Jesus Dismissing Mary?

[Fauken]

Hello everyone!

So, I recently told my parents that I am going through RCIA. Their reception to that went swimmingly well, though they disagree with Catholicism. When my father and I were talking, he said that Mary could not be held in as high of a regard as we think because (apparently) Jesus said something along the lines of “Woman, who are you to me” to Mary before his crucifixion. This did not sit well with me in the back of my head, as I have not encountered such a remark to Mary in Scripture. just browsed through the Gospels and still have not found such a remark. Am I overlooking something? Did Jesus ever say anything along those lines to Mary? Or is my father mistaken?

Thank you for your answers and time!

 

[Mary_Estelle]

You are overlooking something. Translation, intent and the culture of the time. The passage is there, but not to be taken a s a put-down from Jesus to His Mother. Peace.

 

[Belshazzar]

It’s always best to use the original intent of the words of Our Lord from the Greek and Latin translations. He said, “Woman, what is this to Me and you?” meaning the shortage of wine was none of their (Jesus and Mary’s) concern. Unfortunately, the KJV translates that passage to “What have I to do with thee?” Very likely, it was deliberate.

It’s distressing to say the least, to see that many Catholic bibles use the same erroneous interpretation.

 

[Augustine3]

Hello everyone!

So, I recently told my parents that I am going through RCIA. Their reception to that went swimmingly well, though they disagree with Catholicism. When my father and I were talking, he said that Mary could not be held in as high of a regard as we think because (apparently) Jesus said something along the lines of “Woman, who are you to me” to Mary before his crucifixion. This did not sit well with me in the back of my head, as I have not encountered such a remark to Mary in Scripture. just browsed through the Gospels and still have not found such a remark. Am I overlooking something? Did Jesus ever say anything along those lines to Mary? Or is my father mistaken?

Thank you for your answers and time!

I think your father may have been referring to John 4:2 when Jesus said to her, “Woman, what is it to me and thee? My hour has not yet come”

If you read on Jesus obeys Mary’s last request recorded in scripture and provided the wine for the wedding guests even though he didn’t wish to. What does that tell us? Quite the opposite of what your father is implying (with all respect).

 

[Wesrock]

He’s referring to John 2:4 I believe. The NABRE renders it:

4 [d][And] Jesus said to her, “Woman, how does your concern affect me? My hour has not yet come.” 5 His mother said to the servers, “Do whatever he tells you.”

The RSV puts:
4 And Jesus said to her, “O woman, what have you to do with me? My hour has not yet come.” 5 His mother said to the servants, “Do whatever he tells you.”

NIV:
4 “Woman,[a] why do you involve me?” Jesus replied. “My hour has not yet come.” 5 His mother said to the servants, “Do whatever he tells you.”

Let’s assume the RSV; however, that doesn’t mean I agree with your father’s assessment of it being dismissive. For one, it’s thinking about the use of the word “woman” to 21st century English ears, which would hear it as dismissive or even insulting. That would not necessarily be the case in Aramaic or Greek. It could also be understood as a polite form of address.

In French, the word woman is also used for wife. It’s not dismissive to say “my woman” as it literally means “my wife.” (Greek is similar, actually, though I am not saying we should translate it as wife in this situation, certainly not!) Japanese has a term for the elderly that we don’t have in English, but is frequently translated as “granny” when applied to elderly women. It sounds almost insulting to my English ears to call an older woman I hardly know “granny,” but in Japanese it’s considered respectful.

Furthermore, at his crucifixion Jesus calls her “woman” again.

RSV John 19:26
26 When Jesus saw his mother, and the disciple whom he loved standing near, he said to his mother, “Woman, behold, your son!”

We hardly think of the use of “woman” in this case to be direspectful. It should be noted that Catholics also see the word choice in both these occurrences as deliberate references to Eve, for the word used for her in the Greek is the same, and its part of why Mary is often seen as the New Eve.

Then there’s the next phrase: what have you to do with me? (RSV.)

