discussion, reading, social justice, journal

>- ~.... ~ OJ ~ .~ ~ OJ ~ 0 ~ +-' ~-c ~OJ E ~ ~ ~ u ~ 0 ==0 ~ OJ ~ 0.0 ~ OJ

"0 o:::tr-, U 0 c o:::t 0 \.0 +-' O'l III 0 ZCO I-

Journal Title: Jesus of Galilee: contextual christology for the 21st century

Year:~ Page~ 39-52 ': Author~rez

Article Title: Going to Meet the Other

Imprint: primo.exlibrisgroup.com-ALMA-BC

This material may be protected by Copyright Law (Title: 17 U.S.Code)

11/1/20186:21:32 PM

BT203 .J4695 2011 O'Neill

Jaisy Joseph (JOSEPHJG) 234 Corey Rd Apt.l Brighton, MA 02135

JESUS of

GALILEE CONTEXTUAL CHRISTOLOGY FOR THE 21ST CENTURY

-------- ROBERTLASSALLE-KLEIN--------

PABLO ALONSO .:. M. SHAWN COPELAND .> MARY DOAK -.. VIRGILIO ELIZONDO SEAN FREYNE <. ROBERTO S.GOIZUETA .:. DANIEL GROODY .> GUSTAVO GUTIERREZ

MICHAEL E. LEE .> CAROLINE N. MBONU .:. FRANCIS MINJ <. SOPHIA PARK GIACOMO PEREGO .> JON SOBRINO .:. JOSESOLS

ORBISOBOOKS Maryknoll, New York 10545

Founded in 1970, Orb is Books endeavors to publish works that enlighten the minJ, nourish the spirit, and challenge the conscience. The publtshtng arm of the Maryknoll Fathers and Broth- ers, Orhis seeks to explore the ~d()haldirncnviorrs of rhe Christian faith and mission, to invite dialogue with diverse cultures and religious traditions, and to serve the cause of reconciliation and peace. The hooks publishd reflect the views of their authors and do nut represent the offi- cial position of the Maryknoll Society, To learn more about Maryknoll and Orbis Boob, please visit our website at www.marvknollsocictv.org.

Copyright © 20 I I by Rtlhert Lassallc-Klein.

Published hy Orhis Books, Maryknoll, New York 10545-0302. Manufactured in the United States of America.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or hy any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or any information storage or retrieval system, without prior permission in writing from the publisher.

Queries regarding rights and permissions should be addressed to: Orbts Books, po. Box 302, Maryknoll, New York 10545-0302

Librarv of Congress Cataloging-in-Fublicarion Data

Jesus nf Galilee: contextual christology for the Zl sr century I Robert Lassalle-Klein, editor. p. em.

Includes inde x. ISBN 978-1-57075-915-4 (pbk.) I. Jesus Christ-Person and offices. I. Lassalle-Kle!n, Robert Anthony. BT203_)4695 1011 2J2'8--Jc22

2010053154

ISBN 978-1-57075-915-4

2 GOING TO MEET THE OTHER

Gustavo Gutierrez

The realm of the poor and insignificant looks like rhe world of the Other when viewed from the perspective of the groups, the people, the opinions, and the concepts that dominate our life today. The poor and those who enter into solidarity with them are increasingly aware of this unjust situation.

However the so-called parable of the Good Samaritan (Lk 10:3- 37), which has so greatly illfluenced Christian memory and inspired so many artistic expressions, k...mphasizes the primacy of the Other land theI ~ __~ _ necessity of goingt» _1Jl~~.L.th,s:.t!1.j If that is the attitude we 'must have toward all persons, it becomes even more exigent in regard to those who live in a situation of social insignificance. It is fascinating to read and re-read this gospel passage in this light.

The parable is composed of two closely related parts. Each begins with a question. After examining each part, I will reflect on the call of the parable to go to meet the Other.

What Must We Do to Inherit Eternal Life?

The story begins with the question posed by a lawyer: What must I do to inherit eternal life (Lk 1O:25b)7 The question concerns the relation- ship between daily conduct and eternal life, understood as the ultimate meaning of human existence.

