The way Jesus spoke to Mary at the Wedding at Cana

[4most4christ]

It does, though. Jesus is both 100% human and God. Those two natures cannot be separated. Mary cannot be the mother of human Jesus without also being the mother of divine Jesus since they are one in the same. No, Mary is not our savior, nor is she the way to Heaven. Jesus is. However, Mary is the closest way to Jesus. In Revelation 12, we are told of a woman crowned with 12 stars. This is yet another instance of Mary being referred to as “woman.”
We’re not trying to equate her with the Trinity. She isn’t God. She’s not even close. She’s human…perfectly so. By being the mother of the king, she is the queen. As I said earlier, in the Davidic kingdom {which Jesus is a part of}, the mother of the king was the queen.

TOTALLLY agree with you up until “Mary is the closest way to Jesus”.
Might you restate or elaborate on this? She was fully human and born as a sinner like all the rest of us, save Jesus who was born of the Holy Spirit, and there’s no Scripture-based teaching that she is the way, or a way, to heaven, agreed?

About Rev. 12, “The Woman and the Dragon” - thats always been tricky, since it is mostly (though not always) an allegorical book. Yet reading it, we might view the allegory of humanly woman represents mankind where the dragon represent the symobl of evil as a seprent from the garden of Eden.
This passage doesn’t directly imply the woman is Mary. Is it Eve? To be quite honest, I’m not sure. I’m current doing in-depth seminary study on the Benediction, Covenant/Testament definitions and the dispelling of Dispensationalism, and I haven’t gone through an analysis of the original text and context of Rev. 12, so this passage may be meaning Mary & Christ’s kingdom at His first coming. I’d love to hear your studies & take on it.

By the way, I think this is a great discussion!}

TOTAL
Ours is a living faith founded of facts, not some universalistic static myth which might be bent for personal agendas.
Let’s rejoice in the King and seek Him further!!! Have a blessed Labor Day weekend, y’all. Here’s hoping your Sabbath worthship of Jehovah is refreshing and personally efficacious in turning from sin and towards Him.

 

[Prayer_Warrior]

I’m not purposing to be agrumentative, and we likely agre that Mary is the earthly vessel through which the Holy Spirit brought the Savior. She is a saint, yet not on equal standing with any member of the Holy Trinity.
She cannot be a ruler of heaven since she’s not part of the Trinity. This truth doesn’t diminish her in any way.
Her earthly “work” in being the Messiah’s earthly mother doesn’t transfer automatically to a heavenly role of sovereignty, though through faith she is an heir to the Kingdom, along with all those who confess Jesus as Savior.

This is the point of confusion and bewilderment with many (I’d say 75%) with my RCC friends. I’ve been told by some, literally, “Mary is our Savior.” and “Well, yes there’s Jesus, but Mary is the mother of God, so she’s the way.” and I agree with you, this means that those who profess Mary as Savior aren’t following RCC teachings. It seems to be they have a lack of understanding that Jesus is the Savior because of initiating prayer to Mary.

Yes, I agree that Mary was the earthly vessel through which the Holy Spirit brought the Savior. Of course she is not on par with God. We are in agreement that it is a Holy Trinity, not a Holy quartet! However, we believe that her sovereign status comes from her relationship to Jesus and that God honors her has “Queen Mum” so speak. If you think about the Queen Mum of England (QEII’s mother) she had an honored position, but did not hold authority over the reigning monarch. Similarly, the Blessed Mother has no authority over Christ.

Revelation 12 speaks of the woman who gave birth to the Savior as having a crown with 12 stars. Catholics have always understood that passage to have more than one meaning but we believe it is a reference to Mary as queen mother in heaven. This does not mean that she has been given all authority and power. Goodness no! All we believe is that she is able to intercede on our behalf as she did at Cana (see also Tobit 12 to see how those in heaven can hear and present prayers of those on earth.)

It is distressing to hear of any Catholic who says “Mary is Savior”. I’ve known hundreds of Catholics and only one has ever crossed that line. I promptly corrected her. I agree that there seems to be some misunderstanding among some Catholics about intercessory prayer. That you say it is 75% of the Catholics you know is shocking to me. If you come across this in the future, you may want to tell them to read their own Catechism. Sheesh!

More from the CCC;

970 “Mary’s function as mother of men in no way obscures or diminishes this unique mediation of Christ, but rather shows its power. But the Blessed Virgin’s salutary influence on men . . . flows forth from the superabundance of the merits of Christ, rests on his mediation, depends entirely on it, and draws all its power from it.” …

 

[bzkoss236]

TOTALLLY agree with you up until “Mary is the closest way to Jesus”.
Might you restate or elaborate on this? She was fully human and born as a sinner like all the rest of us, save Jesus who was born of the Holy Spirit, and there’s no Scripture-based teaching that she is the way, or a way, to heaven, agreed?

