Faith

---

THE NEGLECTED INNKEEPER

Harold A. and James P. Gram

The story of the Good Samaritan is familiar. It describes how a traveler was robbed of his clothing and possessions, beaten, and left half dead beside the road. A priest, an official of the temple, came along, saw the situation and passed by on the other side of the road. A very religious man, a Levite, came along, looked at the poor victim and kept going. The third person, a Samaritan decided to help him. He bound up the wounds, set him on his own donkey and brought him to an inn. After caring for him all night, he gave the innkeeper some money, told him to take care of the victim and when he returned he would repay the innkeeper for any additional costs.

This parable arose from a lawyer’s challenge to Jesus asking how one attains eternal life. Jesus told the parable and then asked which of the three, priest, Levite, or Samaritan was neighbor to the victim. The major commandment, to which reference was made, was that one was to love God and one’s neighbor as himself. When the lawyer responded it was he who showed mercy, Jesus told him to go and do likewise.

We have probably heard sermons on this parable focusing on the participants in the story. The lawyer’s question was designed to tempt Jesus. The refusal of the priest and the Levite to offer help is a frequent theme. The kindness of the person you would least expect to respond (the Samaritan) and the relationship of good deeds to salvation are also frequent topics. But perhaps the most important person is often neglected. How often do we hear reference to the good innkeeper?

In the Bible, innkeepers are rarely spoken about. We have one turning down Mary and Joseph in Bethlehem but he does offer a stable. We really know little or nothing about the innkeeper in this parable. It is clear, however, that this inn served meals and provided rooms. Obviously he was in business to make money and provide a service. Did innkeepers have a reputation for honesty? Were they noted as generous people? Were innkeepers dependable? Why would the Samaritan trust this innkeeper? On the other hand since we cannot ascribe any special generosity of spirit to innkeepers, we have every right to be amazed when the innkeeper apparently said, “OK, Mister Samaritan, I’ll do exactly as you suggest.”

Samaritans at this time were treated with contempt by the Jews. The story, according to the Jews, was that after the Assyrians had conquered Samaria they brought in colonists to Israel from Babylon and other places. The Jews claimed the colonists had little knowledge of Judaism. Moreover, when the first colonists were beset by an invasion of lions, they appealed for help to a Jewish priest to help get rid of the lions. The Jews claimed this religious conversion was all a veneer and merely “lion conversion”. The Jewish view was that Samaritans might be one step less than Gentiles but certainly not true Jews. Therefore, they were not to be trusted but rather avoided if at all possible.

Look at the situation. The innkeeper is confronted by a Samaritan (a non-Jew) who brings with him a beaten and distressed person. The beaten person has no money or clothing. Worst of all, he is dragging this person covered in blood and half dead. What does he want? Why a room where he can look after this poor creature he has just dragged in. Well, OK, the innkeeper is in the business of rooms and meals so why not. Business is business. After one night he will be gone.

The next morning the Samaritan does not pay his bill and leave. The Samaritan traveler now tells the innkeeper he is continuing his journey but he is leaving behind the victim of the robbery. He asks the innkeeper to look after the poor devil while he is away. He gives him some money and promises that if he spends more on his care, room and meals that he will pay when he returns. The innkeeper is in a dilemma.

The innkeeper has no assurance that the Samaritan will ever return. He is being asked to assume responsibility for a badly beaten person. Not only does he take a bed away from paying guests but he also needs special attention. The Samaritan is asking the innkeeper to be doctor, custodian, protector and agent. Getting stuck with the bill for room and board is hard to contemplate, but the other requested services are impossible. Think about your possible response if you were in the innkeeper’s shoes.

Why would the innkeeper agree to this crazy deal? Samaritans were notably unreliable so he may never return to pay the rest of the bill. He only left a small amount of money so what happens when that’s used up and the victim is still not well? It would be better financially and better for all concerned for the innkeeper to refuse. Maybe the Samaritan could walk and take the victim on his donkey?

Are we missing a major part of the story by limiting it to the major participants: the priest, Levite, the beaten man and the Samaritan? Was Jesus saying that being a neighbor is not limited to the person who acted, but that it creates other acts of kindness? The innkeeper becomes a neighbor to the injured man. Being a neighbor is a contagious activity. One single act spreads to others. Therefore the question, “Who is my neighbor?” is difficult to answer because we may not always be aware of the fallout of our actions.

The Samaritan was the prime mover. It was he who acted; who nursed the injured traveler; who made arrangements for his continued care. But the innkeeper responded by becoming financially and personally responsible for the injured man. Why would he do so? It was not his problem. On the other hand, if the Samaritan was willing to promise payment the innkeeper could be rewarded in the end. But in the interim he serves on the basis of promises from a person he does not know. It is easy, in light of the Samaritan’s actions, to forget the trust required of the innkeeper to accept the victim and rely on the word of the Samaritan that the innkeeper would be reimbursed. He acted as he did with no guarantees and lots of evidence that he would be stuck with a large bill. Did the money mean nothing to him? He did accept money for the night’s lodging and also a small amount for the future care of the injured man. Clearly, the money was important as you would expect from a business person. So, we are still faced with the question of why the innkeeper acted as he did.

Perhaps he was so impressed with the kindness of the Samaritan that he was impelled to follow that example. Does the contagious nature of neighborly acts rest in the examples they set for others? Do we need to be informed that others have donated certain amounts to a good cause before we loosen our purse strings? The setting of examples as a motivation to act leaves people like the innkeeper as reactors only. They are followers of others who perform neighborly acts. Is it enough to say that the innkeeper was merely trying, within his capabilities, to emulate the acts of the Samaritan?

Considering the amount of trust required by the innkeeper to accept the terms proposed by the Samaritan leads us to consider that the innkeeper was not merely a follower, but an initiator of good deeds. Yes, his deeds were different from the Samaritan’s deeds. Who is to say that they were more or less important? They were certainly necessary to supplement and complement what the Samaritan had started. Without the innkeeper, the story would likely result in the miserable death of the traveler. If he was acting out of the same sense of neighborliness that motivated the Samaritan we should consider the parable as that of the Good Innkeeper.

Maybe Jesus was showing the lawyer that being a neighbor generates other acts of kindness not part of, nor intended, by the original act. The innkeeper had no intention of being involved in helping the injured and beaten man; but he became an actor. The innkeeper responded positively to a request for assistance, help and support. That is the essence of the good neighbor concept. Perhaps we should deepen and enrich the parable to include the whole notion of the possibility of good deeds performed by other unlikely candidates in this world. The Good Innkeeper’s role remains largely hidden and unnoticed because, like the Good Samaritan, he acted only when the need was seen. Good people are those who act. The innkeeper becomes as important as the Samaritan in the story, because without the innkeeper there would be no Good Samaritan.

---

PLEASE ENCOURAGE AUTHOR BELOW LEAVE COMMENT ON ARTICLE