Who is my neighbour? Not everyone! Am i right?

[WesleyF]

I’ve often heard the parable of the good samaritan being used to convey that everybody is our neighbour and that we should be like the good samaritan. But when I read the parable, I am more and more convinced that the neighbour was “The one who showed mercy on him” (Luke 10:37).

So my understanding is that anyone who does not show me mercy is not my neighbour and that I am not bound to love him like I love myself.

 

[LilyM]

I’ve often heard the parable of the good samaritan being used to convey that everybody is our neighbour and that we should be like the good samaritan. But when I read the parable, I am more and more convinced that the neighbour was “The one who showed mercy on him” (Luke 10:37).

So my understanding is that anyone who does not show me mercy is not my neighbour and that I am not bound to love him like I love myself.

Couldn’t have it more wrong. At the end of the parable Jesus said ‘go and DO likewise’ - go and do as the Samaritan did, since he was in the only person who DID anything in the story. There’s no indication that the Jew, the victim of the robbers, felt neighbourly in any way towards the Samaritan. For all we know, he may’ve resented having needed help - many people do.

Or as Our Lord put it “You have heard that it was said, “Love your neighbor and hate your enemy. But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you”(Matthew 5:43-44). Can’t get plainer than that. He even tells us why a bit later in the same passage - 'if you love those who love you, what recompense will you have? Do not hte tax collectors do the same?” (v 46)

 

[Pax]

Couldn’t have it more wrong. At the end of the parable Jesus said ‘go and DO likewise’ - go and do as the Samaritan did, since he was in the only person who DID anything in the story. There’s no indication that the Jew, the victim of the robbers, felt neighbourly in any way towards the Samaritan. For all we know, he may’ve resented having needed help - many people do.

Or as Our Lord put it “You have heard that it was said, “Love your neighbor and hate your enemy. But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you”(Matthew 5:43-44). Can’t get plainer than that. He even tells us why a bit later in the same passage - 'if you love those who love you, what recompense will you have? Do not hte tax collectors do the same?” (v 46)

Extremely well stated!

God bless.

 

[Church_Militant]

Hebrews 13:2] Do not neglect to show hospitality to strangers, for thereby some have entertained angels unawares.

 

[JRKH]

I’ve often heard the parable of the good samaritan being used to convey that everybody is our neighbour and that we should be like the good samaritan. But when I read the parable, I am more and more convinced that the neighbour was “The one who showed mercy on him” (Luke 10:37).

So my understanding is that anyone who does not show me mercy is not my neighbour and that I am not bound to love him like I love myself.

Lily has already given an wonderful response to this But I would like to add a thought for reflection.
Where in the Gospels does Christ teach that others must prove themselves to us before we treat them as brothers and neighbors?

Your understanding, as stated in your last sentence opens up a lot of issues for then one must ask “what constitutes mercy” and who gets to decide what is merciful. In the parable the mercy shown is obvious, but there can be many kinds of mercy shown that are so obvious to the one receiving the mercy.
An example might be a parent disciplining a child. The Parent know that there action is merciful and loving because it will save the child heartache later in life. The Child may not see this and instead just see “punishment”.
The same thing could be said for a Employer/employee relationship. The Employer could see disciplinarey action (but not firing) as merciful while the employee merely sees punishment and resents the action taken.

Mercy and being a good neighbor is not about what others do, but about what WE do. What does the Golden rule say? “Do unto others as you would have then do unto you”. In other words treat others as you wish to be treated.

So I would ask again - Where in the NT does Christ teach that our neighbor must prove himself to us first…

Peace
James

 

[DebChris]

One of the reasons for the parable of the Samaritan was to point to the reality that the person we least expect to show mercy may be indeed be the person who does show mercy. Israelites and Samaritans were not exactly on friendly terms during the time of Christ. How do you know that your act of mercy will not change the heart of the person who previously failed to show you mercy? Our act of mercy may indeed be an act of forgiveness and we are called to forgive 70 X 7 times, an infinite number of times.
Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass (who fail to show mercy or otherwise sin) against us.