Right, Christ is the only way to heaven, but Mary is a way to Christ. Get it? Like if a friend introduced you to Christ through the Scriptures, but Mary, as his mother, knew him in a more profound way. So, approaching Mary, is a way that we can approach Christ that we wouldn’t be able to otherwise (not to say that we can’t know Christ otherwise, just not as profoundly).

 

[coachkfan1]

Quote:

This is the point of confusion and bewilderment with many (I’d say 75%) with my RCC friends. I’ve been told by some, literally, “Mary is our Savior.” and “Well, yes there’s Jesus, but Mary is the mother of God, so she’s the way.” and I agree with you, this means that those who profess Mary as Savior aren’t following RCC teachings. It seems to be they have a lack of understanding that Jesus is the Savior because of initiating prayer to Mary.

I am sorry but I have to call horse hockey on this. You say 75% of your Catholic friends say stuff like this. I have NEVER heard a single Catholic say anything like this.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Hey everyone. I have a question. Why did Jesus speak to His Blessed Mother, Mary, the way He did at the Wedding at Cana? I am not saying that He was disrespectful or anything of the sort as I do not believe for one moment that He would be. However, the Scripture is confusing. Here it is:

On the third day there was a marriage at Cana in Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there; Jesus also was invited to the marriage, with his disciples. When the wine failed, the mother of Jesus said to him, “They have no wine.” And Jesus said to her, “O woman, what have you to do with me? My hour has not yet come.” His mother said to the servants, “Do whatever he tells you.” Now six stone jars were standing there, for the Jewish rites of purification, each holding twenty or thirty gallons. Jesus said to them, “Fill the jars with water.” And they filled them up to the brim. He said to them, “Now draw some out, and take it to the steward of the feast.” So they took it. When the steward of the feast tasted the water now become wine, and did not know where it came from (though the servants who had drawn the water knew), the steward of the feast called the bridegroom and said to him, “Every man serves the good wine first; and when men have drunk freely, then the poor wine; but you have kept the good wine until now.” This, the first of his signs, Jesus did at Cana in Galilee, and manifested his glory; and his disciples believed in him.
(John 2:1-11 RSV-CE)

So why did He speak that way to her in the first sentence of His dialogue with His mother? Also, why did He say His time had not yet come? Was He speaking of His time to be crucified? If so, why would He have said this in response to them being out of wine. Or was He saying it was not yet His time to perform His first miracle? If so, why did He do it right then?

**
John 2:4 - Woman**

Q: Didn’t Jesus show his mother disrespect by calling her “Woman” in John 2:4?

A: The title “Woman” is not a sign of disrespect, it is the opposite – a title of dignity. It is a formal mode of speech equivalent to the English titles, “Lady” or “Madam.”

The Protestant commentator William Barclay writes:

“The word Woman (gynai) is also misleading. It sounds to us very rough and abrupt. But it is the same word as Jesus used on the Cross to address Mary as he left her to the care of John (John 19:26). In Homer it is the title by which Odysseus addresses Penelope, his well-loved wife. It is the title by which Augustus, the Roman Emperor, addressed Cleopatara, the famous Egyptian queen. So far from being a rough and discourteous way of address, it was a title of respect. We have no way of speaking in English which exactly renders it; but it is better to translate it Lady which gives at least the courtesy in it” (The Gospel of John, revised edition, vol. 1, p. 98).

Similarly, the Protestant Expositor’s Bible Commentary, published by Zondervan, states:

Jesus’ reply to Mary was not so abrupt as it seems. ‘Woman’ (gynai) was a polite form of address. Jesus used it when he spoke to his mother from the cross (19:26) and also when he spoke to Mary Magdalene after the Resurrection (20:15)" (vol. 9, p. 42).

Even the Fundamentalist Wycliff Bible Commentary put out by Moody Press acknowledges in its comment on this verse,

“In his reply, the use of ‘Woman’ does not involve disrespect (cf. 19:26)” (p. 1076).

The fact it is not a title of disrespect should be obvious from the fact that Jesus, as an obedient Son who fulfilled the Torah perfectly, would never have spoken irreverently to his mother. His perfect fulfillment of the Torah includes a perfect fulfillment of the command, “Honor your father and mother,” which in the literal Hebrew is “Glorify your father and mother.”

