TEXT — Luke 10: 25–37 — Who is the Good Samaritan?
What do I do to inherit eternal life?
25 And behold, a lawyer stood up to put him to the test, saying, “Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?” 26 He said to him, “What is written in the law? How do you read?” 27 And 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 neighbour as yourself.” 28 And he said to him, “You have answered right; do this, and you will live.”
Who is my neighbour?
29 But he, desiring to justify himself, said to Jesus, “And who is my neighbour?” 30 Jesus replied, “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and he fell among robbers, who stripped him and beat him, and departed, leaving him half dead. 31 Now by chance a priest was going down that road; and when he saw him he passed by on the other side. 32 So likewise a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side.
The Samaritan
33 But a Samaritan, as he journeyed, came to where he was; and when he saw him, he had compassion, 34 and went to him and bound up his wounds, pouring on oil and wine; then he set him on his own beast and brought him to an inn, and took care of him. 35 And the next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper, saying, ‘Take care of him; and whatever more you spend, I will repay you when I come back.’
Go and do likewise
36 Which of these three, do you think, proved neighbour to the man who fell among the robbers?” 37 He said, “The one who showed mercy on him.” And Jesus said to him, “Go and do likewise.”
EXPLANATION
25 And behold, a lawyer stood up to put him to the test, saying, “Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?” 26 He said to him, “What is written in the law? How do you read?” 27 And 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 neighbour as yourself.” 28 And he said to him, “You have answered right; do this, and you will live.”
“And behold, a lawyer stood up to put him to the test” — Lawyers were experts in the Scriptures. This lawyer’s question was not sincere as Luke tells us that he asked it “to put [Jesus] to the test”.
“saying, ‘Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?’” — The lawyer calls Jesus “Teacher”, indicating that he expects his professional view on this contentious point. This title was given to him by his contemporaries more than any other. It implied that he was an expert in sacred scripture (Lk. 2: 46; 20: 21).
“what shall I do to inherit eternal life?’” — When Jesus sent out the seventy missionary disciples to prepare for his visits to the towns and countryside (last Sunday’s Gospel Reading) he did not mention anything about the observance of the Jewish Law. For the lawyer this was the only way to salvation. It did not require interior dispositions. Religion, for the scribes and Pharisees, was pure legalism, the external observance of laws.
This question will be put to Jesus again by a member of one of the leading families (Lk. 18: 18).
“He said to him, ‘What is written in the law? How do you read?’” — Jesus invited the expert to reply to his own question. Jesus knew that the lawyer sought eternal life through observance of the Law.
The Law, given to Moses for the Chosen People and called the Torah, is to be found in the first five books of the Bible which are known as the Pentateuch. This was supplemented by the scribes and Pharisees with an additional 613 precepts (248 commandments and 365 prohibitions). These covered every aspect of Jewish life. The two other sections of the Jewish or Hebrew Bible are the Prophets and the Writings.
“And 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 neighbour as yourself.’” — The lawyer’s reply was perfect, linking as one the two most important commandments: absolute and total love for God and loving neighbour as oneself. The first was taken from Deuteronomy 6: 5 and the second from Lv. 19:18.
“And he said to him, “You have answered right; do this, and you will live.” — Jesus confirms that by loving God and neighbour a person will “inherit eternal life”.
29 But he, desiring to justify himself, said to Jesus, “And who is my neighbour?” 30 Jesus replied, “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and he fell among robbers, who stripped him and beat him, and departed, leaving him half dead. 31 Now by chance a priest was going down that road; and when he saw him he passed by on the other side. 32 So likewise a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side.
“But he, desiring to justify himself, said to Jesus, ‘And who is my neighbour?’” — The lawyer wished to assert himself and show that he was righteous and so asked the second question, again to “test” or trap Jesus.
