by Tad de Bordenave

Last week I described the contemporary “man in the ditch” as four groups: indigenous people, the unborn child, nomads, and Muslims in our neighborhoods. This week we bring in the priest and the Levite of today. These two men “passed by on the other side.” What would that look like today?

We should note that the priest and the Levite had stature and experience. They were clever with power and deft with the public. Their responses would seem plausible and reasonable. Those standing by would be nodding their heads in approval.

The Indigenous People. They live under the crushing influence of the “Doctrine of Discovery.” That authenticates the right of the dominant culture to take whatever form of riches are found among the original inhabitants.

This decree has evolved from government and church settings to most hearts and minds, welcomed without objection.  Anyone of the dominant niche assumes the rights of superiority. This is “White privilege” shorn of color or boundary.

The scenes for this are legion: race, gender, politics, relationships, ethnicity, finance… any arena where there is disparity with one party above another. Those above may assume privilege over those below. That simple.

Who would object? This is the ideal alliance of greed and immunity. Who would seek deliverance from a temptation so delectable?

Whoever does is a rare and brave person: rare for waiving rights; brave for speaking to the powers of priests and Levites. The brave and rare put forth different alliances: humility and advocacy, charity and boldness. As the virtues of the brave and rare evolve into hearts and minds, the indigenous receive signs of hope and dignity.

The Unborn Child. The priest and the Levite exploit today’s narrative of the mother’s health and privacy. Unwanted pregnancy would bring emotional pain and spiritual distress for the mother. She would be in no condition for birth and motherhood.

Why should an unwanted pregnancy interfere with a woman’s career? Her future is erased, advance education wasted, and career possibilities ended. Besides, must we insist on the birth of a child born into poverty, broken homes, and dysfunction?

People listen to this, they nod their heads. After all, the priest and the Levite are from the medical profession, from neighbors, from pulpits, and from others who have aborted their own. And the procedure is so easy, so swift. All for the sanctity of choice.

Of course, choice had entered the picture earlier — the choice to have sexual relations. At that time dismissed was the responsibility for conception, so later dismissed was the responsibility of pregnancy and birth. Keep choice but only with these terms. As Jeremiah wrote, “The heart is more deceitful than anything else and incurable” (Jeremiah 17:9).

I have stood, knelt, and prayed outside places that perform abortion. That is one part of being pro-life. The implications must go on from advocacy for the poor all the way to support and comfort for the elderly and the dying.

The Wounded – Nomads. Today’s priests and Levites offer grounds for passing by nomads. I have been immersed in mission efforts for all to hear the Good News. I am familiar with these “plausible and reasonable grounds” for not going.  Here are a few:

• We are doing mission. We have a long-term commitment to work in Brazil. For years we have sent needed resources as well as teams for Bible School.
• Our plate is full. Our congregation is growing, we have expansion plans, our technology needs upgrading. Maybe later.
• Besides, it’s just not their time. After they are fully mainstreamed and assimilated, then we can get involved.
• Really? A church on the back of a camel? Is that what Malcolm Hunter was told? Yeah, right.
• We wonder about that church – a church of Jesus Christ among nomads. What does it look like alongside our churches? Better than that, let the comparison begin with theirs and then bring a scrutiny onto ours. What would this comparison expose — about our pews, our organization, our fellowship, our – lets’ say it – our entertainment? A church among the nomads may miss what we consider essential but makes us evaluate our essentials.

Malcolm Hunter has some answers to these. This article and his Youtube interviews make challenging reading.

Mosques in Our Neighborhoods. Towards these people the priest and the Levite suggest benign neglect. They have a right to worship in our country. Their presence represents the best of democracy. Besides, they have their own religion. Who are we to judge what they believe? Don’t all roads lead to God, and do they bother us? Yes and no. Leave them alone.

Muslims have always been friendly to me and my companion. When I have interviewed them, I have jokingly posed this question, “How many times have you been a suicide bomber?” Priest and Levite tell us that theirs is a religion of peace.

Not exactly. Theirs is a religion of dawa – meaning deliberate and constant effort to convert others to Islam and bring Islamic influence to our laws. Friendly, yes. Intent on expanding influence, most definitely.

Do we fear them? Of course not. We can and should befriend them. Are we not also on dawa? Are we not asked to make disciples of all nations, all peoples? Being witnesses to Muslims tests our resolve. This asks patience, efforts to learn their faith, revisiting Muslim acquaintances, and prayer, much prayer. As Peter wrote, “With gentleness and respect we tell them the reason for the hope that we have” (1 Peter 3:15). That is how we honor Jesus Christ, the Son of the one true and living God.

Those are some of the ways the priest and the Levite pass by the man in the ditch. Next week we meet the Samaritan, the one who stops and shows genuine compassion.