Samaritans

This has always struck me as odd.

The Samaritans is a helpline, a place for those at their wits’ end, a refuge to folk who are beaten and trampled by life. I understand that. I respect that. I applaud that.

But...

...and please correct me if I’m wrong...

...is the parable of The Good Samaritan not:

A beggar lay dying in the gutter.

The beggar saw a holy man approaching, and thought he would be saved. The holy man passed him by.

The beggar saw a nun approaching, and thought he would be saved. The nun man passed him by.

The beggar saw a Samaritan - known for their cruel indifference - approaching, and thought he was as good as dead. But the Samaritan stopped. He took the beggar in; he fed and clothed the beggar; he dressed his wounds.

The moral being: do not assume that a person is as bad as the clan they hail from. This was a Good Samaritan.

And I love that story. I stongly believe that we’re on this earth to help one another. I like to see man looking after fellow man. [Though, to be PC, I suppose I should have written: ‘I like to see (wo)man looking after fellow (wo)man.’]

But I digress. The point I’m making - albeit in a haphazard, seemingly-pointless manner - is that, even though Samaritans were known for their cruel indifference, the beggar was saved by the one, the only, Good Samaritan.

Yet the charity that serves to help its fellow (wo)man in times of greatest need chose to call themselves ‘The Samaritans’, not ‘The Good Samaritans’.

This has always struck me as odd.