The Question The..question a~?~~~esthe ..!:~~_4_,~S'(~.o_.?~?!l1~_~hit:K.!.~()!.5J~r.~g~!.I!.~~_~~.r, nal life, for we are in the realm of the practical and of works, which provides a more concrete and personal approach to the great com, mandment than that offered by the parallel passages in Mark (12: 18) and Matthew (22:36). The lawyer's question provides the first men- tion of the verb "to do" (Greek: poieo), which appears three other times framing the development of the narrative: two are found at the

39

40 .:. GUSTAVO GUTIERREZ

beginning (Lk 10,25, 27), and two otbers in the final verse (10:37). Practice is one of the axes on which the story turns.

Jesus responds by bringing up the issue of the interpretation of the law, and as happens so many times in the gospels, he formulates it m the form of a question: "What is written in the law" (Lk 10:26)1 Ac- knowledging his interlocutor as someone trained to interpret the law, he adds, with a certain amount of deference, "What do you read there?" (10:26). The parable, which follows shortly, is dedicated to deepening our understanding of the answer.

The scribe responds correctly that love ought to inspire the be- lk.~er's behavior. For that reason the textin lilk,,;'unliK'e the parallel texts in Mark and Matthew, combines the two biblical passages cited from the Old Testament into one sentence (10:27). The first passage, which is preceded in the text of Deuteronomy by the solemn expres- sion, "Hear, 0 Israel," says, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength" (see Deut 6:5). The phrase asks us, without repeating the verb love, to immedi- ately connect all our human energies to the second passage which fol- lows, "you shall love your neighbor as yourself: I am the LORD" (Lev 19:18). This combined formulation is thus an interpretation of the law.

Toward a Single Commandment Some clarifications regarding these texts and the relationship that ex- ists between them will help us to sketch the framework and the mean- ing of the parable that follows, which constitutes the second part of the pericope.

1. The first observation pertains to the scope of the idea of neighbor. It is important to note that in the text of Leviticus (19: 18) the Hebrew term is rea, translated as neighbor (in Greek, plesion, or near), which has the narrow meaning of an associate or companion (moreover verse 18 identifies it with "your countrymen," literally "the children of your people").' The context clearly says the same thing since, a little later in the same chapter of Leviticus, we are called to see the immigrant (geT: guest, stranger) who resides "with you" as though such a person were native born, and we are told once again, "you shall love the alien as yourself" (10:33-34).

Here it is important to recall two other mentions of Leviticus 18:19 in the New Testament. For Paul, "the whole law is summed up In a single commandment, 'You shall love your neighhor as yourself'" (Gal 5:14; see Rom 13:8-9 and 15:2). For his part, James affirms that

GOING TO MEET THE OTHER .~ 41

"the royal law according to the scripture" demands that "You shall love your neighbor as yourself' Oas 2:8). These two verses connect love of neighbor with the fulfillment of the law to which Luke alludes. And the references to the law that immediately follow use the significant terms, "the whole law" and "the royal law." Both underline the impor- tance of love of neighbor in the Christian life as a verifiable practice. Neither explicitly mentions the love of God, but the context does not require it, for it is precisely the love of God that is verified.

2. The expression "as yourself' is contested. One can read it literally, "as you love yourself," the most frequent translation, which is largely influenced by the Greek version of the Septuagint. But the Hebrew terms are open to another translation. Some Jewish ~~rs -(B~E~-r among them) suggest the expression: "love your neighbor who is like '- you," "your likeness"; "love your neighbor who 9g~~th~same works that you d(;:'; ~;~-;i~~pIYl"love your n:eighbor."l Norb~~ Lohfink pro- poses a readirig that follo~s these lines, but goes further. For him, the expression "as yourself' is "a Semitism that is equivalent to 'my family' [which implies that] loving someone as yourself means ... ~.':!.~i}},g.th.'!'1<.. as if they were a member of your family. And this love must also be ex- tend~dr;:]'the'nelghbor, that is, t~' th~~e who are not part of your fam- ily,"4 This means,' "lo've your neighbor as you love your own,"/as you .t£~~--" love your family, as you love your community. ..., '

In truth, the translation "love your neighbor as yourself' does not avoid the risk of an individualistic reading and a shortsighted view. The aforementioned versions certainly require clarifications, but they are interesting clues (particularly Lohfinks) that permit us to locate this expression in a wider horizon in which the Other clearly occupies the central place.

fThe neighbor is someone who is close to me, but who is also differ- ent'and irreducibly othe;')-lis or her otherness helps me to step outside myself, and my recognition of him or her is a necessary aspect of my own personal affirmation. The parable will make it clear that love is

" not simply understood as an abstract feeling, but rather signifies sloi~ . 'something for the Other. .

