We must first point out the beginning of this passage: At that time Jesus went through the standing grain. This is set at the time he gave thanks to God the Father for having given salvation to the people. The same meaning is given to what went before (his thanksgiving) and what came after (his walking in the fields). Note the relationships. Spiritually viewed, the land is the world, the sabbath is the day of rest, and the crop is the effect of future believers upon the harvest. Therefore, having gone out to a field on the sabbath, the day of rest under God’s law, he proceeded into this world, to visiting the crop, the sown field of the human race. And since hunger is the craving for human salvation, the disciples hasten to pluck off the ears of corn, namely, the holy people, to get their fill of salvation. But the grain is not yet ready for human consumption. Rather, the crop upholds faith in the events to come. The added power of words completes the sacrament that implies both hunger and fullness.

How could he who foreknew all things be unaware of the consequences of this action, unless it had been his will that the sabbath law had to be reinterpreted? That was his will indeed, but not in a simple sense. He never broke the law without adequate cause, and always by giving a reasonable justification. His purpose in doing so was to bring the old law to an end, yet not in a defiant manner. There are indeed occasions in which he repeals the old law directly and without any fanfare, as when he anointed the eyes of the blind man with clay, and as when he said, My Father is still working, and I also am working.^[1] He does this to glorify his own Father and to soothe the enmity of the Jews. His appeal is to the necessity of nature in this case, since his disciples were hungry.

For where nothing great or noble happens, the Pharisees remain quiet. But where they see certain people being healed, they are more offended than anyone else. In this way they are the enemies of humanity’s salvation and without understanding of the sacred writings. If the new covenant announced of old by Jeremiah differs from the first covenant, it ought by all means to make use not of old laws but of new ones. But the Pharisees, not willing to comprehend this, lay snares for the holy apostles and say about them to Christ: Look here, we see those you’ve schooled opposing themselves to the stipulations of the law. For where the law commands everyone to rest on the sabbath and to touch no manner of work, your disciples pluck ears of wheat with their hands. But tell me, O Pharisee, when you have set the sabbath table for yourself, don’t even you break the bread? Why then do you blame others?

To put down the chicanery of the Pharisees it is recorded in ancient history that David was fleeing from Saul and came to Nob.^[1] Having been received by Ahimelech the priest, he asked him for food. Since Ahimelech had no common bread at hand, he gave David some holy bread, which only priests and Levites could lawfully eat. The priest asked whether the young men had kept themselves from women, and he received the answer since yesterday and the day before.^[2] He did not hesitate to give the bread, having thought it better, remembering that the prophet says, I desire mercy and not sacrifice.^[3] In view of the danger of hunger, Ahimelech judged it better to help people than to offer sacrifice to God. The slain victim pleasing to God is the salvation of humankind. If David is holy and the priest Ahimelech is not offensive to you, but they have broken both commandments of the law with a probable excuse—in this case, hunger—why do you not find acceptable the same hunger in the apostles that you find acceptable in others? However, in this there is a great difference: the disciples plucked grain on the sabbath, whereas David ate the levitical bread. . . . Note that neither David nor his young men accepted the loaves of the presence until they replied that they had kept themselves from women.

Do not reply that one does not free oneself from blame by noting that someone else is committing the same offense. Or that if the offender has no blame, his act becomes a rule for others to plead.

Jesus was not satisfied with such reasoning. Instead, he concludes something more decisive: the deed itself in this case is no sin at all! This more than anything was the sign of a glorious victory: For here the Giver of the law was overriding the law.^[1] This victory occurs in a particular place, the temple, and on a particular day, the sabbath. One might even point to several levels of legal reversal, pertaining to the work that is done; it is done by priests, and more so, that it elicits no charges. For they remain guiltless.

Do you see how many levels of argument Jesus is making in stating this case? They are in the temple. The persons involved are priests. The time is the sabbath. The act itself is profane. Note that he does not say gently that they break the sabbath law but more grievously that they profane it. Yet in all this they not only escape punishment but are free from blame, being guiltless.

So do not treat the example of the priests in the same way as the example of David. For David’s case occurred only once, and was not done by a priest, and occurred due to an explicit need, and so was deserving of excuse. But the example of the priests was done repeatedly, every sabbath, was done by priests, and was done in the temple, and it too was of necessity. They were acquitted of charges not by special pleading or indulgence but on reasonable grounds according to the principles of justice.

You falsely accuse my disciples, Jesus says, for plucking ears of grain while passing through the standing fields. They did this because of their pangs of hunger. But you must violate the sabbath by immolating victims in the temple, slaughtering bulls and burning holocausts on a heap of firewood and, according to the testimony of the other Gospel, circumcising children on the sabbath.^[1] Thus, while you wish to observe the one law, you dishonor the sabbath. But God’s commands do not contradict each other.