The rabbis of the time indulged in debate on the definition of ‘who is a neighbour?’ One group held that it was only those of the Jewish faith (Lv. 19: 18 — “You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against any of your people, but you shall love your neighbour as yourself: I am the Lord”). The others taught that it was broader and included people of other faiths but who were dwelling in Israel (Lv. 19: 33–34 — “When an alien resides with you in your land, you shall not oppress the alien. The alien who resides with you shall be to you as the citizen among you; you shall love the alien as yourself, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God”).
“Jesus replied, ‘A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho’” — Jesus replies with the parable of the Good Samaritan. This is not really a parable but a story that does not require interpretation. It is so factual it could have been a true story.
Jesus will not reply directly to the lawyer’s question but will state what conduct should be expected from one who is a neighbour to another person.
The “man” is presumed to be a Judean Jew.
“Going down” can be taken literally here as Jerusalem is 2,500 feet above sea level and Jericho is 8oo feet below, a very steep decline. It was a lonely and, consequently, a dangerous road frequented by bandits. It would be about twenty–five to thirty kilometers long.
“and he fell among robbers, who stripped him and beat him, and departed, leaving him half dead” — Bands of robbers plagued this road as it was isolated. For protection people travelled in groups as far as possible. The traveller probably resisted the robbery and so was beaten.
“Now by chance” — This phrase is used only of “the priest” but it is implied for the Levite and Samaritan. As already stated, generally people would travel in groups on this road unless there was no group or they were unable to wait for the next group. The phrase is important. It was “by chance” that these three individuals, priest, Levite and Samaritan, came across the injured man.
“a priest was going down that road; and when he saw him he passed by on the other side” — The “priest” saw the injured man and made a decision. If the man was dead or if he was not a Jew to touch him would have meant that the priest would become ritually unclean (Nm. 19: 11) and have to return to Jerusalem for purification. He judged that he should not do that. He was observing the Law. He would have been praised, not condemned, for his decision.
By passing by “on the other side” the “priest” avoided all possibility of contact with the injured man and defilement.
“So likewise a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side” — The “Levite”, a sacred minister of word and sacrifice in the Temple, made a similar decision as the priest for the same reason. He also was observing the Law.
The first two people to see the injured man were the priest and the Levite, both attached to worship in the Temple. Jesus is giving a practical example of “what I want is love, not sacrifice”, that is moral responsibility has priority over cultic services. Jesus will go on and describe the Samaritan as using two items prominent in Temple worship, namely oil and wine. The Samaritan, a non–Jew who would not be allowed to worship in the Temple, was using the same elements to bring peace and healing as used in Temple worship. His loving act was worthy of Temple worship.
33 But a Samaritan, as he journeyed, came to where he was; and when he saw him, he had compassion, 34 and went to him and bound up his wounds, pouring on oil and wine; then he set him on his own beast and brought him to an inn, and took care of him. 35 And the next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper, saying, ‘Take care of him; and whatever more you spend, I will repay you when I come back.’
“But a Samaritan” — The Samaritans and the Jews were very hostile to each other. One would expect that the Samaritan would have passed by without helping the Jew. There always was the possibility that the man lying on the ground was feigning injury so that travellers would come to his help and when they did he would jump up, attack and rob them. The Samaritan had very good reasons to “pass by on the other side”.
“as he journeyed, came to where he was” — This phrase implies that the Samaritan only “by chance” (v. 31) came across the injured man.
“and when he saw him, he had compassion, and went to him and bound up his wounds, pouring on oil and wine” — The Samaritan was moved by love and compassion and immediately undertook to do something practical. It was not the Jewish Law that motivated him. Nor was he afraid of ritual defilement by touching the injured man.
The alcohol in the wine would have an antiseptic effect on the wound. The oil would have soothed the pain.
“then he set him on his own beast and brought him to an inn, and took care of him” — By placing the injured man on his own beast the Samaritan would have had to walk and hold the man from falling off.