First of all, the actual Greek is “Τί ἐμοὶ καὶ σοί;” This may be the wrong path for me to take, as I’m essentially still in the very early stages of learning Greek (so someone please correct if I’m wrong), but me (ἐμοὶ) and you (σοί) are both in the dative case, meaning they are both indirect objects. It seems odd to pit one as the subject or object of the other since they’re in the same case. They are both receiving whatever is going on here, whatever action this sentence is taking is being applied to both of them, not one to the other. “καὶ” just means “and” in this verse. “Τί” means “who”, “which”, or “what (thing)” or something along those lines. The end of our analysis is seeing that this is a question (indicated by the Greek question mark “;”, so we can add a word or two to English to make it make sense as such. So watch my hubris as I render it “What is this to you and me?” Or, allow me to risk making a fool of myself, he’s essentially asking “Is this really any of our business?” (With the implication being it’s not your wedding or mine, yet. Let’s not forget the next phrase which puts Jesus’ response into context, “my hour has not yet come.” His response is to tie this into his messianic mission, to the consummation of his own wedding at the cross. It’s not a coincidence that his first public miracle was at a wedding. It’s not a simple question of whether they should get involved. This is too relevant to be an accident or a random, unplanned (by God) occurrence, which would be the conclusion from your Father’s interpretation, which makes this miracle a result of Jesus being pressured into doing it by his mother.) Hopefully someone more knowledgable of the Greek can comment on this and correct me if I’ve erred.

The phrase isn’t necessarily dismissive. Whether I’m right about the Greek, I also think we need to understand that translating from one language to the others might lose the true meaning of a phrase. “Once in a blue moon.” “When pigs fly.” Etc…

Plus, we don’t know how it was said. Perhaps it was with a smile on his face in good nature. It’s no less of an assumption to assume he was being negative or derogatory towards his mother, especially when the fourth commandment is about honoring one’s parents, and Jesus, the perfect man, stresses keeping the spirit of the law, not just its letter.

Anyway, Jesus follows through with it. I’d hardly see it as disrespectful. And what happens immediately after this? Jesus is ready to start his ministry.

 

[TimothyH]

Jesus didn’t want to start his ministry because he knew it would lead to his death.

And Jesus said to her, “O woman, what have you to do with me? My hour has not yet come.” (John 2:4)

It is natural not to want to die but in the end Jesus obeyed his Mother.

Here we see the only place in the Bible where any human gets to tell God what to do. Mary is given the singular honor of initiating the events that will redeem all mankind. This is how high God himself held Mary. We should do no less.

-Tim-

 

[Lily_Bernans]

Jesus didn’t want to start his ministry because he knew it would lead to his death.

And Jesus said to her, "O woman, what have you to do with me? My hour has not yet come." (John 2:4)

It is natural not to want to die but in the end Jesus obeyed his Mother.

Here we see the only place in the Bible where any human gets to tell God what to do. Mary is given the singular honor of initiating the events that will redeem all mankind. This is how high God himself held Mary. We should do no less.

-Tim-

Do you have a source for Jesus not wanting to start his ministry? Are you referring to Cana? Jesus did, very much, want to begin his ministry. So much so that his family had to pull him away from crowds that thought he had taken leave of his senses.

"And He came home, and the crowd gathered again, to such an extent that they could not even eat a meal. 21When His own people heard of this, they went out to take custody of Him; for they were saying, “He has lost His senses.” 22The scribes who came down from Jerusalem were saying, “He is possessed by Beelzebul,” and “He casts out the demons by the ruler of the demons” (Mark 3:21). Jesus came to his Messianic calling gradually, but once he became fully aware of it, he was, at all times, obedient to his Father. He didn’t know, early on, that it would lead to his death. He came to that realization only gradually as well. A consequence of assuming full humanity. Although he retained, at all times, his full divinity (the hypostatic union), while on earth, he had to grow and learn and think discursively as we do. When he did go to his death, he probably wasn’t certain that he would be resurrected on the third day. Another consequence of being human. But he was “obedient unto death.” His ministry was his life.

 

[Tim_D]

When he did go to his death, he probably wasn’t certain that he would be resurrected on the third day.

Jesus had already told the Apostles that it was necessary for the Son of Man to be crucified, die, be buried and rise again on the third day. He certainly was aware that he would be resurrected. It was the whole purpose of His mission.

 

[Lily_Bernans]

Jesus had already told the Apostles that it was necessary for the Son of Man to be crucified, die, be buried and rise again on the third day. He certainly was aware that he would be resurrected. It was the whole purpose of His mission.