Christ also reminded them of another prophecy so that they might learn that all things that were spoken of previously were accomplished in him through the law, that the priests in the temple broke the sabbath without offense, clearly revealing that Jesus himself was the temple. In him salvation was given to the Gentiles through the teaching of the apostles, while the people who were bound by the law wandered about faithlessly, so that he himself might be greater than the sabbath. Evangelical faith lived in Christ transcends the law.

In order to show that this appearance of his work anticipated all the power of things to come, he added, If you understood what the saying means: ‘I want mercy, not sacrifice,’ you would never have condemned the blameless. The business of our salvation lies not in sacrifice but in mercy. When law is made void, we are saved by the goodness of God. If they had understood the grace of this statement, they would never have condemned the blameless. They would not have condemned the apostles whom they were going to accuse falsely, out of envy, of transgressing the law. When the ancient practice of sacrifices was stopped, the strangeness of mercy became more clearly known. Had this been known, they would not have thought that the Lord of the sabbath was confined by the law of the sabbath.

The faithful are more than priests. For the Lord of the temple himself has come to them. The Truth personally has arrived, not merely the image of the truth. So he could say, I tell you, something greater than the temple is here!

Nevertheless, great as the sayings were which they heard, they made no reply, for they were inattentive to the coming salvation of humanity. Then, because it might otherwise seem harsh to his hearers, Jesus quickly drew a veil over his discourse, giving it a lenient turn, yet even then conveying a sharp admonition: If you had known what this means, ‘I desire mercy, and not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the guiltless. Do you see once again how his speech is inclined toward leniency, yet showing the priests themselves to be in need of leniency?

Doubtless he speaks of himself when he mentions the Lord of the sabbath. Mark relates a complementary saying about our common human nature, that the sabbath was made for humans, not humans for the sabbath.^[1]

Why then should someone who gathered sticks on the sabbath be censured? The law that was established earlier could not be scorned without jeopardizing the law to be given later.

The sabbath did confer many benefits, great blessings in the earlier dispensation. It made people more gentle toward those close to them. It guided them toward being more sympathetic. It located them temporally within God’s creation and providence, as Ezekiel knew.^[2] The sabbath trained Israel by degrees to abstain from evil and disposed them to listen to the things of the Spirit.

They would have stretched the law out of shape if, when he was giving the law of the sabbath, Jesus had said, You can work on the sabbath, but just do good works, do nothing evil. This would have brought out the worst in them. So he restrained them from doing any works at all on the sabbath. And even this stricter prohibition did not keep them in line. But he himself, in the very act of giving the law of the sabbath, gave them a veiled sign of things to come. For by saying, You must do no work, except what shall be done for your life,^[3] he indicated that the intent of the law was to have them refrain from evil works only, not all works. Even in the temple, much went on during the sabbath, and with great diligence and double toil. Thus even by this very shadowy saying Jesus was secretly opening the truth to them.

Did Christ then attempt to repeal a law so beneficial as the sabbath law? Far from it. Rather, he greatly magnified the sabbath. For with Christ came the time for everyone to be trained by a higher requirement.

You will also thus observe that knowing God is more necessary than resting on the sabbath. The sabbath was given to the Jews when, in Egypt, they were turned toward idolatry. And the sabbath was given for this reason: so that they would not call the world uncreated and outside the sphere of providence, but that they would acknowledge that God is both the One who planned it and that it is he himself who made the world in six days and on the seventh day rested. When God commanded them to do no work on the sabbath, it was to remind them of this. Subsequently, the fact that God is the Maker of the universe has become known to all, and so much of the detailed sabbath law has become superficial. If these extreme arguments about the sabbath were truly useful, they would have been applied not only to human beings but even to the sun and moon. Imagine that the very sun would cease working its benefits to us on the sabbath day. No. This commandment has been given to human beings, even from the foundation of the world.

The spiritual sense of the expression he went on from there can be understood in this way: When he establishes a new covenant and the sabbath no longer is in force, then he goes over or departs to another place. For this reason they accuse him and his disciples, not outside but within the synagogue. Their offenses are thereby increased to the brim. They brought to the Savior the barrenness of their hands. For having a withered hand indicated unfruitfulness. But that which is unfruitful is coming near to being reversed.

Is it allowed to heal on the sabbath? He knew their love of wealth. He knew that they were all the more taken up with love of things than persons. And indeed the other Evangelist^[1] said that Jesus also scrutinized them as he asked this question, that by his very glance he might win them over, but they did not become softened. While in other cases he healed manually by the laying on of his hands, in this case he only speaks and gazes. But nothing would make them more gentle. Rather, even while the man was being healed, their condition was becoming worse. Jesus’ desire was to heal first their bitterness before he healed the withered hand. But even in his various attempts to offer them healing, both by what he said and did, their malady proved all the more intractable.