This is why the *corban *custom was so wrong – because it left one’s parents scrounging for food and money and thus publicly humiliated, violating the command to glorify your father and mother by seeing that they are not publicly shamed by being reduced to begging. To publicly speak irreverently of his mother is something that Jesus would never have been able to countenance. Actually, the way Jesus is using the term – at the two key junctures in John’s Gospel where Mary appears – is symbolic and emblematic of her role in redemptive history. Whereas Eve was the First Woman, Mary is the Second Woman, just as Adam was the First Man and Jesus was the Second Man (1 Cor. 15:47).

 

[WaitingForJesus]

About Rev. 12, “The Woman and the Dragon” - thats always been tricky, since it is mostly (though not always) an allegorical book. Yet reading it, we might view the allegory of humanly woman represents mankind where the dragon represent the symobl of evil as a seprent from the garden of Eden.
This passage doesn’t directly imply the woman is Mary. Is it Eve? To be quite honest, I’m not sure. I’m current doing in-depth seminary study on the Benediction, Covenant/Testament definitions and the dispelling of Dispensationalism, and I haven’t gone through an analysis of the original text and context of Rev. 12, so this passage may be meaning Mary & Christ’s kingdom at His first coming. I’d love to hear your studies & take on it.

I would encourage you to read Hail Holy Queen by Scott Haan to learn more about how Catholic’s view Mary. He used to be a Presbyterian minister. Incidentally, I am a convert to Catholicism and it took a long time for me to really absorb the Church’s teachings on Mary.

Below I have combined what is at the end of Revelation 11 with the beginning of Revelation 12. I do view it as Christ’s first coming through Mary. I also believe it shows that his second coming will be through Mary. I believe Christians need to understand her role in order for our Lord’s powers to be fully manifested in the world.

When I read these references to a woman giving birth to a child destined to rule all the nations with an iron rod, I knew the child was Jesus…which meant the woman had to be Mary. And it connects back to things in the Old Testament as I noted earlier.

Then the seventh angel blew his trumpet. There were loud voices in heaven, saying, “The kingdom of the world now belongs to our Lord and to his Anointed, and he will reign forever and ever.” The twenty-four elders who sat on their thrones before God prostrated themselves and worshiped God and said: "We give thanks to you, Lord God almighty, who are and who were. For you have assumed your great power and have established your reign. The nations raged, but your wrath has come, and the time for the dead to be judged, and to recompense your servants, the prophets, and the holy ones and those who fear your name, the small and the great alike, and to destroy those who destroy the earth. **Then God’s temple in heaven was opened, and the ark of his covenant could be seen in the temple. There were flashes of lightning, rumblings, and peals of thunder, an earthquake, and a violent hailstorm. ** **A great sign appeared in the sky, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars. She was with child and wailed aloud in pain as she labored to give birth. **Then another sign appeared in the sky; it was a huge red dragon, 4 with seven heads and ten horns, and on its heads were seven diadems. Its tail swept away a third of the stars in the sky and hurled them down to the earth. Then the dragon stood before the woman about to give birth, to devour her child when she gave birth. **She gave birth to a son, a male child, destined to rule all the nations with an iron rod. Her child was caught up to God and his throne. **

 

[Kopratic]

Furthermore, Mary was not born in sin. She is the new ark of the covenant. The old ark had to be perfect, inside and out, and nothing imperfect could touch it – much less dwell inside it. Why would God go through all the trouble to have the old ark perfect yet make the new ark {which is much more important, since God made flesh dwells inside} imperfect? Yes, Mary is human. However, in her sinless nature {which God saved her from, not herself} she is perfectly human. Sin is a result of our fallen nature – something Mary never experienced.

 

[4most4christ]

I am sorry but I have to call horse hockey on this. You say 75% of your Catholic friends say stuff like this. I have NEVER heard a single Catholic say anything like this.

“horse hockey” - that made me audibly laugh - thank you, and thanks for not using curse words
Truth is truly stranger than fiction, my friend. I often engage all my friends (whatever their stand) in Christian discussion to direct to Christ, Who is the greatest topic EVER, but my RCC friends (I’m including my Grandfather-in-law) almost always end up getting irritated that I’m asking questions into something IMHO that they likely don’t have a proper understanding about & so they switch the topic. Talking about East coast, South East & Midwestern friends; can’t speak of left coast or Northern folk.