Yes, you’re right, but he came to the realization gradually. He definitely wanted to begin his ministry. Even though he did believe he would be resurrected, being fully human, he questioned himself. Things like “Am I on the right track here?” “I think this is what God wants of me, but how can I be positive?” If he were positive of being resurrected, he wouldn’t have been in such terrible distress and agony in the Garden the night before his arrest. That he assumed full humanity shows how much he humbled himself for the sake of humanity who often doesn’t seem very grateful to him. (I’m not speaking of anyone here, just humanity in general.) We always have to keep in mind that Jesus was not only fully divine, he was also fully human. Today, many people have lost sight of that and have become pseudo-Monophysites. (Not saying anyone here has, but I encounter many who are).

I think Jesus was reluctant to turn the water into wine in Cana because it always caused a ruckus when he did perform a miracle - well early on, at least - and crowds would clamor for his attention and love, wanting things of him. I think he wanted to keep the focus on the wedding and the wedding couple, but Mary convinced him to help out with the refreshments.

 

[Lily_Bernans]

Jesus didn’t want to start his ministry because he knew it would lead to his death.

And Jesus said to her, "O woman, what have you to do with me? My hour has not yet come." (John 2:4)

It is natural not to want to die but in the end Jesus obeyed his Mother.

Here we see the only place in the Bible where any human gets to tell God what to do. Mary is given the singular honor of initiating the events that will redeem all mankind. This is how high God himself held Mary. We should do no less.

-Tim-

Yes, it does show in what high esteem Christ held his mother. Certainly she merits a very special place. He also holds those who believe in him and love him in very high esteem. Take Mt 12:48-49: "Someone said to Him, “Behold, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside seeking to speak to You.” But Jesus answered the one who was telling Him and said, “Who is My mother and who are My brothers?” And stretching out His hand toward His disciples, He said, “Behold My mother and My brothers!”

So by following him and trusting him and loving him more than anyone else, we, too, can become his mother, sister, brother.

 

[Tim_D]

If he were positive of being resurrected, he wouldn’t have been in such terrible distress and agony in the Garden the night before his arrest.

The reason for His distress and agony in the garden was because of the fact that as God, he knew what awaited Him and as Man, he was afraid of it. Jesus’ humanity had full trust in God; as God, He knew what would happen. I do not subscribe to the idea that Jesus somehow suffered from an “identity crisis,” somehow not knowing who He was or what He was eventually going to do.

I think Jesus was reluctant to turn the water into wine in Cana because it always caused a ruckus when he did perform a miracle - well early on, at least - and crowds would clamor for his attention and love, wanting things of him. I think he wanted to keep the focus on the wedding and the wedding couple, but Mary convinced him to help out with the refreshments.

Jesus tells us in scripture why He was reluctant to turn the water into wine; it was because His time had not yet come. It certainly wasn’t because He wanted to keep the focus on the wedding; it was because of His infinite love for His mother Mary. It was Mary who caused Jesus to begin His public ministry before the appointed time because of her love and concern for the public perception of the wedding couple. She did not need to “convince” Him of anything.

 

[Lily_Bernans]

The reason for His distress and agony in the garden was because of the fact that as God, he knew what awaited Him and as Man, he was afraid of it. Jesus’ humanity had full trust in God; as God, He knew what would happen. I do not subscribe to the idea that Jesus somehow suffered from an “identity crisis,” somehow not knowing who He was or what He was eventually going to do.

Jesus tells us in scripture why He was reluctant to turn the water into wine; it was because His time had not yet come. It certainly wasn’t because He wanted to keep the focus on the wedding; it was because of His infinite love for His mother Mary. It was Mary who caused Jesus to begin His public ministry before the appointed time because of her love and concern for the public perception of the wedding couple. She did not need to “convince” Him of anything.

I never said he suffered from an “identity crisis.” I don’t think he did. But he was fully human, and being fully human, he had to think discursively like we do. God does not think discursively. God is not complex; God is utterly simple. During his Incarnation, Jesus was not utterly simple. When he assumed humanity, he also assumed the problems of being human.

There are other places in the Bible where Jesus tells people his hour had not yet come, and those take place during his ministry. He didn’t begin his ministry prior to the appointed time! Everything was carried out just as it had been meant to be carried out from eternity. Certainly he loved his mother greatly, but he did not begin his ministry prior to the appointed time because of Mary’s request, nor would Mary make such a request. She knew her son was the Son of God.

He is telling Mary he came to cure the world of spiritual ills, not to fix fripperies like running out of wine, which is a physical problem.

John used the word “hour” a lot:

catholic-resources.org/John/Themes-Hour.htm

Jesus certainly loved his mother, but she did not persuade him to begin his ministry ahead of its appointed time.

