The story of the Good Samaritan is one of the best known in the Bible. Even people who don’t read the Bible know what a “good Samaritan” is. In the legal world there are the “good Samaritan laws,” which offer legal protection to people who give reasonable assistance to those who are injured, ill or in perilous situations. These good Samaritan laws are meant to encourage people to offer assistance to those in need.
The parable of the good Samaritan was told by a master storyteller and has the qualities of a “story-well-told.” Some of the marks of a good story are evidenced in its use of repetition, attention to detail and a phrase repeated for dramatic impact. These, among others, are the characteristics of the parable. For example, besides its dramatic features and stark setting, the parable has a phrase that is repeated — with powerful effect.
We are told twice that both the priest and Levite, upon seeing the battered man, “pass by on the opposite side.” What a shock to Jesus’ listeners; two religious figures, whom they would expect to stop to give help, pass by. Not only that, but they pass by “on the opposite side” — as if to put distance between themselves and the suffering victim. In Jesus’ time people were all too familiar with incidents of violence happening along the road from Jerusalem to Jericho. So, Jesus’ parable tells about one more victim along that treacherous road. It’s possible then that those who heard the tale might understand why two solitary travelers would hurry by the place, because the attackers might still be lurking, waiting for another victim.
We have also heard many tragic stories of human suffering. The media makes us so aware of worldwide pain, the result of hurricanes, floods and forest fires — like the fire that just happened in Arizona and took the lives of 19 firefighters. We also hear stories of pain inflicted, not only by natural catastrophes, but as a result of the cruelty humans inflict on other humans — the roads from Jerusalem to Jericho are many: civil wars and conflicts around the world; unrest in Egypt; roadside bombings in Afghanistan; suicide attacks in Iraq; and let’s not forget the past horrors of the Holocaust and the slaughter by the Khmer Rouge of over 1 million Cambodians.
So many horrors stir up questions in our minds: How could people let these things happen? Where were the good people? Why didn’t they speak up and do something? Why do people keep a distance? Remain not-so-innocent bystanders while others are in dire need?
Recently Johanna Vos died. During the Second World War she and her husband Art risked their lives in Holland to hide Jewish neighbors from the Gestapo. They and others, who did similar heroic acts, were known as “rescuers.” These “rescuers” were ordinary people who took great risks to save the victims “by the side of the road.” It is estimated that 500,000 Jews were saved by “rescuers” during those terrible days.
A study was done of people like them. What made them take such risks? When Johanna and Art were asked, fifty years later, their response was quite ordinary-sounding, “We didn’t think about it. We did what any human being would do.” But unfortunately history doesn’t bear that out; so many people have remained bystanders when others were in need. They wouldn’t cross over to the other side to offer help.
The study concluded: Rescuers come from all classes of people, educated and uneducated, rich and poor, believers and atheists. (That’s what Samaritans were, fallen-away Jews, outside the pale of the religious observant.) Rescuers were individualists; while other people followed demands of society, they weren’t constrained by what others expected them to do. (Family, friends and society can exert pressures and restrain good deeds.) In addition, many rescuers had a history of doing good deeds: visiting people in hospitals; collecting books for poor students; caring for stray animals, etc. The report about rescuers said, “They just got into the habit of doing good. So when a need arose, they habitually responded.”
Many of those who helped the desperate during the war had a sense of “universalism.” They didn’t see Jews as Jews first, but as human beings. (The Samaritan in the story didn’t see a Jew or a Samaritan by the side of the road, but an injured person.) Finally, interviews with rescuers showed they believed the gift of goodness could be passed on; that it is natural in every human being, but it must be cultivated and nursed. (This encourages us to set an example for our children of caring for others, especially those individuals outside the box.)
The story about Johanna and Art Vox, appeared in Time Magazine (March 16, 1992, page 65) and was called “A Conspiracy of Goodness.” (For more on Johanna and Art go to: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/04/nyregion/04vos.html?_r=0)
Conspiracy is not always a threatening notion; it means “to breathe with.”
We as a church are ” A Conspiracy of Goodness.” We breathe together the same breath of God’s Spirit that urges and enables us to do good. The Spirit breathes in us, stirring up our inner goodness and instincts to help others in need who may be outside our immediate circle. The Spirit helps us do good in everyday and ordinary ways so that such deeds become a natural response — as natural as breathing in and breathing out.
We note in the parable that the Samaritan carried with him the “healing ointments” of the day: wine for cleansing, oil to promote healing. Which suggests that with God’s Spirit we already have the necessary elements for healing and helping. We draw on our natural skills, gifts from God, and take steps to cross over to the other side where those in need are, so that we can address their wounds.