what the parable of the Good Samaritan says about a Biblical/Christian response to health care

Impressive exegesis in a staggeringly good letter to the editor of the C-J. Frankly, I can't believe something like this was sent in and made it into print. Wow; well done, Mr. Tucker!

I would like to pass along a few salient points as to what the Bible says regarding providing health care to those without the resources for such. These points are taken from a lecture given at the 1994 Evangelical Theological Society by Dr. John W. Robbins. Christ's parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:25-37) provides a gold mine of instructions about the ethics and economics of health care. Let me unpack a few of its implications.

First, the possession of health and the administration of health care are always individual. There are no such things as “national illness” or “national health care,” for nations cannot and do not get sick or injured; nations cannot and do not care; only individuals can and do.

Second, the politico-religious establishment, represented in the parable by the priest and Levite, is uninterested in actual health care. Perhaps the priest and the Levite were hurrying to a national health care discussion.

Third, the Good Samaritan appears to be a businessman on a business trip: He had an animal; he was carrying oil, wine and money; and he was making a round trip.

Fourth, the Samaritan businessman used his own resources and spent his own time helping the victim.

Fifth, the Samaritan businessman paid the innkeeper for his trouble. He apparently did not think that the innkeeper had an obligation to help him or the crime victim without being paid. The Good Samaritan was not an altruist who believed that need creates an entitlement to the property of another. He acted out of compassion, not compulsion, and he did not try to compel anyone else to be kind.

Sixth, the Samaritan businessman spent the night in the inn with his victim, making sure he would recover, and after the emergency was past, he continued on his trip, leaving the victim in the care of the innkeeper. The Good Samaritan did not organize a lobby to agitate for a national health plan, for that has nothing to do with love for one's neighbor. Instead, he continues on about his business. This traveling Samaritan was the good neighbor by sharing both his own goods and his own time with the crime victim, and it is his example, not that of the political and religious leaders, that Christ commands us to imitate.

The bottom line is this: The biblical command to love one another does not find its application in the confiscation of wealth under threat of punishment (taxes), but rather through charitable giving of one's time and money based upon the sacrifice of Christ for His people.

ROBERT S. TUCKER

Louisville 40222