 

[Prophesy]

I’ve often heard the parable of the good samaritan being used to convey that everybody is our neighbour and that we should be like the good samaritan. But when I read the parable, I am more and more convinced that the neighbour was “The one who showed mercy on him” (Luke 10:37).

So my understanding is that anyone who does not show me mercy is not my neighbour and that I am not bound to love him like I love myself.

It is not that the person who does not show you is not your neighbour. They just are not acting as neighbours. We are to love all, but it can be tough love. =]

-Prophecy

 

[catharina]

I’ve often heard the parable of the good samaritan being used to convey that everybody is our neighbour and that we should be like the good samaritan. But when I read the parable, I am more and more convinced that the neighbour was “The one who showed mercy on him” (Luke 10:37).

So my understanding is that anyone who does not show me mercy is not my neighbour and that I am not bound to love him like I love myself.

Your are exactly WRONG.
We are to be “neighbor” to all.

 

[catharina]

Hebrews 13:2] Do not neglect to show hospitality to strangers, for thereby some have entertained angels unawares.

Thank you. I’ve always loved this teaching!

 

[catharina]

Lily has already given an wonderful response to this But I would like to add a thought for reflection.
Where in the Gospels does Christ teach that others must prove themselves to us before we treat them as brothers and neighbors?

Your understanding, as stated in your last sentence opens up a lot of issues for then one must ask “what constitutes mercy” and who gets to decide what is merciful. In the parable the mercy shown is obvious, but there can be many kinds of mercy shown that are so obvious to the one receiving the mercy.

An example might be a parent disciplining a child. The Parent know that there action is merciful and loving because it will save the child heartache later in life. The Child may not see this and instead just see “punishment”.

The same thing could be said for a Employer/employee relationship. The Employer could see disciplinarey action (but not firing) as merciful while the employee merely sees punishment and resents the action taken.

Mercy and being a good neighbor is not about what others do, but about what WE do. What does the Golden rule say? “Do unto others as you would have then do unto you”. In other words treat others as you wish to be treated.

So I would ask again - Where in the NT does Christ teach that our neighbor must prove himself to us first…

Peace
James

Beautiful.

 

[EricFilmer]

But when I read the parable, I am more and more convinced that the neighbour was “The one who showed mercy on him” (Luke 10:37).

After presenting the Parable of the Good Samaritan, Jesus asked the scholar, “Which of these three, in your opinion, was neighbor to the robbers’ victim?” The scholar replied, “The one who treated him with mercy.” (Luke 10:36 & 37). Based on this, I can understand why you see the Good Samaritan being the one identified as the neighbor.

Nevertheless, I think the point of the parable is that both the Good Samaritan and the victim of the robbers are to be considered as neighbors to each other. It is normal within human society to feel a type of kinship with those who live near you. People who dwell in the same neighborhood often help one another with tasks (for example, moving a sofa or getting a ride to the airport), with borrowing things (tools, the iconic “cup of sugar”, and such) and often engage in open social events (block parties, backyard BBQs, etc.). Also, in a time of an emergency, a person may run to the house of a neighbor for help. It is natural for humans to feel more inclined to help a neighbor than a complete stranger.

But in the Parable of the Good Samaritan, the Samaritan is obviously far away from his own neighborhood (for the simple fact that he is not in Samaria). The victim of the robbers is a complete stranger and a Jew as well (and there was a lot of animosity between Jews and Samaritans in the time of Jesus). Nevertheless, the Samaritan is moved by the virtues of mercy and compassion to treat this stranger in the same way he would treat a fellow Samaritan living in his own neighborhood.

In light of all this, I believe that the term “neighbor” in the parable applies to both the Samaritan and the victim of the robbers. In other words, the relationship between neighbors is what is being described. The challenge of the parable is to not simply view our friends, families and people in our neighborhoods as people entitled to neighborly care from us, but everyone. Therefore, we should extend to strangers the kind of loving Christian care and service we extend to those we know personally. Otherwise, the victim of the robbers would have died in the street unless someone who knew him personally happened to come along in time.

 

[belmontmac]

Did anyone listen to the homily on EWTN Mass for last Sunday? Kinda a different spin that what I heard at Mass.

