Let us see why.

In general, our attention is turned to the poor victim, seeing him as the neighbour of the priest, the Levite and the Samaritan. Nevertheless, Our Lord’s question presents a different focus: “Which of the three was neighbour to the robbers’ victim?”

It is not so important to know who considered the victim as his neighbour, but which of the three was, in accordance with his actions, the neighbour whom the victim should love. It is a more complex question than would appear at first sight, for by their ministry, the priest and the Levite ought to be the most solicitous neighbours toward the people. However, the scribe did not hesitate to reply that the neighbour was the Samaritan.

Ultimately, Our Lord was opening the way for the master of the Law to acknowledge Him as the One whom he should love more, since no one desired to do as much good for his soul as He did.

He took on our wounds!

For us, this question also has an obvious answer: we must love, above all, the One who has shown infinite mercy towards us. After original sin, humanity was left for dead, stripped of everything, abandoned in the worst possible situation. Our Lord, the Good Samaritan, leaves eternity, takes on flesh and assumes our weakness, bringing a new doctrine endowed with power, of which He Himself gives example. The Saviour not only treats our wounds, but takes them upon Himself, letting Himself be martyred on the Cross to redeem humanity, and sheltering us in the best inn history has known, namely the Holy Church. Therefore, He did much more than the Samaritan of the parable. Who deserves our love more than He?

Therefore, we should love Him with our whole heart. In this way we will perfectly fulfil the commandment recalled by the scribe, and meet the requirements for eternal life, promised to us at Baptism.

Let us be good Samaritans with our neighbour

With regard to others, let us consider how many people need our help because they have been assaulted by that thief called the devil and abandoned with open wounds, almost drained of strength. Now, the Divine Samaritan often allows this to happen so that we may practise the virtue of charity of which He Himself set the example. If we are filled with compassion to see someone suffering from hunger and immediately seek to help them, with even more reason we should apply ourselves to fortifying with the Word of God those lacking spiritual sustenance.

May all those in the Church be fully aware of this obligation to treat the wounds and care for the victims of the devil we encounter along our path! ◊

Notes

¹ In the Greek, the indefinite pronoun τις is used, which can be translated as certain, any.