Mark 2:25

(Vict. Ant. e Cat. in Marc.) But our Lord brings forward David, to whom it once happened to eat though it was forbidden by the law, when he touched the Priest's food, that by his example, he might do away with their accusation of the disciples. For there follows, Have ye never read, &c.

It is foolish to believe the Evangelist's account that he ate and not to believe that he was really hungry. Yet it does not follow that everyone who eats is hungry. For we read that even an angel ate, but we do not read that he was hungry. Nor does it follow that everyone who is hungry eats. He may either restrain himself due to some obligation or lack food or the means to eat.… Now, just as the fact that Jesus ate food is unintelligible without a body, so the fact that he felt hunger is impossible without a soul.

And he said to them: Have you never read, etc.? To refute the Pharisees' accusation, he recalls an old story, when David, fleeing Saul, came to Nob and was received by the priest Abimelech, and asked for food (1 Samuel 21). Since he did not have ordinary bread, he gave him consecrated bread, which only priests and Levites were allowed to eat. He only asked if the young men were pure from women: and when he answered from yesterday and the day before, he did not hesitate to give the bread, considering it better (as the prophet says, I desire mercy, and not sacrifice [Hosea 6]) to free men from the danger of hunger than to offer a sacrifice to God. For the acceptable sacrifice to God is the salvation of men. Therefore, the Lord argues and says: If both David is holy and Abimelech the priest is not blamed by you, but each of them transgressed the commandment of the law with reasonable excuse, and hunger is the cause, why do you not approve the same hunger in the apostles which you approve in others? Although, in this matter, there is much difference. These rub the ears of grain in their hands on the Sabbath, those ate Levitical bread. There, even at the solemnity of the Sabbath, the days of the new moons illuminated it, and in the feasts when he fled from the royal court. Figuratively speaking, when it is said that David and his men received the consecrated bread, it shows that the food of the priesthood would pass into common use, either because we all ought to imitate the priestly life, or because all the children of the Church are priests. For we are anointed into a holy priesthood, offering ourselves as spiritual sacrifices to God. We have spoken more fully about this whole story according to our understanding in the exposition of the book of Kings, and about the table and the bread of the presence, in the book on the exposition of the tabernacle and its vessels. As for why the Lord calls Abimelech the chief of the priests instead of Abiathar, there is no discrepancy. For both were there when David came and asked for and received the bread, namely Abimelech the chief of the priests, and Abiathar his son. After Abimelech was killed by Saul, along with eighty-five priests of his household, Abiathar fled to David and became his companion throughout his exile. Later, when David reigned, he received the office of high priest and remained in the pontificate…