 

[John7]

I’ve often heard the parable of the good samaritan being used to convey that everybody is our neighbour and that we should be like the good samaritan. But when I read the parable, I am more and more convinced that the neighbour was “The one who showed mercy on him” (Luke 10:37).

So my understanding is that anyone who does not show me mercy is not my neighbour and that I am not bound to love him like I love myself.

did a bit of googling on ‘who is my neighbor’ and found this,
Although one of the critical elements of the Christian revaluation of Jewish revelation involved the attempt to enlarge the category of the neighbor, disagreement as to the reference of re’a—the “neighbor” in Leviticus 19:18—was also a key point in some of the major ideological and interpretive splits within the rabbinic tradition. The dominant strand of Jewish interpretation of the commandment, from Onkelos (second century C.E.) and Maimonides (twelfth century) at least until the Emancipation in the eighteenth century, has argued that re’a in Leviticus 19:18 refers exclusively to a fellow-Jew, a brother-in-covenant. And indeed at many other points in the Bible there can be no doubt that re’a is strictly limited to the children of Israel. Commentators in this tradition often impose further limitations within the realm of the “fellow-Jew.” Maimonides, for example, seems to confine the category of neighbor solely to observant Jews, to “him who is your brother in the Law and in the performance of the commandments.”[8] Rashbam (twelfth century) similarly restricts the obligation to love the neighbor by adding the proviso, “if he [really] is ‘your neighbor,’ * if he is good, but not if he is wicked, as it is written, ‘To fear the Lord is to hate evil’ (Prov. 8:13).”[9] Readers who limit the meaning of re’a to fellow-Jews often point out that verse 18 falls into two halves, in which the thought of the first part, “Thou shalt not take vengeance, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people” continues in the second, “and thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.” These interpreters claim that “neighbor” merely reiterates “children of thy people,” and that the verse specifies two types of duties, negative and positive, owed to other Jews.
from etext.virginia.edu/journals/tr/volume4/TR_04_01_e01.html (there are also other views in this article)

Thank God for Jesus !!! He actually knew what he was talking about.*

 

[RosaryFan]

I’ve often heard the parable of the good samaritan being used to convey that everybody is our neighbour and that we should be like the good samaritan. But when I read the parable, I am more and more convinced that the neighbour was “The one who showed mercy on him” (Luke 10:37).

So my understanding is that anyone who does not show me mercy is not my neighbour and that I am not bound to love him like I love myself.

“Loving” your neighbor does not mean you have to like him or like how he acts; it means you are under an obligation to treat him with mercy (treating him better than he deserves) regardless of how he treats you. It means wanting and willing what is best for his salvation. This is the command that Jesus has given us. Everyone, without exception, is your neighbor.

 

[thenobes]

Very nice!!!

Your are exactly WRONG.
We are to be “neighbor” to all.

Simply stated, a neighbor is anyone to whom we can act as a neighbor.

If it is possible for us to be a neighbor to someone, then that one is our neighbor.

peace
steve

 

[WesleyF]

Hmmm. Thank you guys for your excellent (name removed by moderator)uts.

However, here is my problem in understanding this concept of neighbour -

Jesus said that we must love our neighbour as we love ourselves. Now that is quite a difficult thing to do, especially if the person you are trying to help is not good. A neighbour is someone whom we are commanded to love as we love ourselves.

Church Militant pointed out Hebrews 13:2, which says “Do not neglect to show hospitality to strangers, for thereby some have entertained angels unawares.”

Now, my understanding is that showing hospitality is not the same as loving somebody as oneself.

At one place Jesus said, “Do not give what is holy to dogs. Do not cast your pearls before pigs.” Now if I am to treat these “dogs” and “pigs” as my neighbours (love them as myself), then I think I would be in trouble. John also says, “If any one comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him into the house or give him any greeting” (2 John:10). However, if I were to treat this person as a neighbour, then I would be bound to welcome him and greet him.

I am not arguing here for the sake of arguing, but because I see the real difficulties in loving each person as I love myself.

