Jesus Christ, on the contrary, deepens and develops the principles of the Old Testament legislation, intensifying its spiritual tension. It preserves its spirit, but often breaks its form. This is the basic and essential difference in the attitude of the Lord Jesus Christ and the Pharisees to the Old Testament.

Why did we get such a difference?

Because the Lord looks at religion immeasurably more deeply than the Pharisees. For Him, the essence of religion lies in the living union of the human soul with God, the union of love. May they all be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You, so may they also be one in Us... That the love with which Thou hast loved Me may be in them, and I in them (Jn. XVII, 21, 26), - thus He prays to His Father. The God-loving human soul is what is most valuable to Him, and how this soul came to the love that unites it with God is, strictly speaking, a secondary question, not of essential importance. A person can cultivate this love by orthodox means, by strict observance of rites and decrees worked out by religion, which have pedagogical significance, but he can achieve the same goal in a completely peculiar way, as, for example, the holy hermits achieved, whose stay in the desert required of them a special way of life and special rules of external behavior. In Christianity, it is not so much the activity of a person that is evaluated, but the qualities of his soul, which are manifested in this activity. Saint Nicholas publicly scolded Arius and was condemned by the fathers of the Council, who saw in this act a violation of the discipline of love, but God justified His chosen one, for in this ear was expressed the ardent zeal of the saint for the faith, his great love for God and, undoubtedly, moreover, of Arius, whose blasphemous speeches had to be stopped, so that the wrath of God would not strike him. The Lord, as always, looks at the root of things. Such a root in the spiritual life is the soul; external deeds are only fruits. First of all, it is important that the root – the soul – is healthy, then the fruits will be good. Thus every good tree bears good fruit, and a bad tree also bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth bad fruit, nor a bad tree bring forth good fruit (Matt. VII, 17-18).

A good man brings forth good things out of the good treasure of his heart, but an evil man brings forth evil things out of the evil treasure of his heart, for out of the abundance of his heart his mouth speaks. VI, 45).

Standing on this point of view, the Lord evaluates all the external institutions of religion, its rites, rules, and customs exclusively to their connection with the soul of man, that is, insofar as they either express the religious moods and movements of the soul, or serve as a means of its religious education. The Sabbath is for man, and not man for the Sabbath, He says (Mk. II, 27).

This means that all external forms in which religious life is manifested are good and valuable if they contribute to the spiritual development of man and help him to draw closer to God. Sincere prayers are valuable, because they serve as an expression of faith, reverence and love for God, bowing the Lord to mercy to the praying, bringing God closer to man. Church services full of symbolism and deeply touching rites are valuable, for they develop a religious feeling in a person. Works of mercy and various pious exercises are valuable, for they cultivate a well-disposed will, striving to please God.

But all these forms of religious manifestation become meaningless if they lose their connection with the living soul. Prayers are meaningless and aimless if they are uttered only with the lips and if neither the mind nor the heart participates in them. Rites become completely unnecessary if they do not educate the soul in love and obedience to God. Even works of charity and service to one's neighbor lose their value if a person does not participate in them with his soul (1 Cor. XIII, 3).

If we understand all this, if we understand the Lord's view of religion and religious life, then the meaning of all three answers, in which His disagreement with the Pharisees was revealed, will become clear to us.

When the Pharisees reproach Him for dishonoring His calling as a spiritual teacher by His proximity to tax collectors and sinners, the Lord answers them: "It is not the healthy who have need of a physician, but the sick; I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

The most valuable thing for God is the soul of man. Therefore, the duty of a religious teacher is precisely to enlighten this soul, darkened by sin, and having departed from God, to be enlightened, healed, and returned to the Creator again. There is no need for a teacher who does not follow this soul, abhorring its ulcers, and his majestic and arrogant standing at a distance from people who demand his guidance is meaningless. If he wishes to remain only in the unsullied Circle of the Righteous, then he is useless and does not do his work.

To the question why His disciples do not fast, the Lord answers: can the sons of the bridal chamber fast when the bridegroom is with them? As long as the bridegroom is with them, they cannot fast, but the days will come when the bridegroom will be taken away from them, and then they will fast in those days (Mk. II, 19-20).

This means that fasting does not correspond to their current mood. Fasting is an outward expression of spiritual sorrow and contrition for sins. But now is a time of joy for them, for I, their Lord and Teacher, am with them. It would be ridiculous if the guests invited to the wedding feast grieved and fasted. In the same way, for their exultant souls, fasting is not only useless and meaningless, but would only be harmful hypocrisy. The days will come when I will not be with them, then they will mourn and fast. Then fasting will be for them a need of the soul and an expression of longing love. Then it will be needed.

When, finally, the Pharisees reproached the disciples of Jesus for plucking and eating the ears of grain on the Sabbath, the Lord answered and said: "Have you never read what David did when he was in need and hungered for himself and those who were with him?" How did he enter into the house of God in the presence of Abiathar the high priest, and eat the shewbread, which no man was to eat except the priests, and gave also to those who were with him? (vv. 25-26).

The episode that the Lord indicates refers to the time when David was fleeing from the persecution of Saul, and is described in detail in the first book of Samuel, chapter XXI, verses 1-6. The showbread was considered a great shrine (Lev. XXIV, 9), and no stranger dared to eat them according to the law of Moses. However, David violated this decree, for otherwise he and his retinue would be in danger of starvation. The Lord does not rebuke David, for the ordinances of the law have in mind the benefit of man and his soul, and where their literal fulfillment is associated with obvious harm to man, they can certainly be revoked.