Again on the sabbath he performed a healing, defending himself on behalf of the disciples’ activities. The Lukan Gospel writer says that he made the man stand in the middle^[1] and asked them if it was allowed to do good on the sabbath. Note well the Lord’s goodness of heart. He made him stand in the middle so that he might bend them to his vision, so that by being overcome by the sight they might reject wickedness and in pitying the man they might cease from their savage behavior. But the wild and misanthropic men chose rather to distract Christ from his teaching than to see this man saved. . . . Thus the other Gospel writers say that Jesus asked questions, but this author says that he was asked questions. And they questioned him: ‘Is it allowed to heal on the sabbath?’ so that they might accuse him. It is likely that both events happened. For since they were brutal and saw that [Jesus] would come at any rate to heal him, they were eager to preoccupy him with questions, resolving to hinder him. Therefore they asked, Is it allowed to heal on the sabbath? not so that they might learn but so that they might bring charges against him. And indeed the act was sufficient if they wished to prosecute him. But through his words they wished to find an excuse for prosecution by preparing beforehand for themselves an abundance of arguments. . . . And he made the man stand in the middle,^[2] not because Jesus feared them but because he was eager to help them and to draw them toward his mercy.

Such healing is rightly attributed to our Lord. After his return from the cornfield from which his apostles had gotten the produce, he went to the synagogue. From there Jesus intended to acquire laborers for his own harvest. Many of them afterwards lived with the apostles. Many were healed, as in the case of the maimed man.^[1] Yet the leaders of the synagogue did not believe in the grace of salvation. The use of the man’s hand had atrophied. That function of his body had withered, by which he was able to do or share in certain tasks. So the Lord ordered him to stretch out his hand, and it was restored to him as the other one was. His whole cure rested on the word of the healer alone. The hand was restored to the same condition as the other hand. It was made a partner in the service of the apostles in their duty of granting salvation.

Envy is responsible for the fact that they set a trap for our Lord. What had he done to incite the Pharisees to kill him? Certainly it was because the man had stretched out his hand. Who of the Pharisees did not stretch out his hand on the sabbath day when he was carrying food, when he was offering a drinking cup or performing the other actions that are necessary for nourishment? So if stretching forth one’s hand and lifting up food or drink on the sabbath are not offenses, why should they make this accusation? They themselves are found guilty of doing the same, especially since that stonecutter had not carried anything of the sort that they had but had only stretched out his hand at the order of our Lord.

By this he makes clear that deluded souls are not even persuaded by miracles. And he shows how his disciples also had been wrongly blamed by them without cause. Note how vehement his detractors have suddenly grown, and this happens especially when they see others benefiting from his ministry! When they see someone delivered either from disease or iniquity, then that immediately cues them to further find fault. They become like wild beasts. According to this pattern they repeatedly demeaned him, as when he was about to save the prostitute, and again when he was eating with publicans, and now again, when they saw the withered hand restored.^[1]

Note carefully how he does not cease in his tender care for the infirm yet softens the envy of his adversaries. Hence great multitudes followed him, and he healed them all; and he charged those that were healed that they should make him known to no one. But the multitudes seemed more ready to admire him and trail after him than to change their decadent ways.

To the extent that one draws near to Jesus, one does not hold counsel,^[1] for no counselor of evil things draws near to Jesus. But when others go out, departing from Jesus, they hold counsel to destroy Jesus, to destroy the Light, the good Way, the Life, the Treasure, the Pearl, Love itself and Peace. If anyone destroys these, he is called a son of destruction. But Jesus, aware of this, withdrew from there. He had no reason to remain around the sons of destruction. They sought to destroy him, but we, who were not seeking, have found him. This recalls the words of the prophet: I am found by those who do not seek for me; I have been made manifest to those who were not asking after me.^[2] For he came to the lost sheep of the house of Israel who had forgotten their own Shepherd. So Jesus withdraws, not fearing their judgment but to dispel evil. And, lest anyone should suppose that it was through fear that he had withdrawn, Jesus healed everyone, displaying his almighty power. But, as one who does what is fitting, without pride, he sent them away, telling them not to publicize this.

He ordered those whom he healed to be silent. Was it silence about the healing that he ordered? Not at all. For the salvation that was given to each one was its own testimony. But by ordering it to be kept secret Jesus also shunned boasting about himself. It was better that knowledge of him remains in himself. So he admonished them to remain silent about him. The observance of silence springs from that about which one must keep silent.