“And the next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper, saying, ‘Take care of him; and whatever more you spend, I will repay you when I come back.’ — It is reckoned that according to the rates at the time, the Samaritan gave to the inn–keeper enough money for about twenty–five days accommodation for the sick man. He went even further by promising to pay more if necessary on his return. If the innkeeper was not honest the Samaritan was leaving himself open for a very big bill. His great generosity is stressed.
36 Which of these three, do you think, proved neighbour to the man who fell among the robbers?” 37 He said, “The one who showed mercy on him.” And Jesus said to him, “Go and do likewise.”
“‘Which of these three, do you think, proved neighbour to the man who fell among the robbers?’ He said, ‘The one who showed mercy on him’” — Note the question, “Who proved to be the neighbour?”
The lawyer could not bring himself to say that “the Samaritan” proved himself to be a neighbour to a Jew which would mean that the Samaritan fulfilled the Law. Nevertheless he had to admit that “the Samaritan” “showed mercy to him [the injured man]”.
The lawyer had asked two questions: “What shall I do to inherit eternal life?” and “Who is my neighbour?” He answered the first question by telling Jesus that he would inherit eternal life by loving God and his neighbour. He then asked the second question and Jesus led him to admit that the one who displayed, not just felt, love and compassion was neighbour to other people, even if they were enemies, of different races, religions and nationalities. The question “Who is my neighbour?” was not answered but “to whom am I neighbour” was. The Samaritan was neighbour to the injured man.
“And Jesus said to him, ‘Go and do likewise’” — Once again I repeat, this passage opened with the lawyer asking the question, “What must I do to inherit eternal life?” Here now is the answer to this question. It is not a theoretical question provoking just intellectual debate. It requires a practical answer. One must have compassion expressed in action. This is why Jesus concludes with “Go and do likewise”.
APPLICATION
Jesus
The lawyer who came to Jesus addressed him as “Teacher”. This was the most common title given to Jesus by his contemporaries. It implied that he was an expert in sacred scripture (Lk. 2: 46; 20: 21). There were two strong reactions to his teaching. On the one hand the authorities took objection to his claiming to teach on his own personal right, or with God’s authority, in introducing new doctrines and interpretations of the Law. He also provoked the authorities by claiming to be the fulfilment of the Old Testament that he was the promised Messiah. On the other hand he was admired for teaching with power and authority. He frequently backed up his teaching with miracles. His parables were novel and wonderful vehicles of new teaching or interpretations.
When one reads the sacred scriptures there are two ways of interpreting a passage. The first is called the literal sense which is the meaning conveyed by the words and interpreted by scholars according to rules of sound interpretation. All other senses depend on the literal sense.
The second way of interpretation is by the spiritual sense. This is very clearly expressed in The Catechism of the Catholic Church: “The Holy Spirit gives a spiritual understanding of the Word of God to those who read or hear it, according to the dispositions of their hearts. By means of the words, actions, and symbols that form the structure of a celebration, the Spirit puts both the faithful and the ministers into a living relationship with Christ, the Word and Image of the Father, so that they can live out the meaning of what they hear, contemplate, and do in the celebration” (CCC, n. 1011).
There are three types of spiritual sense, the first being the allegorical sense. Hopefully, at the end of this Application, you will have a clearer understanding of what this spiritual, as an allegorical sense, means. Here is a spiritual interpretation of this story or parable.
The injured man represents Adam expelled from paradise, the symbol of all fallen mankind. He is stripped of immortality and is left dead in sin.
The robbers represent Satan and his forces of evil who try to destroy the spiritual life in people.
The priest and Levite represent the Old Covenant which has not been able to restore fallen man to full life.
The inn represents the Church; wine and oil represent the sacraments. It is through the Church, the sacrament of salvation, and the sacraments that the life won for us by Jesus is granted to fallen mankind.
The Samaritan represents Jesus. He is full of love and compassion for fallen mankind. Even though people may hate and reject him he is willing to take risks to bring healing and salvation to those in need. He does not hesitate to take action to restore full life, going to the utmost in generosity to help, giving all that he has which for him is his very life. He gives responsibility to the Church (inn) to continue his initial healing. The Samaritan leaving the inn with the promise to return is the resurrection into heaven. The two denarii represent the Scriptures and the sacraments which nourish souls.