 

[LilyM]

Hmmm. Thank you guys for your excellent (name removed by moderator)uts.

However, here is my problem in understanding this concept of neighbour -

Jesus said that we must love our neighbour as we love ourselves. Now that is quite a difficult thing to do, especially if the person you are trying to help is not good. A neighbour is someone whom we are commanded to love as we love ourselves.

Church Militant pointed out Hebrews 13:2, which says “Do not neglect to show hospitality to strangers, for thereby some have entertained angels unawares.”

Now, my understanding is that showing hospitality is not the same as loving somebody as oneself.

At one place Jesus said, “Do not give what is holy to dogs. Do not cast your pearls before pigs.” Now if I am to treat these “dogs” and “pigs” as my neighbours (love them as myself), then I think I would be in trouble. John also says, “If any one comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him into the house or give him any greeting” (2 John:10). However, if I were to treat this person as a neighbour, then I would be bound to welcome him and greet him.

I am not arguing here for the sake of arguing, but because I see the real difficulties in loving each person as I love myself.

We are to do MORE than love our neighbour as ourselves, in fact. We are to love him as Jesus loves him. That’s something to ponder, as there’s quite a gulf between our love of self and Jesus’ love of even the last and least of people. His love reaches the level of self-identification with the other, to the point where what is done to the other - ANY other, even the least - He considers as done to Him.

Giving someone ‘pearls’ or ‘what is holy’ is a very different thing to giving them the common neighbourly courtesies and the help that is due one’s fellow man. ‘Pearls’ and ‘what is holy’ imply giving them the highest treasures of wisdom and knowledge, rather than the necessities.

Even Jesus reached a point where He gave up trying to convert the hard of heart, although He certainly tried hard with many, such as Judas, who were ultimately unable to accept. To do so might well be an example of giving what is holy to dogs or putting pearls before swine.

The Samaritan got the Jew medical treatment, and a place to stay. We need to do likewise for anyone who needs them or similar necessities (food, clothing, etc), provided we can help. In fact we are told that our judgement, and ultimately our eternal fate, depends (at least in part) on doing those things - the corporal works of mercy - or neglecting to do them, even to the least.

Note the Samaritan didn’t give the Jew his copy of the Torah or insist on taking him to his synagogue or whatnot. THAT might well be ‘giving what is holy to dogs’ - those who are unable to appreciate the sacred.

 

[JRKH]

ONe must be careful when pulling verses out of context. If you read the preceding passage in 2 John, you’ll see that he is warning the Church agianst those who are “deceivers” and are not acknowledging Christ, and are not moving ahead in Love.
He is warning the Church to beware of such deceivers so that they do not lose what they have worked to attain.
So this is a warning against false teachings within the Church and not against a casual greeting to a non-believer or even to a brother who is recognized as being in error.

As to Christ’s words, one must remember when and where they were spoken. This preceded the passion and resurection. These words were spoken under the old covenent before the kingdom was opened to the Gentiles.
Of course even at this, it must be seen that, when it is obvious that a person is not receptive to The Word, one should not waste time preaching The Word to them.
This does not preclude treating such persons with respect however. For even if we are not to give what is Holy to dogs, that does not mean we are to kick them. Even if were are not to through pearls before swine that does not mean we are to starve them.
Common Chrisitan Charity needs to prevail in all cases for one thing remains constant…

If we Love others as we Love ourselves then we want to see these others get to heaven. To facilitate this we must show them Christ in our daily lives.
That is the greatest Love we can show them.
As St Francis once said, "Preach teh Gospel always. When necessary use words.

Peace
James

 

[WesleyF]

Hmmm, Lily and JRKH, your replies are very convincing. However, help me to overcome this mental barrier I have. Is there any papal document addressing this issue? Coz if the Church has officially taught something, then I accept it immediately.

 

[JRKH]

Hmmm, Lily and JRKH, your replies are very convincing. However, help me to overcome this mental barrier I have. Is there any papal document addressing this issue? Coz if the Church has officially taught something, then I accept it immediately.

I am not “up on” the various papal documents available, but if you go HERE I’m sure you will be able to find something to address your concern.

Peace
James