3. The third observation speaks to the way in which Luke presents the issue. The parallel texts in Mark and Matthew insist on the close rela- tionship between love of God and love of neighbor. But Luke, as we have already said, goes in a direction that seems to merge the two pre- cepts into one, which we will have to consider in analyzing the parable.

42 .:. GUSTAVO GUTIERREZ

This is the same unity to which Benedict XVI draws our attention in t _ his first encyclical: "Love of God and love of neighbor are thus insepa- rable, they form a single commandment" (Deus Caritas Est, 18, my em- phasis).' We also find it in Matthew 25:31-46, which provides an illu- minating perspective from which to the read the parable of the Good Samaritan: we find Jesus in the Other, in the poor.

The first part of the verse that we are considering ends-as will occur at the conclusion of the parable it.self-with a response from Jesus that goes beyond his approval of the answer provided by the scribe. Jesus tells the scribe to put this single commandment into prac- tice: "do this and you will live" 00:28). "Do the truth," he could have "lid in Johannine terms On 3:21); the act of love is the source of life, It is truth put in practice.

The scribe has responded to his own question, and Jesus has given his assent. At this point it is about moving on to what is most impor- tant, translating this precept into concrete gestures of love toward both God and his neighbor, thereby taking part m "eternal life," in the reign of God. In this way the scribe will become worthy of the beatitudes that Luke will offer in the following chapter, and which further emphasize the importance of practice. In response to the woman's shouted greet' ing, "Blessed is the womb that bore you," Jesus replies, "Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it" (Lk II: 27-28)1

The dialogue with the doctor of the law is thus crucial for under- standing the message of the parable. The exchange not only illustrates the word that calls us to love of God and love of neighbor, but it also provides clarifications that underline the unity and universality of that love, and that draw our attention to the context in which that love has life: the context of practice.

Who Is My Neighbor?

The lawyer insists on clarifications; he wants to know exactly who his neighbor is. But instead of responding with an abstract definition, Jesus replies with a story.

From the Side of the Road The crucial question, "Who is my neighbor!" (10:29), situates the per- son asking the question, the "1," in a space where the neighbor would probably refer to those nearby, people on his or her property, or those living in close proximity. These are people who, in one way or another, surround me and to whose needs I must attend, which in this case

GOING TO MEETTHE OTHER 0} 43

would include the man who was robbed. The scribe LSnot step.El!'g out of his own little wotld Lfat the beginningo~~~~-;:'~;;tic;n he a;k'7, "What shouHTdo," immediately adding "for my neighbor?'; Perhaps this is why the text says he wanted to "justify himself" (10:29). But the gospel of Jesus consists in a call to abandon a world focused on the I-a world that is literally egocentric-and to enter into the world of the Other.

For this reason, after telling the story Jesus turns the tables on his questioner, respond ing with a question of his own that provides the key to the meaning of the story: Who behaved like a good neighbor to the wounded man found by the side of the road? In other words, who be- came a neighbor to the other, to the thou? Here we must see that a shilt has taken place,th~axis of thestorv has been moved. We are in- vited to realize that becoming a neighbor to the Other involves getting close to them This is something that the first travelers did not do, and that only the Samaritan understood. Jesus' question changes the see- nario: the heart of the problem resides not in the I of the questioner, but in the thou of the one who has been violated and forgotten. The performance of the travelers is judged in relation to him; as a result, the lawyer who is Jesus' interlocutor moves from the center to the pe- ripheryof our concerns, which seems to have been the location of the victim of the attack in the lawyer's original question.

Thus, there is a movement from the I of the lawyer to the thou of the wounded man, from my world to the world of the Other, a move- ment that is at the heart of the parable. We have moved from seeing the neighbor as an object, or recipient of our help, to considering him or her as a subject of a personal approach, of fellowship, which is more than an expression of simple physical and cultural neighborliness. This transition is in many ways Copernican: it inverts two worlds. The world of the lawyer gives way to the world of the person who was at- tacked (his neighbor). This move is particularly sigmficant in a gospel like Luke's, which emphasizes the historical changes brought about by the Messiah.