 

[Tim_D]

Jesus certainly loved his mother, but she did not persuade him to begin his ministry ahead of its appointed time.

Then how do we reconcile scripture that has Christ say in response to the absence of wine: ““Woman, how does your concern affect me? My hour has not yet come.,” to her order to the servants to “Do whatever he tells you” and the resultant sign of the wine? John says that “Jesus did this as the beginning of his signs in Cana in Galilee and so revealed his glory,* and his disciples began to believe in him.” Certainly it was the impetus of Mary that “persuaded” Him to being his ministry before the appointed time.

 

[Richca]

We hardly think of the use of “woman” in this case to be direspectful. It should be noted that Catholics also see the word choice in both these occurrences as deliberate references to Eve, for the word used for her in the Greek is the same, and its part of why Mary is often seen as the New Eve.

 

[Lily_Bernans]

Then how do we reconcile scripture that has Christ say in response to the absence of wine: ““Woman, how does your concern affect me? My hour has not yet come.,” to her order to the servants to “Do whatever he tells you” and the resultant sign of the wine? John says that “Jesus did this as the beginning of his signs in Cana in Galilee and so revealed his glory,* and his disciples began to believe in him.” Certainly it was the impetus of Mary that “persuaded” Him to being his ministry before the appointed time.

How would you interpret all the many other uses of “it is not yet my hour” John uses in his gospel?

I am not downplaying Mary’s significance in history one bit or devotion to her or Jesus’ love for his mother, but no one, not even Mary, “persuaded” Jesus to begin his ministry before its appointed time. You even point out that he had disciples. Someone with disciples has already begun his ministry. God is changeless. What he does is what is supposed to happen, what has been decreed.

 

[ericc]

Yes, you’re right, but he came to the realization gradually. He definitely wanted to begin his ministry. Even though he did believe he would be resurrected, being fully human, he questioned himself. Things like “Am I on the right track here?” “I think this is what God wants of me, but how can I be positive?” If he were positive of being resurrected, he wouldn’t have been in such terrible distress and agony in the Garden the night before his arrest. That he assumed full humanity shows how much he humbled himself for the sake of humanity who often doesn’t seem very grateful to him. (I’m not speaking of anyone here, just humanity in general.) We always have to keep in mind that Jesus was not only fully divine, he was also fully human. Today, many people have lost sight of that and have become pseudo-Monophysites. (Not saying anyone here has, but I encounter many who are).

I think Jesus was reluctant to turn the water into wine in Cana because it always caused a ruckus when he did perform a miracle - well early on, at least - and crowds would clamor for his attention and love, wanting things of him. I think he wanted to keep the focus on the wedding and the wedding couple, but Mary convinced him to help out with the refreshments.

I think Jesus already began his ministry prior to Cana. In Jn 2:2 his disciples were already with him at Cana. In Mat 4:17 we see he already started preaching even before he had his disciples gathered, which happened in ver 18. I’d place the start of his ministry at verse 17.

“My hour is not yet come” in several places always refer to his death. Even at the start of his ministry, he knew it will end in death. You suggest that he came into realization of his death gradually but this “hour has not come” statement does suggest otherwise.

John​

2:4
7:6
7:8
7:30
8 :20
12:23,27
13:1
17:1

This procession of references to “his hour” is indicative that he surely know his destiny, right from Cana.

No the wine miracle didn’t cause a ruckus. Even the steward thought the groom reserved his best wine for last.

 

[ericc]

If he were positive of being resurrected, he wouldn’t have been in such terrible distress and agony in the Garden the night before his arrest.

I can assure you that any sane man even if he knows will be resurrected would not wish to go through the pain, agony, humiliation of crucifixion. Branded a common criminal, spat upon, mocked, whipped, nailed and suspended till you die of suffocation. And 3? hours to die. You seem to make light of his suffering just because he knows he will be resurrected. With scars to show for it.

theguardian.com/science/2004/apr/08/thisweekssciencequestions

Someone nailed to a crucifix with their arms stretched out on either side could expect to live for no more than 24 hours. Seven-inch nails would be driven through the wrists so that the bones there could support the body’s weight. The nail would sever the median nerve, which not only caused immense pain but would have paralysed the victim’s hands.

The feet were nailed to the upright part of the crucifix, so that the knees were bent at around 45 degrees. To speed death, executioners would often break the legs of their victims to give no chance of using their thigh muscles as support. It was probably unnecessary, as their strength would not have lasted more than a few minutes even if they were unharmed.

