15th
SUNDAY IN ORDINARY TIME
Colossians 1:15-20
Luke 10:25-37
"And who is my neighbor... The one who
treated him with mercy ... Go and do likewise.”
In today’s gospel,
Luke narrates to us one of the most celebrated parables of Jesus: The Parable
of the Good Samaritan. This story is proper o Luke. But what is most amazing
here is Luke's typical style of presenting the story in connection with the
greatest commandment of love. The didactic discussion between Jesus and the
scholar is introduced practically by the latter’s two questions: "What
must I do to inherit eternal life? And
"Who is my neighbor?” Around these two questions rotates the
message of our gospel. Let us meditate along these points.
1. Philosophy may always prove that there
can never be any atheist. This is precisely true because ironically this world
practically consists of only one generic kind of people: the atheist. But in
this generic atheism we distinguish two species: practical atheism and speculative
atheism. The former tries
to affirm that there is God in theory but denies or negates him in practice.
The latter, on the other hand, tries to deny or negate God's existence in
theory but in practice affirms that there is God. This seems to be one big
point in today's parable. While the parable does not intend to belittle the
priest and the Levite as irreligious, it neither it honors the Samaritan as
religious. What the parable is trying to teach is the fact that no one can really
deny God through and through. Only, the problem poses right then and there: how
can one really show that there is.
a. Practical atheism is personified by the priest and
the Levite. Needless to say, these are the people who teach and preach about
God, and most often they stand as the traditional image of religiosity. But
their constant speculative affirmation of a just and a loving God is now put
into test right then and there at the old and rugged road to
"When he (priest / Levite) saw him (the victim,
he passed by on the opposite side.” This is the way the parable
describes how the priest and the Levite behaved when they saw the fallen man.
The fact is, they saw. But here, their behavior seems to suggest that either
they did not want to see or they simply acted as if they did not see. Whichever
the case be, this is surely not an excuse. At the final judgment, many indeed would
ask: When did we see you in need and not help you? This seems to be the
"innocent" question of those who really failed to see Christ in the ugly faces of their
needy neighbors. The priest and the Levite
may also ask, or perhaps, pretend to ask this same question. But the Lord has
only one answer: "As often as you neglected to do it for one of the
least of my brothers you neglected to do it for me” (cf Mt 25:31-46).
Or else, we may suggest a third proposition. We may presume that, as a priest and a Levite, they might have been so meticulously mindful of the Levitical prescription not to defile themselves with the dead [(at a distance, the victim must have looked like dead) cf Lev 21:1. So, they might have simply acted according to the imperatives of their religion and thus render even this very act of avoidance as something religious. But even then, such motivation would not be an excuse either. Religious must be saving and not enslaving. This is one point Jesus has always been consistent of. Besides, the Jews are more concerned on what to do and not on what to be. Theirs is a morality of doing and not so much of being and becoming. So, even at the level of their own morality, this poor priest and Levite is rated 70 or below. Certainly, saving is greater a deed than simply avoiding to be defiled.
b. Speculative
atheism is personified by the star of the parable: the Good Samaritan. To
the eyes of the Jews, the two terms – Good
and Samaritan - are repugnant. They are impossible to go together. Either
one is good and not a Samaritan or a Samaritan and not good. Such attitude has
been deeply interwoven in their religio-cultural history as peoples. Among
others, Samaritans are living defiant of Jewish orthodoxy and thus are
considered unbelievers or even worse. This is even the reason why Jesus himself
would warn his disciples not to go to any pagan territory nor enter a Samaritan
town (cf Mt l0:5). But surprisingly, Jesus now makes a hero out of a
despised Samaritan. The parable tells us about this moving scene: "But
a Samaritan traveler came upon him was moved with compassion at the sight. He
approached the victim, poured oil and wine over his wounds and bandaged them. “
This is something pedagogical. And certainly, Jesus teaches us a message: this guy, considered as an enemy, is in fact a neighbor! He is no priest nor a levite. He is even believed to be a man of no God. He never taught nor preached. But the very act he did is no doubt a living testimony that there is indeed a living and a loving God!
2. "Who is my neighbor?” This is precisely the question the parable means to answer. And as we see, the answer to this second question is the concretization of the answer to the first question: "What must I do to inherit eternal life?” With this, Luke wants to establish that the commandment of love which is the gate pass to heaven is inseparable from one’s good treatment to his neighbor. But the parable certainly offers a very profound understanding of what and who a neighbor is. Certainly, such understanding surpasses the scholar's expectation and even ours.
The second question of the scholar sets the
neighbor as the object of love. That is why even at the beginning of the parable;
we can immediately suppose (together with the scholar) that that poor man who fell
into the robbers' hands was the neighbor. And of course, no one would
forbid us to think and treat the victim as a neighbor since everyone in need is
truly a neighbor. But at the end of the parable, Jesus shifts the course of our
thinking by asking: "Which of these three, do you think, made himself
neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?” With this, Jesus
sets the difference once and for all. He
sets the neighbor not so much as the object of love but as the subject
of love. Meaning, the
neighbor is not so much the receiver of love but the giver of love. He is the doer, the actor. No doubt, the victim was
a neighbor not only to the Samaritan but also to the priest and the levite. But priest and the Levite failed to be a neighbor
to the victim because they never extended any charity to the man in his dire
need. They even took the opposite side of the road. Only
the Samaritan became a neighbor because he acted in charity and gave out
love. And he did straight from the heart! His compassion must be that great as
to go beyond race and religion.