For this reason, and contrary to our expectations, the key actor in the story is not the Samaritan, but rather the person identified as "a man" (anthrop6s tis, 10:30), the victim, the helpless one, the one with no name or standing. Nothing is said about him; he is an insignificant, anonymous person. We don't know if he is ]ewish"-orSamaritan;"fFie nature ofhi~ 't~;,~ie, or what he is doing there. He is the Other and he will define all the other characters in the narrative. His battered and abandoned condition calls out to people immersed in their everyday

44 .:. GUSTAVO GUTIERREZ

routines, and their response is to find any excuse to get away. The road to Jericho is an image of everyday life then and now. There we con- stantly cross paths with others, acquaintances and strangers. And what the Samaritan did happens among us today, as is also unfortunately true of what the Levite and the priest did.

Each of the characrers in the story- including the robbers and the innkeeper-is designated by his religious Identity or social location. The insignificance of the victim is caprured by his anonymity and so- cial nakedness. He is left with just one characteristic: his humanity, his face, which, accordingto Levinas, says, "Don't let me die." The pres- ence of the victim touches every aspect of the story. We must read the text from the side of the road where the person was left beaten and "half dead," avoided by some and noticed by one whose heart was moved by the cruelty and injustice of the victim's condition . . - The story calls us to a change of course, to take responsibility for what is implied by an authentic life for a human and a believer. The scribe has no choice but to recognize that the Samaritan was the one who acted with compassion by giving life to the injured, unlike the Levite and the priest who, by avoiding him, abandoned him to his fate and to death, thus becoming factual accomplices of the assailants.

The parable makes us understand that we must go beyond nation- ality, beyond religious or ethnic ties, and attend to rhe needy, whatever his or her social or religious status, with no one excluded. We are called to a universal questioning that pushes beyond existing categories and recognizes the priority of those who suffer abandonment and injus- tice. This is what Luke means when he talks about love of enemies and says "do good to those who hate you" (6:27)6 This vision is under- scored by the action of the Samaritan, who can be considered an "enemy" to those hearing the parable.

Nonetheless, it is important to note that the story of the Good Samaritan is not so much a rejection of the law as it is an innovative reinterpretation of it. The parable offers a hermeneutical key for under- standing the law as Torah, as a teaching or path. Jesus does not respond to the lawyer with a formal definition of the notion of neighbor, which could lead to a touchy debate on the law. Rather, for Jesus it is about a dynamic category that presupposes getting closer to the Other, depend- ing on our creativity. The neighbor is not defined a priori, for we can all be neighbors if we draw close to the Other. The mode I is set and the story invites us to behave like this in our daily lives. There is no men- tion, nor is there need for it at the moment, of a final judgment at the end of time. The focus is here and now .

._----_ .._-_ ...

GOING TO MEETTHE OTHER -.. 45

Becoming a Neighbor Thus, a neighbor is not the person we chance to meet in our neigh- borhood or in our daily travels, but rather the person whose acquain- tance we choose to make, to the extent that we step out of our usual route and take that of the Other, entering into their world. 7 It is about becoming a neighbor to the Other, even the foreigner, to th~~o is not a part of our own geographical, social, or cultural world. In a way, we could say that we do not "have" neighbors, hut rather we "make them" through our own initiatives, gestures, and actions that bring us close to those we consider distant. Moving closer to the Other has a two-way effect: we become their neighbor and the Other becomes ours; it's a coming and going. This is the point of the afore- mentioned question of jesus at the end of the story: "Which';,[these three, do you think, was (geganenai) to the man who fell into the hands of the robbers" (I0:36)?

Jesus' question replaces the earlier question posed by the doctor of the law, redirecting it to its roots: what must one do to inherit eternal life? The lawyer answers: act like the Samaritan ["The one who showed him mercy" (10:37)]. The verbal form gegonenai is often mis- leadingly translated as "had been," or "was," but could be more pre- cisely translated as "made himself' or "became a neighbor," or "acted like a neighbor." This translation is important for the meaning of the text, since being a neighboris not simply a given, but must be con- structed or created.