Neighbour
The initial question of the lawyer was “what shall I do to inherit eternal life?” This brought about a second question, “Who is my neighbour?” That second question was not answered as the lawyer expected. Instead Jesus directed the dialogue with the lawyer to the question “To whom am I neighbour?” The lawyer had expected a definition of his neighbour based on nationality, race and religion, that Jews only were his neighbours. The interpretation of the parable or story is that anyone in need is one’s neighbour. In fact the story of the Good Samaritan answers the lawyer’s first question, “what shall I do to inherit eternal life?”
Works of mercy by which we come to the aid of those in need can be either spiritual or corporal depending on their spiritual and bodily necessities. The seven spiritual works of mercy are: To convert the sinner;
To instruct the ignorant;
To counsel the doubtful;
To comfort the sorrowful;
To bear wrongs patiently;
To forgive injuries;
To pray for the living and the dead.
The seven corporal works of mercy are:
To feed the hungry;
To give drink to the thirsty;
To clothe the naked;
To shelter the homeless;
To visit the sick;
To visit the imprisoned;
To bury the dead.
Pope Benedict XVI in his encyclical letter, Deus Caritas est, has a wonderful contribution on the teaching of the story of the Good Samaritan:
“a) The Church’s deepest nature is expressed in her three–fold responsibility: of proclaiming the word of God, celebrating the sacraments, and exercising the ministry of charity. These duties presuppose each other and are inseparable. For the Church, charity is not a kind of welfare activity which could equally well be left to others, but is a part of her nature, an indispensable expression of her very being.
“b) The Church is God’s family in the world. In this family no one ought to go without the necessities of life. Yet at the same time divine love extends beyond the frontiers of the Church. The parable of the Good Samaritan remains as a standard which imposes universal love towards the needy whom we encounter “by chance” (cf. Lk 10:31), whoever they may be. Without in any way detracting from this commandment of universal love, the Church also has a specific responsibility: within the ecclesial family no member should suffer through being in need. The teaching of theLetter to the Galatiansis emphatic: ‘So then, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all, and especially to those who are of the household of faith’ (6:10)” (n. 25).
Commentary on 15th Sunday of the year C 10.07.2016
TEXT — Luke 10: 25–37 — Who is the Good Samaritan?
What do I do to inherit eternal life?
25 And behold, a lawyer stood up to put him to the test, saying, “Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?” 26 He said to him, “What is written in the law? How do you read?” 27 And 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 neighbour as yourself.” 28 And he said to him, “You have answered right; do this, and you will live.”
Who is my neighbour?
29 But he, desiring to justify himself, said to Jesus, “And who is my neighbour?” 30 Jesus replied, “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and he fell among robbers, who stripped him and beat him, and departed, leaving him half dead. 31 Now by chance a priest was going down that road; and when he saw him he passed by on the other side. 32 So likewise a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side.
The Samaritan
33 But a Samaritan, as he journeyed, came to where he was; and when he saw him, he had compassion, 34 and went to him and bound up his wounds, pouring on oil and wine; then he set him on his own beast and brought him to an inn, and took care of him. 35 And the next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper, saying, ‘Take care of him; and whatever more you spend, I will repay you when I come back.’
Go and do likewise
36 Which of these three, do you think, proved neighbour to the man who fell among the robbers?” 37 He said, “The one who showed mercy on him.” And Jesus said to him, “Go and do likewise.”
EXPLANATION
25 And behold, a lawyer stood up to put him to the test, saying, “Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?” 26 He said to him, “What is written in the law? How do you read?” 27 And 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 neighbour as yourself.” 28 And he said to him, “You have answered right; do this, and you will live.”
