Reflecting on Mark's Gospel - Mark 2:23-28

The Sabbath was, and is, a very special part of Jewish faith and life. It is the day of rest, set aside at the end of the week. It is an important recognition of the value of a balanced life, and the fact that we need rest and relaxation. It is a day that is different, and markedly so, and, in order to keep it like that, it was (and is) important to ensure that it felt different, and this particularly came in terms of the things that must not happen as they would be a breach of the Sabbath.

The original intention was not to make the Sabbath restrictive, a point made more than once by Jesus. However, in order to maintain an appropriate ethos, it was far easier to be restrictive in explaining what should be, than to be permissive. This led to all sorts of ‘rules’ about what could happen on the Sabbath. Jesus’ view is summed up in verse 27 – The Sabbath was made for humankind, and not humankind for the Sabbath.

The particular issue here is that the hungry disciples pluck some heads of grain to eat as they are making their way through the fields. It may well be that there is a double criticism here as, arguably, they should not have been travelling, and, secondly, reaping the grain would be regarded as prohibited work, as only emergency work was allowed. It was permissible for hungry travellers to get some food in this way, but not on the Sabbath.

The comparison is then made with what King David and his companions did when they were, similarly, hungry. They took the bread of the Presence from the Temple. The point is that hunger trumps the rules, whatever they may be.

There is an interesting tangential as to what might be any issues that we should address that could take across lines that are otherwise appropriate.

Ched Myers (Binding the Strong Man) suggests, with justification, that what we have here is fundamentally a political point – “The disciples’ commandeering grain against Sabbath regulations must from this perspective be seen as a protest of “civil disobedience” over the politics of food in Palestine. Jesus is not only defending discipleship practice against the alternative holiness code of Pharisaism, he is going on the offensive, challenging the ideological control and the manipulation of the redistributive economy by a minority whose elite status is only aggrandized. Mark consistently argues that solidarity with the poor also means addressing oppressive structures.”

Clearly the law is essentially good, and there for a purpose. However, if it is damaging to human life, it may well need to be broken. Here is a relatively early hint that discipleship is a radical calling that may take us to difficult places.