This perspective is emphasized by the contrast between rhe first two travelers and the Samaritan, a touch that gives a particular bite to the story. Here we encounter another reversal of roles, in the style of Luke. Both the priest and the Levite-respected people connecred to the cult, but whose behavior is disapproved by jesus-see the man, but they cross to "the other side" of the road in order to avoid someone who is half dead. It is the Samaritan-c--a member of a rejected commu., nity-who leaves his path when he sees the Injured man, comes close to him, and shows compassion. He makes his decision Without being asked, without having any particular connection to the man who was attacked. His view (a view of mercy) is different from that of the first two travelers. Perhaps the victim is from the jewish people, a foreigner to the Samaritan, What is important is that he has been assaulted and needs help. The Samaritan is not looking for reciprocity and does not expect a reward for his gesture. He acts out of generosity and gratuity, out of a kind of righteousness that "exceeds that of the scribes" (Mr 5:20) both then and now.

46 .;. GUSTAVO GUTIERREZ

Neither does the Samaritan act out of observance of a cold and impersonal sense of duty (like Nazarfn, the character in the movie by Bnnuel, who excels in gestures of assistance acting out of duty rather than love"). Rather, he acts from the feeling provoked by the situation of the person who has been assaulted. What motivates the action of the Samaritan is compassion-in the sense of sharing the pain of the other-which he experiences personally. Luke chooses a strong term to describe this feeling, splanknizomai, which means to stir one's en- trails.' Speaking at the beginning of the gospel through Zechariah, Luke talks about the "tender (splankna) mercy" of God (Lk 1:78), a love that literally becomes flesh, and which isneither ethereal or neu- tral. It is the presence of charity, the grace of God, incarnated in human love in the many ways in which human beings express their love, and which do not otherwise exist." The physical repercussion of compassion (felt in the entrails) is an aspect of how charity is experi- enced in the human person, a radical unity of flesh and spirit. With· out affective closeness, without friendship with the poor and insignifi- cant, there is no solidarity with them. The Samaritan was capable of responding appropriately because he made the painful situation of the wounded person into his own.

Hospitality is a profound and frequent theme in scripture, a theme that illuminates our understanding of "being a neighbor." The Samari- tan leaves his own road, his world, in order to enter in the life of the wounded stranger, the Other. He makes the stranger his guest because he hosts him in his own life, a gesture that he prolongs by entrusting the man to the care of the innkeeper, making the latter a participant in the gesture of hospitality. Hospitality, like nearness, involves reciproc- ity. It is interesting that the Spanish word for guest refers both to the one who receives hospitality and to the one who gives it. Hospitality does not make the personal reality of the one being accommodated in our world disappear; rather, it implies respecting that reality in its oth- erness, and being enriched by it. The God of the Bible takes hospice in our history, and in so doing makes us guests of his reign."!

Go and Do Likewise

The parable of the Good Samaritan does not explicitly mention the reign of God, but it describes the situation by which the reign should be characterized: the brotherhood/sisterhood of humankind. This brotherhood/sisterhood is rooted in the gift of relationship, in our na- ture as daughters and sons of the God announced by Jesus Christ, whose love surpasses all borders and which we build gesture by gesture.

GOING TO MEETTHE OTHER •• 47

The Samaritan, Image of Jesus Our parable has been frequently allegorized, sometimes excessively, making each of the characters into figures from human history, or per- sons from the First or Second Testaments. Unfortunately this has sometimes removed them from the newness of good news of the Gospel of Luke, which forces us to be discerning. It is good to move away from the abuse of the allegorical interpretation of scripture, but abandoning it completely would be to lose a rich tradition with its spiritual impact on Christian life. Given that the Samaritan is presented as a model for Christian conduct, the insistence of the great pastors and theologians of the Patristic era or its importance serves to highlight the christo log i- cal dimension of the story. This view, I believe, provides us with the ul- timate meaning of the Samaritan's behavior: putting into practice the single commandment of love of God and love of neighbor, a summary of the ethics of the gospel.

The gospels in fact show us a Jesus who is sensitive to injustice and suffering, who practices compassion, and who h~~-'ii'i~~~n"'hTs'''he~rt"to the abandoned and the miserable. Caring for the Victim, the Samaritan bandages "his wounds, having poured oil and wine on them" (10:34), and entrusts him to the innkeeper (I0:34). Jesus approaches the needy and despised, whoever they might be, taking no account of national, cultural, or religious barriers. Elsewhere Luke describes Jesus' attitude of compassion for the widow whose only son has died (7: 13), and for the father in the parable of the Prodigal Son (15:20). Both texts sup- port the view that the Samaritan represents Jesus. The gospels each de- scribe different expressions of kindness and even tenderness by Jesus, his preoccupation with alleviating the suffering of the marginated, his desire to appreciate the poor as persons, and his rejection of those who mistreat the vulnerable. It is impossible not to be moved by the Samar- itan's actions, and not to think of him as a representative of Jesus, the Son ofGod.

