John Calvin Commentary Luke 14

This narrative contains nothing more than a miracle which Christ performed in order to correct the superstitious observance of the Sabbath. For he did not intend, as some imagine, absolutely to abolish the Sabbath, but only to point out that neither the works of God nor the duties of charity violate the holy rest which is enjoined by the law.

Whether or not those very persons had purposely brought the dropsical man to that place cannot be known with certainty. He unquestionably could not be present at the table by accident, nor break into a private dwelling without the permission and consent of the owner. It is therefore probable that he was placed there with the concealed design of tempting Christ, which, on their part, was as foolish an action as it was wicked, for they had already known by experience what Christ was accustomed to do whenever a similar occasion presented itself.

Is it lawful to cure on Sabbath? The meaning of this question is, ought the curing of a man to be considered among the works which violate the Sabbath? If they had said that the observance of the Sabbath is violated in this way, the reply was obvious: that it is a work of God. Now the law of the Sabbath goes no further than that men shall rest from their own works.

Christ first puts the question to them, and he does so for the purpose of guarding against offense. It would not have been necessary for him to pacify them, if they had not been instigated by hardened malice. Not that he always placed himself under this restriction; for in many cases he did what had been commanded him by the Father, without attending to the offense that might arise from it. But he intended to show by this example that he did not inconsiderately perform miracles on Sabbath, because he was prepared to give a reason for what he did.

They, on the other hand, make it evident by their silence that their desire to find fault is stronger than their zeal for the law; and therefore, Christ treats their opinion about his action with utter indifference, because it was evident that they intentionally sought an occasion for offense.

Which of you shall have an ox or an ass? Though they did not deserve that Christ should take pains to remove the offense, yet he shows that he did nothing inconsistent with the observance of the Sabbath.

He undoubtedly does this, not so much to instruct them as to protect himself against their slanders; for he knew that they were too blinded by virulent hatred to yield submissively to argument, but wished to triumph over their malice by compelling them through shame to be silent.

If we are at liberty to relieve brute animals on the Sabbath, it would be unreasonable that we should not perform a similar office of kindness to man, who is formed after the image of God.

And he spoke a parable to those who were invited. We know to what an extent ambition prevailed among the Pharisees and all the scribes. While they desired to exercise a haughty dominion over all other men, the superiority among themselves was likewise an object of emulation. It is constantly the case with men who are desirous of empty applause, that they cherish envy towards each other, every one endeavoring to draw to himself what others imagine to be due to them. Thus the Pharisees and scribes, while they were all equally disposed, in the presence of the people, to glory in the title of holy order, are now disputing among themselves about the degree of honor, because every one claims for himself the highest place.

This ambition of theirs Christ exposes to ridicule by an appropriate parable. If anyone sitting at another man’s table were to occupy the highest place, and were afterwards compelled to give way to a more honorable person, it would not be without shame and dishonor that he was ordered by the master of the feast to take a different place. But the same thing must happen to all who proudly give themselves out as superior to others; for God will bring upon them disgrace and contempt. It must be observed, that Christ is not now speaking of outward and civil modesty; for we often see that the haughtiest men excel in this respect, and civilly, as the phrase is, profess great modesty. But by a comparison taken from men, he describes what we ought to be inwardly before God. “Were it to happen that a guest should foolishly take possession of the highest place, and should, on that account, be put down to the lowest, he would be so completely overpowered with shame as to wish that he had never gone higher. To prevent the same thing from happening to you, that God would punish your arrogance with the deepest disgrace, resolve, on your own, to be humble and modest.”

For every one that exalteth himself shall be humbled. This clause makes it evident that ambition was the subject Christ was speaking about; for he does not state what usually happens in the ordinary life of people, but declares that God will be their Judge, who resisteth the proud, and humbleth their haughtiness, but giveth grace to the humble (James 4:6; 1 Peter 5:5; Psalms 138:6). Scripture is full of similar testimonies that God is an enemy to all who desire to exalt themselves, as all who claim for themselves any merit must necessarily make war with Him. It is a manifestation of pride to boast of the gifts of God as if there were any excellence in ourselves that would exalt us on the ground of our own merit. Humility, on the other hand, must be not only an unfeigned abasement, but a real annihilation of ourselves, proceeding from a thorough knowledge of our own weakness, the entire absence of lofty pretensions, and a conviction that whatever excellence we possess comes from the grace of God alone.