“And behold, a lawyer stood up to put him to the test” — Lawyers were experts in the Scriptures. This lawyer’s question was not sincere as Luke tells us that he asked it “to put [Jesus] to the test”.
“saying, ‘Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?’” — The lawyer calls Jesus “Teacher”, indicating that he expects his professional view on this contentious point. This title was given to him by his contemporaries more than any other. It implied that he was an expert in sacred scripture (Lk. 2: 46; 20: 21).
“what shall I do to inherit eternal life?’” — When Jesus sent out the seventy missionary disciples to prepare for his visits to the towns and countryside (last Sunday’s Gospel Reading) he did not mention anything about the observance of the Jewish Law. For the lawyer this was the only way to salvation. It did not require interior dispositions. Religion, for the scribes and Pharisees, was pure legalism, the external observance of laws.
This question will be put to Jesus again by a member of one of the leading families (Lk. 18: 18).
“He said to him, ‘What is written in the law? How do you read?’” — Jesus invited the expert to reply to his own question. Jesus knew that the lawyer sought eternal life through observance of the Law.
The Law, given to Moses for the Chosen People and called the Torah, is to be found in the first five books of the Bible which are known as the Pentateuch. This was supplemented by the scribes and Pharisees with an additional 613 precepts (248 commandments and 365 prohibitions). These covered every aspect of Jewish life. The two other sections of the Jewish or Hebrew Bible are the Prophets and the Writings.
“And 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 neighbour as yourself.’” — The lawyer’s reply was perfect, linking as one the two most important commandments: absolute and total love for God and loving neighbour as oneself. The first was taken from Deuteronomy 6: 5 and the second from Lv. 19:18.
“And he said to him, “You have answered right; do this, and you will live.” — Jesus confirms that by loving God and neighbour a person will “inherit eternal life”.
29 But he, desiring to justify himself, said to Jesus, “And who is my neighbour?” 30 Jesus replied, “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and he fell among robbers, who stripped him and beat him, and departed, leaving him half dead. 31 Now by chance a priest was going down that road; and when he saw him he passed by on the other side. 32 So likewise a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side.
“But he, desiring to justify himself, said to Jesus, ‘And who is my neighbour?’” — The lawyer wished to assert himself and show that he was righteous and so asked the second question, again to “test” or trap Jesus.
The rabbis of the time indulged in debate on the definition of ‘who is a neighbour?’ One group held that it was only those of the Jewish faith (Lv. 19: 18 — “You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against any of your people, but you shall love your neighbour as yourself: I am the Lord”). The others taught that it was broader and included people of other faiths but who were dwelling in Israel (Lv. 19: 33–34 — “When an alien resides with you in your land, you shall not oppress the alien. The alien who resides with you shall be to you as the citizen among you; you shall love the alien as yourself, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God”).
“Jesus replied, ‘A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho’” — Jesus replies with the parable of the Good Samaritan. This is not really a parable but a story that does not require interpretation. It is so factual it could have been a true story.
Jesus will not reply directly to the lawyer’s question but will state what conduct should be expected from one who is a neighbour to another person.
The “man” is presumed to be a Judean Jew.
“Going down” can be taken literally here as Jerusalem is 2,500 feet above sea level and Jericho is 8oo feet below, a very steep decline. It was a lonely and, consequently, a dangerous road frequented by bandits. It would be about twenty–five to thirty kilometers long.
“and he fell among robbers, who stripped him and beat him, and departed, leaving him half dead” — Bands of robbers plagued this road as it was isolated. For protection people travelled in groups as far as possible. The traveller probably resisted the robbery and so was beaten.
“Now by chance” — This phrase is used only of “the priest” but it is implied for the Levite and Samaritan. As already stated, generally people would travel in groups on this road unless there was no group or they were unable to wait for the next group. The phrase is important. It was “by chance” that these three individuals, priest, Levite and Samaritan, came across the injured man.