As a result, it is clear that to be a disciple of Jesus is to act as he did and to love as he did. In this case that means acting like the Samari- tan, becoming a neighbor to the one who is suffering and marginated. This means recognizing what was done by the Samaritan, not only that he was moved, but that he put mercy into practice, he attended to the wounded, and, preoccupied with whar would happen to him, placed the wounded man into the care of the innkeeper (10:35). Then, for the second time in the story, Jesus tells the scribe, "go and do likewise" (10:37). This constitutes almost a commission for mission, something like "give your life, practice mercy"-without partiality-in the best and most fundamental sense of the term: give your heart through

48 .:. GUSTAVO GUTIERREZ

concrete gestures to the poor and forsaken. A foreigner considered ig- norant of the law demonstrates the correct action for those who wish to inherit "eternal life" (10:25), which is to put the reign of God into practice. This is an idea that, despite appearances, dominates the peri- cope and provides a permanent standard for our own conduct.

It has been argued that the emphasis of this text on loving the stranger is complemented by the story of Martha and Mary, which highlights the love of God and follows the story of the Samaritan." But I think this unfairly reduces the message of the parable, which is complex and rich and does not require this annotation. To behave like the Samaritan, drawing near to the needy, already squarely situates us in love of God. This is what it means to fulfill the single command- ment. On the other hand, the peri cope of Martha and Mary has its own coherence and meaning.

Our understanding of the parable of the Good Samaritan becomes clearer and more insistent if we start from the face of the Other. The text cannot be separated from the scene of the last judgment in Matthew 25, which gives it a permanent connection to history. The Latin American bishops have stated this clearly on a variety of occa- sions. Indeed, at its last three meetings, the Conference of Latin America Bishops has restated this and offered concrete examples of this gospel horizon, including lists describing the faces of the poor on the continent in whose faces we must learn to recognize the face of Christ.

A Samaritan Church Reflecting on the reality of Latin America and the Caribbean, the 2007 Conference of Latin American bishops at Aparecida, Brazil, reaffirmed the preferential option for the poor and took the Samaritan as the model for the work of evangelization and humanization. "llluminated by Christ," the Conference declares, "the suffering, the injustice, and the cross [of our people] call us to live like a Samaritan Church (d. Luke 10:25-37)" (#27), adding the clarification, following Luke and citing the address by Pope Benedict XVI, "we are reminded that 'evangeliza- tion has always been united with human development and authentic Christian liberation." Evangelization is the good news of God's gratu- itous love, which calls us to commit ourselves to the promotion of jus- tice and to liberation from every kind of oppression. Evangelization and the good news are as inseparable as love of God and love of neighbor.

This approach, which strengthens Aparecida's conclusions, appears in a variety of places in the final document. The bishops argue that re-

GOING TO MEETTHE OTHER ~ 49

sponding to Jesus who calls us to follow in his footsteps "demands that we jom the good Samaritan (Lk 10:29-37) who commands us, follow- ing the practice of Jesus, to make ourselves into neighbors, most espe- cially with those who suffer, and to create a society in which no one is excluded" (#135). "Making ourselves neighbors," taking the initiative to draw close to the Other, as we saw in the parable, means "going as good Samaritans to meet the needs of the poor and those who suffer, and creating 'the just structures that are the condition without which a just social order is not possible" (Benedict XVI, Address at Aparecida) so that the continent might become "our common home" (Aparecida. #537). This is a practice that reveals the identity Jesus and the ecclesla of his followers (Mt 11:2-6)."

The expression Samariran Church is beautiful and evocative) hut it also draws our attention to the paths we must follow in order to un- nounee the initial presence of the reign of God in history. Beginning with Medellin and inspired by Vatican 11, this was the position taken by the church in Latin America. The church understood that the proclamation of the good news to every person leads us to place a pri- oritv on solidarity with the poor and oppressed and to reject the unjust situation in which they are forced to live as contrary to the will of the God of love. This process not only led to Aparecida, but was also strengthened and opened itself to new perspectives there.

