Even if you are not a student
of the Bible, you will have heard of the "Good Samaritan" parable in
Luke 10:25-37. On the road from
Jerusalem down to Jericho, a certain man lay half dead, having been
beaten and robbed by thieves. When a priest happened by, he noticed the
man in need, but gave no help. Later a Levite came along. Not wanting to
get involved either, he "passed by on the other side" just like the
priest. But when a despised Samaritan came to the scene, he did what was
needed, at considerable inconvenience and expense. Jesus said he "showed
mercy," and the Good Samaritan now stands as a symbol for anyone who
actively serves the needs of his fellow man.
But I wonder about the priest
and the Levite. Weren’t they "good" men? It seems not unlikely that
their next-door neighbors would have described them as "decent, clean,
upstanding folks." They both had steady jobs. They were probably
friendly when you saw them, but also minded their own business. Likely
they kept their lawn up so as not to be an embarrassment to the
neighborhood. They didn’t let their teenagers get drunk and hot rod up
and down the street at two in the morning, etc., etc. Surely they were
"good, moral people" weren’t they?
Well, the priest and the
Levite were good in exactly the sense that many of us think of ourselves
as being good: they did not murder, did not commit adultery, did not
lie, etc. They perhaps secretly congratulated themselves for being above
average morally because they would not stoop to engage in the despicable
things they frowned on in others. The strength of their own morality was
measured by the intensity of their negative feelings about the
immorality of other people. They were "good" because they had a long
list of practices they felt strongly against. In other words,
righteousness for them meant scrupulously avoiding un-righteousness.
We shouldn’t minimize the
importance of fleeing evil, obviously. But there is more to being truly
moral than looking down on immorality in others. One of my favorite
quotations is a line from Roy Masters which says: "Loving what is right
is different from hating what is wrong and feeling right about it." This
means that we don’t truly qualify as being on the side of truth and
goodness if all we do is criticize the sin we see around us. There is,
of course, no lack of things in the world that are wrong, and we ought
to feel a genuine revulsion for these sins. But neither ought we to
confuse this revolting feeling with a true love for what is good.
It is also a mistake to
confuse a merely intellectual appreciation of goodness with genuine love
for what is right. Really loving what is right goes beyond abstract
appreciation. Many years ago, Charles Finney made this observation:
"Moral agents are so constituted, that they necessarily approve of moral
worth or excellence; and when even sinners behold right character, or
moral goodness, they are compelled to respect and approve it, by a law
of their intelligence. This they not infrequently regard as evidence of
goodness in themselves. But this is doubtless just as common in hell as
it is on earth. The veriest sinners on earth or in hell, have, by the
unalterable constitution of their nature, the necessity imposed upon
them, of paying intellectual homage to moral excellence." And neither is
an eagerness to debate issues of right and wrong proof that we love the
good. As Adlai Stevenson remarked, "It is often easier to fight for our
principles than to live up to them." No, truly loving what is good
requires actively doing what is good!
A part of our problem here is
that we tend to judge others by their actual performance, while we judge
ourselves by our ideals. We think of ourselves as being fairly "good"
because we know that our goals and intentions are good. We may not be
doing much about our goals, but we render a favorable verdict on
ourselves anyway, because we know what we are capable of doing, what we
are going to do in the future, etc. But the person who truly loves what
is right is not merely the person with high ideals and positive
potential — he is the actual doer of good. When there is mercy to be
shown, Jesus’ commendation falls upon the person who loves mercy enough
to show it, making a personal sacrifice if necessary in order to do so.
Talk is cheap, as the saying
goes. So, in a certain sense, are our intentions. Can do and have done
don’t even live in the same neighborhood. "To him who knows to do good
and does not do it, to him it is sin" (Jas.
4:17). Loving what is right demands that we do more than complain
about the world going to the dogs while we watch the evening news from
the comfort of a recliner.
Other Articles by Robert Turner
Obscene Movies and TV
Programs
Calm Enough to Consider
Diligently Seeking God