“a priest was going down that road; and when he saw him he passed by on the other side” — The “priest” saw the injured man and made a decision. If the man was dead or if he was not a Jew to touch him would have meant that the priest would become ritually unclean (Nm. 19: 11) and have to return to Jerusalem for purification. He judged that he should not do that. He was observing the Law. He would have been praised, not condemned, for his decision.
By passing by “on the other side” the “priest” avoided all possibility of contact with the injured man and defilement.
“So likewise a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side” — The “Levite”, a sacred minister of word and sacrifice in the Temple, made a similar decision as the priest for the same reason. He also was observing the Law.
The first two people to see the injured man were the priest and the Levite, both attached to worship in the Temple. Jesus is giving a practical example of “what I want is love, not sacrifice”, that is moral responsibility has priority over cultic services. Jesus will go on and describe the Samaritan as using two items prominent in Temple worship, namely oil and wine. The Samaritan, a non–Jew who would not be allowed to worship in the Temple, was using the same elements to bring peace and healing as used in Temple worship. His loving act was worthy of Temple worship.
33 But a Samaritan, as he journeyed, came to where he was; and when he saw him, he had compassion, 34 and went to him and bound up his wounds, pouring on oil and wine; then he set him on his own beast and brought him to an inn, and took care of him. 35 And the next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper, saying, ‘Take care of him; and whatever more you spend, I will repay you when I come back.’
“But a Samaritan” — The Samaritans and the Jews were very hostile to each other. One would expect that the Samaritan would have passed by without helping the Jew. There always was the possibility that the man lying on the ground was feigning injury so that travellers would come to his help and when they did he would jump up, attack and rob them. The Samaritan had very good reasons to “pass by on the other side”.
“as he journeyed, came to where he was” — This phrase implies that the Samaritan only “by chance” (v. 31) came across the injured man.
“and when he saw him, he had compassion, and went to him and bound up his wounds, pouring on oil and wine” — The Samaritan was moved by love and compassion and immediately undertook to do something practical. It was not the Jewish Law that motivated him. Nor was he afraid of ritual defilement by touching the injured man.
The alcohol in the wine would have an antiseptic effect on the wound. The oil would have soothed the pain.
“then he set him on his own beast and brought him to an inn, and took care of him” — By placing the injured man on his own beast the Samaritan would have had to walk and hold the man from falling off.
“And the next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper, saying, ‘Take care of him; and whatever more you spend, I will repay you when I come back.’ — It is reckoned that according to the rates at the time, the Samaritan gave to the inn–keeper enough money for about twenty–five days accommodation for the sick man. He went even further by promising to pay more if necessary on his return. If the innkeeper was not honest the Samaritan was leaving himself open for a very big bill. His great generosity is stressed.
36 Which of these three, do you think, proved neighbour to the man who fell among the robbers?” 37 He said, “The one who showed mercy on him.” And Jesus said to him, “Go and do likewise.”
“‘Which of these three, do you think, proved neighbour to the man who fell among the robbers?’ He said, ‘The one who showed mercy on him’” — Note the question, “Who proved to be the neighbour?”
The lawyer could not bring himself to say that “the Samaritan” proved himself to be a neighbour to a Jew which would mean that the Samaritan fulfilled the Law. Nevertheless he had to admit that “the Samaritan” “showed mercy to him [the injured man]”.
The lawyer had asked two questions: “What shall I do to inherit eternal life?” and “Who is my neighbour?” He answered the first question by telling Jesus that he would inherit eternal life by loving God and his neighbour. He then asked the second question and Jesus led him to admit that the one who displayed, not just felt, love and compassion was neighbour to other people, even if they were enemies, of different races, religions and nationalities. The question “Who is my neighbour?” was not answered but “to whom am I neighbour” was. The Samaritan was neighbour to the injured man.
“And Jesus said to him, ‘Go and do likewise’” — Once again I repeat, this passage opened with the lawyer asking the question, “What must I do to inherit eternal life?” Here now is the answer to this question. It is not a theoretical question provoking just intellectual debate. It requires a practical answer. One must have compassion expressed in action. This is why Jesus concludes with “Go and do likewise”.
