BURKITT : | Lu 6:1-5 | Lu 6:6-11 | Lu 6:12 | Lu 6:13-16 | Lu 6:17-19 | Lu 6:20 | Lu 6:21 | Lu 6:22-23 | Lu 6:24-25 | Lu 6:26 | Lu 6:27-29 | Lu 6:30 | Lu 6:31 | Lu 6:32-36 | Lu 6:37 | Lu 6:38 | Lu 6:39 | Lu 6:40 | Lu 6:41-42 | Lu 6:43-45 | Lu 6:46-49 | KJV
Reference
1 And it came to pass on the second sabbath after the first, that he went through the corn fields; and his disciples plucked the ears of corn, and did eat, rubbing them in their hands. 2 And certain of the Pharisees said unto them, Why do ye that which is not lawful to do on the sabbath days? 3 And Jesus answering them said, Have ye not read so much as this, what David did, when himself was an hungred, and they which were with him; 4 How he went into the house of God, and did take and eat the shewbread, and gave also to them that were with him; which it is not lawful to eat but for the priests alone? 5 And he said unto them, That the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath. (Luke 6:1-5 KJV)
William Burkitt’s Commentary
In the former part of this chapter, we find our blessed Saviour defending his disciples from the clamorous accusations of the Pharisees for breaking the sabbath day, because they plucked the ears of corn, and rubbed them in their hands, in order to the satisfying of their hunger.
Where note, 1. The great poverty, the low estate and condition of Christ’s own disciples in the world. They wanted bread and were forced to pluck the ears of corn to satisfy their hunger. God may, and sometimes does suffer his dearest children to fall into straits, and to taste of want, for the trial of their faith and dependence upon his power and goodness.
Note, 2. How the hypocritical Pharisees blame this action of the disciples, namely, their plucking off the ears of corn; yet did they not charge them with theft for so doing; because to take in our great necessity so much of our neighbor’s goods as we may reasonably suppose, that, if he were present and knew our circumstances, he would not deny us, is no theft. But it was the servile labor on the sabbath, in gathering the ears of corn which the Pharisees scruple and object against.
Where note, how hypocrites expend their zeal in and about the lesser things of the law, while they neglect the greater; placing all holiness in the observation of outward ceremonies, and neglecting moral duties.
Note, 3. The argument with which our Saviour defends this action of his disciples; it is taken from the example of David: necessity freed him from fault and blame in eating the consecrated bread, which none but the priests might lawfully eat; for in case of necessity, a ceremonial precept must give place to a moral duty. Works of mercy for preserving our lives and better fitting us for sabbath services are certainly lawful on the sabbath day.
Note, lastly, the argument which our Saviour uses to prove the sabbath’s observation may be dispensed with in a case of absolute necessity, and that is drawn from that authority which Christ, the institutor and Lord of the Sabbath, had over it: The Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath; that is, he has authority and power as God and as Mediator, to institute and appoint a sabbath, to alter and change it, to dispense with a breach of it upon a just and great occasion; and consequently, acts of mercy, which tend to fit us for works of piety, not only may, but ought, to be done on the sabbath day.
This action of the disciples, being of that nature, is without just cause censured and condemned by the Pharisees; a sort of men who were resolved to cavil at, and quarrel with, whatever our Saviour or his disciples either did or said.