The primacy of the Other-and no one represents the condition of otherness more clearly than the poor and excluded-is an important aspect of the liberating word of the gospel. The option for solidarity with the forgotten and mistreated implies putting ourselves on their path, making them our guests, seeing them not only as needy or vic- tims, but rather as equals, no matter how different from LIS they might be. It implies complete respect for their personal dignity and for their rights to be the agents of their own history. It also means making their demands for justice and their struggles for a more human life into our own." The final basis of all conduct for the Christian is the following of jesus."

It is possible to understand the different dimensions of the prefer- ential option for the poor-spiritual, theological, evangelical-only from the world of the poor, through the process of stepping out of our own path, without taking detours to avoid coming face to face with the injustice and suffering that afflict the poor. Living with these aspects of the option for the poor in their complexity and interactions implies what the gospel calls a conversion, a metanoia, which in the Bible means leaving one path and taking another.

50 .) GUSTAVO GUTIERREZ

This is the point of departure and the essential condition for ac- cepting the reign of God and walking in the steps of the Christ of our faith. "Convert and believe in the good news" is what it says at the be- ginning of rhe earliest gospel (Mk I:15). This is what the parable of the Good Samaritan invites us to do.

(Translated by Robert Lassallc-Klein and Salvador Leavitt-Alcantara)

Notes

1. In his memorable discourse at the end of the Vatican Council, PaulVI said: "The ancient story of the Samaritan has been the spiritual model for the Council. An immense compassion has penetrated everything. The discovery of human needs ... has absorbed the attention of our Synod" (December 7, 1965). The parable of the Good Samariran isfound only in Luke and it bears his redactional and theological imprint.

2. This is the way it was read by the Qumran community, which was contemporary with Jesus.

3. For a brief presentation of the different positions regarding this term see Rodney S. Sadler, [r., "Who Is My Neighbor? Introductory Explorations," in Inrerprercnon (April 2008): 116-22.

4. "Reino de Dios y Economfa en la Biblia,"Comrnunio 2 (March-April 1986): 112-24.

S. In another paragraph Benedict states, "Loveof God and love ofneigh- bor merge to become one" (Deus Cariras Est, 15).

6. Freud believed that it is utopian to speak of a love with universal scope, which he believesgoes against the natural inclination of human beings: "If I love someone, it is necessary," he wrote, "that he or she deserves it for whatever reason" (Sigmund Freud, EI Malestar de la Cultura. Obras Completas (Madrid: Editorial Biblioteca Nueva, 1981),3044.

7. A neighbor "is not just someone that I encounter in my path, but rather someone in whosepath I place myself (Gustavo Gutierrez, Teologfade la Liheraci6n [Lima: CEP, 1971],245).

8. Ibid., 246-48 9. This term is used in Matthew 9:36, 14:4, 15:32, and 20:34. Mark uses

ir m 1:41, 5: I9,6:34, and 8:2. In Luke it appears only in 7:I3 and 15:20, aswe will see below.

10. "There is no charity outside of human love... Charity does not com- pare to human love" (Gustavo Gutierrez, Caridnd y arnor humano [Lima: Unec, 19651,9).

11. Claudio Monge, Dieu Hate: Recherche Hisrorique et Theologique sur lesRituels de L'Hospualue (Bucharest: Zeta Books,2008).

12. This is the casewith John Nolland, who thinks that the parable speaks only about love of neighbor, and is complemented by the episode with Martha

GOING TO MEETTHE OTHER .:. 51

and Mary, which refers to loveof God (John Nolland, Luke 9,21-18,34, Word Biblical Commentary [Dallas:Word Books Publisher, 1993],597).

13. Hugo Echegaray, La Prde,ica de ]estLs (Lima, CEP,1980). 14. Nairn Ateek, who writes a commentary on this parable in Palestine,

thinking about the Jewish-Palestinian conflict, underscores its message of an "unconditional love" (Nairn Ateek, "Who Is My Neighbor?" Inter!nctatiun [April 2008],165).

15. Barnard Haring stated this clearly in his book, La loi du Christ, vol. 3 (Tournai: Desclee y Cie, 1959), which helped renew moral theology several decades ago in the period leading up to and following Vatican II.