Then so that you might not be troubled at the events and their strange frenzy, Jesus reminded them of the prophet who had predicted them. For so great was the accuracy of the prophets that they did not omit even these little matters. But they foretold his travels, changes of place and the intent with which he would act, that we might learn that they spoke by the Spirit. If human secrets cannot be easily discerned, how much more difficult it is to discern Christ’s purpose, except when the Spirit reveals it to us.

Through Isaiah the prophet the person of the Father states this: I shall put my Spirit upon him. The Spirit is not placed upon the Word of God nor upon the only begotten Son who proceeds from the Father but upon the One about whom it is said, Here is my Son.^[1]

Those who teach in the streets do this,^[1] not for the sake of helping anyone but out of egotism and to hoodwink the gullible. The result of this is that everyone views them with suspicion and they fail to reach the goal of their teaching. Thus the Savior taught us these lessons not only by word. His way of life also taught us not to scream nor to show off but to lead a public life in respect to virtuous actions. For a talkative disposition would be most harmful for us. It is the opposite that is most useful and beneficial.

The prophet celebrated in advance both the Savior’s meekness right alongside his unspeakable power. Thereby he opened to the Gentiles a great and effective door. Isaiah also foretold the ills that were to overtake the Jews. He foreknew the Son’s oneness with the Father: Israel is my chosen, my soul has accepted him; I have put my Spirit upon him.^[1] For it is not as an adversary that Christ transcends the law, as if he were an enemy of the Lawgiver, but as though he were of one mind with the Lawgiver and held to the very same purposes. Then, proclaiming the Lord’s meekness, Isaiah said, He shall not cry nor lift up his voice.^[2] For his desire indeed was to enable healing in their presence. But since they pushed him away, he did not contend any further against their opposition.

But even amid this desire to keep silent about himself, the purpose of Jesus’ words was fulfilled through Isaiah. About his prophecy I now give you the following important reminder: Jesus was loved by God and was pleasing in his Father’s will. The Spirit of God was upon him. Judgment was made known to the Gentiles by him. The reed that was crushed was not broken, and the smoking wick was not extinguished. This means that the frail, shaken bodies of the Gentiles were not worn out but rather preserved to salvation. The meager flame only smoking now on the wick was not extinguished. The spirit of Israel was not removed from the rest of the ancient story of grace. The capability of restoring all the light exists in the time of repentance. But that was appointed within the statutes of a fixed time, till he brings justice to victory. When the power of death was removed, he would bring judgment at the return of his splendor to the Gentiles who would believe in his name through faith.

He did not eagerly contend with the folly of the rulers, nor did he scream and provoke them to anger against himself. Rather, with gentleness Jesus withdrew slowly so that he might not, in confuting them, cause them to be destroyed while they were still weak in soul like a bruised reed or like smoking flax, that is, very close to being snuffed out. He bore with them patiently, so as not to reduce them to utter oblivion on account of their weakness, until he had fulfilled the purpose of his dispensation, that is, to bring judgment to a full end. By this dispensation all the nations would come to believe.

The one who does not stretch out a hand to a sinner and does not carry a brother’s load breaks the crushed reed. And the one who despises the small spark of faith in children extinguishes the smoking wick. Christ did neither of these. He came for this purpose: to save those who were perishing.

And showing both his strength and their weakness, Jesus said, He will not break a crushed reed.^[1] For in fact it was easy enough for God to break them all to pieces like a reed, and not just any reed but one already crushed. And he will not quench a smoldering wick.^[2] By this he points to their anger that had been kindled and his might that is able to put down their anger and to quench it easily. By this is signified his great mildness.

What then? Shall these things always be? And will Christ endure perpetually those who form such frantic plots against him? Far from it. When he has performed his saving action, then he shall also execute its corresponding purposes. Isaiah declared this by saying both that he shall bring forth justice to victory^[3] and in his name shall the Gentiles trust.^[4] Paul similarly instructed us to take every thought captive to obey Christ, being ready to punish every disobedience, when your obedience is complete.^[5]

But what is meant by he shall bring forth justice to victory?^[6] When Christ has completely fulfilled his own part, then, we are told, he will also bring down upon unbelievers his final judgment, when he has left them no contradicting arguments, however shameless, when they will then believe in his wondrous glory. For he knows how to say that justice is a judgment. But his dispensation will not be confined merely to the punishment of unbelievers. He will also proceed to win to himself the nations of the world, so he added, and in his name will the Gentiles hope.^[7] Then, to inform us that this too is proceeding according to the purpose of the Father from the beginning, the prophet has given us this assurance together with what he has just said: this is my beloved in whom my soul is well pleased.^[8] For it was very clear that the beloved committed these actions according to the purpose of the one who loved him.