Picking Grain on the Sabbath

Today's  Reflections

Picking Grain on the Sabbath 

graceandspace.org

Mt 12:1-8

[On one occasion] ¹Jesus was going through a field of grain on the sabbath. His disciples were hungry and began to pick the heads of grain and eat them. ²When the Pharisees saw this, they said to him, “See, your disciples are doing what is unlawful to do on the sabbath.” ³He said to them, “Have you not read what David did when he and his companions were hungry, ⁴how he went into the house of God and ate the bread of offering, which neither he nor his companions but only the priests could lawfully eat? ⁵Or have you not read in the law that on the sabbath the priests serving in the temple violate the sabbath and are innocent? ⁶I say to you, something greater than the temple is here. ⁷If you knew what this meant, ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned these innocent men. ⁸For the Son of Man is Lord of the sabbath.”

Reflection:

I desire mercy, not sacrifice. The action of Jesus’ disciples—picking heads of grain and eating them—is equated with reaping and considered a violation of Ex 34:21, as pointed out by the Pharisees. Harvesting as well as plowing of grains is prohibited on the Sabbath.

Jesus, however, wants the Sabbath law to be interpreted with compassion. Necessity knows no law, so we say. In the disciples’ case, human life is involved, in particular, human hunger. It is as if the rigid-thinking Pharisees are reasoning out, “Let them go hungry and starve. The law is more important than their hunger.”

Jesus teaches that common sense should prevail. No one should go hungry because of a rigid interpretation of the law. Jesus recalls the experience of David who went to the house of God, took the bread of offering which only the priests could lawfully eat, and shared it with his companions. Human needs take precedence over regulations. In fact, rules and regulations are made to serve human needs, to advance human well-being.

Can you identify laws that serve only a few

and put a burden on the majority of people?

Recall instances when you were rigid

in your interpretation of the law.