APPLICATION
Jesus
The second way of interpretation is by the spiritual sense. This is very clearly expressed in The Catechism of the Catholic Church: “The Holy Spirit gives a spiritual understanding of the Word of God to those who read or hear it, according to the dispositions of their hearts. By means of the words, actions, and symbols that form the structure of a celebration, the Spirit puts both the faithful and the ministers into a living relationship with Christ, the Word and Image of the Father, so that they can live out the meaning of what they hear, contemplate, and do in the celebration” (CCC, n. 1011).
There are three types of spiritual sense, the first being the allegorical sense. Hopefully, at the end of this Application, you will have a clearer understanding of what this spiritual, as an allegorical sense, means. Here is a spiritual interpretation of this story or parable.
The injured man represents Adam expelled from paradise, the symbol of all fallen mankind. He is stripped of immortality and is left dead in sin.
The robbers represent Satan and his forces of evil who try to destroy the spiritual life in people.
The priest and Levite represent the Old Covenant which has not been able to restore fallen man to full life.
The inn represents the Church; wine and oil represent the sacraments. It is through the Church, the sacrament of salvation, and the sacraments that the life won for us by Jesus is granted to fallen mankind.
The Samaritan represents Jesus. He is full of love and compassion for fallen mankind. Even though people may hate and reject him he is willing to take risks to bring healing and salvation to those in need. He does not hesitate to take action to restore full life, going to the utmost in generosity to help, giving all that he has which for him is his very life. He gives responsibility to the Church (inn) to continue his initial healing. The Samaritan leaving the inn with the promise to return is the resurrection into heaven. The two denarii represent the Scriptures and the sacraments which nourish souls.
Neighbour
The initial question of the lawyer was “what shall I do to inherit eternal life?” This brought about a second question, “Who is my neighbour?” That second question was not answered as the lawyer expected. Instead Jesus directed the dialogue with the lawyer to the question “To whom am I neighbour?” The lawyer had expected a definition of his neighbour based on nationality, race and religion, that Jews only were his neighbours. The interpretation of the parable or story is that anyone in need is one’s neighbour. In fact the story of the Good Samaritan answers the lawyer’s first question, “what shall I do to inherit eternal life?”
Works of mercy by which we come to the aid of those in need can be either spiritual or corporal depending on their spiritual and bodily necessities. The seven spiritual works of mercy are: To convert the sinner;
To instruct the ignorant;
To counsel the doubtful;
To comfort the sorrowful;
To bear wrongs patiently;
To forgive injuries;
To pray for the living and the dead.
The seven corporal works of mercy are:
To feed the hungry;
To give drink to the thirsty;
To clothe the naked;
To shelter the homeless;
To visit the sick;
To visit the imprisoned;
To bury the dead.
Pope Benedict XVI in his encyclical letter, Deus Caritas est, has a wonderful contribution on the teaching of the story of the Good Samaritan:
“a) The Church’s deepest nature is expressed in her three–fold responsibility: of proclaiming the word of God, celebrating the sacraments, and exercising the ministry of charity. These duties presuppose each other and are inseparable. For the Church, charity is not a kind of welfare activity which could equally well be left to others, but is a part of her nature, an indispensable expression of her very being.
“b) The Church is God’s family in the world. In this family no one ought to go without the necessities of life. Yet at the same time divine love extends beyond the frontiers of the Church. The parable of the Good Samaritan remains as a standard which imposes universal love towards the needy whom we encounter “by chance” (cf. Lk 10:31), whoever they may be. Without in any way detracting from this commandment of universal love, the Church also has a specific responsibility: within the ecclesial family no member should suffer through being in need. The teaching of the Letter to the Galatians is emphatic: ‘So then, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all, and especially to those who are of the household of faith’ (6:10)” (n. 25).