Once the legs gave out, the weight would be transferred to the arms, gradually dragging the shoulders from their sockets. The elbows and wrists would follow a few minutes later; by now, the arms would be six or seven inches longer. The victim would have no choice but to bear his weight on his chest. He would immediately have trouble breathing as the weight caused the rib cage to lift up and force him into an almost perpetual state of inhalation.

Suffocation would usually follow, but the relief of death could also arrive in other ways. “The resultant lack of oxygen in the blood would cause damage to tissues and blood vessels, allowing fluid to diffuse out of the blood into tissues, including the lungs and the sac around the heart,” says Ward.

This would make the lungs stiffer and make breathing even more difficult, and the pressure around the heart would impair its pumping.

The agony is worse for him because he knew he will die by crucifixion even before the trial, the most painful death of the time. Knowing you will get up 3 days later doesn’t give a lot of comfort. Ordinary men would be clueless and still hoping to get acquitted and an “ignorance is bliss” statement may be apt for them.

 

[TimothyH]

Yes, it does show in what high esteem Christ held his mother. Certainly she merits a very special place. He also holds those who believe in him and love him in very high esteem. Take Mt 12:48-49: "Someone said to Him, “Behold, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside seeking to speak to You.” But Jesus answered the one who was telling Him and said, “Who is My mother and who are My brothers?” And stretching out His hand toward His disciples, He said, “Behold My mother and My brothers!”

So by following him and trusting him and loving him more than anyone else, we, too, can become his mother, sister, brother.

Jesus is honoring his mother in that passage.

For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother, and sister, and mother." (Matthew 12:50)

No one followed God’s will more than Mary.

-Tim-

 

[TimothyH]

Do you have a source for Jesus not wanting to start his ministry? Are you referring to Cana? Jesus did, very much, want to begin his ministry. So much so that his family had to pull him away from crowds that thought he had taken leave of his senses.

"And He came home, and the crowd gathered again, to such an extent that they could not even eat a meal. 21When His own people heard of this, they went out to take custody of Him; for they were saying, “He has lost His senses.” 22The scribes who came down from Jerusalem were saying, “He is possessed by Beelzebul,” and “He casts out the demons by the ruler of the demons” (Mark 3:21). Jesus came to his Messianic calling gradually, but once he became fully aware of it, he was, at all times, obedient to his Father. He didn’t know, early on, that it would lead to his death. He came to that realization only gradually as well. A consequence of assuming full humanity. Although he retained, at all times, his full divinity (the hypostatic union), while on earth, he had to grow and learn and think discursively as we do. When he did go to his death, he probably wasn’t certain that he would be resurrected on the third day. Another consequence of being human. But he was “obedient unto death.” His ministry was his life.

It is a very common understanding that Jesus did not want to start his ministry at that moment. I’m surprised when people say they have never heard of it.

-Tim-

 

[Lily_Bernans]

I think Jesus already began his ministry prior to Cana. In Jn 2:2 his disciples were already with him at Cana. In Mat 4:17 we see he already started preaching even before he had his disciples gathered, which happened in ver 18. I’d place the start of his ministry at verse 17.

“My hour is not yet come” in several places always refer to his death. Even at the start of his ministry, he knew it will end in death. You suggest that he came into realization of his death gradually but this “hour has not come” statement does suggest otherwise.

John​

2:4
7:6
7:8
7:30
8 :20
12:23,27
13:1
17:1

This procession of references to “his hour” is indicative that he surely know his destiny, right from Cana.

No the wine miracle didn’t cause a ruckus. Even the steward thought the groom reserved his best wine for last.

I seem to have failed to make myself clear in my posts and for that I apologize. I am terrible at multi-tasking and should give it up! I do agree with what you’ve written, with the exception that I still believe that Jesus came to his Messianic calling gradually, however, I was speaking of the time prior to his ministry. Certainly he knew his fate when he began his ministry, which is why he began his ministry. On reflection, even though crowds did gather around him, the miracle at Cana was his first miracle IIRC, so people weren’t clamoring to meet him as I’ve stated. I was in error on that. That did not come until later. Still, I cannot agree that Mary persuaded him to begin his ministry early, and I realize you have not said he did. You have pointed out that he had disciples already by the time of the wedding in Cana. I think you’ve done a great job explaining, and I agree that John’s use of the word “hour” signifies Jesus’ death.