 

[4most4christ]

Yes, I agree that Mary was the earthly vessel through which the Holy Spirit brought the Savior. Of course she is not on par with God. We are in agreement that it is a Holy Trinity, not a Holy quartet! However, we believe that her sovereign status comes from her relationship to Jesus and that God honors her has “Queen Mum” so speak. If you think about the Queen Mum of England (QEII’s mother) she had an honored position, but did not hold authority over the reigning monarch. Similarly, the Blessed Mother has no authority over Christ…

Great succinct explanation & anaology.

Catholics have always understood that passage to have more than one meaning but we believe it is a reference to Mary as queen mother in heaven. This does not mean that she has been given all authority and power. Goodness no! All we believe is that she is able to intercede on our behalf as she did at Cana (see also Tobit 12 to see how those in heaven can hear and present prayers of those on earth.)…

You had me nodding in agreement up until “able to intercede on our behalf…” since we differ on our understanding of the proper scope of the Old Testament canon.

It is distressing to hear of any Catholic who says “Mary is Savior”. I’ve known hundreds of Catholics and only one has ever crossed that line. I promptly corrected her. I agree that there seems to be some misunderstanding among some Catholics about intercessory prayer. That you say it is 75% of the Catholics you know is shocking to me. If you come across this in the future, you may want to tell them to read their own Catechism. Sheesh!..

TELL ME ABOUT IT! It’s quite troublesome when someone states non-Biblical Theology with certainty, then doesn’t want to engage in discussion when face-to-face. I’ve attempted to understand these wackadoodle kind of statements, but since they usually haven;t plumbed those depths of either the Bible of the RCC Catechism, it’s rather futile conversations that abruptly end of that topic from their end. In knowing this paradigm & the limited time they allow for discussion, I instead point more towards the CCC section 133:
"The Church “forcefully and specifically exhorts all the Christian faithful. . . to learn the surpassing knowledge of Jesus Christ, by frequent reading of the divine Scriptures. Ignorance of the Scriptures is ignorance of Christ.”
Amen to that.

 

[4most4christ]

Furthermore, Mary was not born in sin. .

Let’s discuss this. Since the requirements of the Covenant or Works were not met by Adam & Eve (both are to accountable for all of humanity being in the state of sin, and consider this: Do you think anyone has ever been more repentant for their actions? I don’t have a conclusive answer, but I rather doubt it), all of mankind has been plagued with sin. That’s why we needed a Savior who was not mere man. Mary was born through and through with sin, like all of us - save Jesus, who was different becaue He was fathered by the Holy Spirit, and He is therefore the only person to be both man AND God. He lived the perfect life, and died on the cross to appease the payment necessary for mankind’s sin - Hallelujah!

Mary is the vessel through which the Messiah was born, and neither the old ark nor Mary was “perfect, inside and out”. I’d like to hear where that is authoritatively stated, because this might be the root of where some of my RCC friends have been swayed to think Mary is their Savior.

You said “Sin is a result of our fallen nature – something Mary never experienced.” but she WAS a part of humanity, which suffers and groans in sin. Was she 1 of God’s elect? Surely, she is in the company of saints in heaven, all of whom sinned. All the saints were born into sin and could not escape sin;s punishment except from God’s undeserving grace.

Also, Mary & Joseph went on to have other children and she lived the human life, like you say, so surely she struggled with sin. It’s the human condition and plague.

 

[SighGuy]

Mary is the vessel through which the Messiah was born, and neither the old ark nor Mary was “perfect, inside and out”. I’d like to hear where that is authoritatively stated, because this might be the root of where some of my RCC friends have been swayed to think Mary is their Savior.

You said “Sin is a result of our fallen nature – something Mary never experienced.” but she WAS a part of humanity, which suffers and groans in sin. Was she 1 of God’s elect? Surely, she is in the company of saints in heaven, all of whom sinned. All the saints were born into sin and could not escape sin;s punishment except from God’s undeserving grace.

Also, Mary & Joseph went on to have other children and she lived the human life, like you say, so surely she struggled with sin. It’s the human condition and plague.

If you seek authority, then seek the Church. This is what Jesus Christ our Lord established for our benefit. He did not establish the Bible, which, though very important, does not contain the totality of Truth. Paul advised us… “So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter” (2 Thess. 2:15)
Jesus built his Church on Peter, and the gates of Hades should never prevail against it. He warned us that others would come along to draw men away from the true faith, like wolves in sheep’s clothing.
Even within the time frame of the NT we see the Church in action during Acts 15.

Heresy is sin, the wages of sin are death, and death is something that will not prevail against the Church! For it is Christ’s body. Thus the Church that Jesus Christ established upon Peter cannot be in heresy. This is what authority is, authority that was entrusted to man through God.

When that is established, the rest of the revelations of truth that have been bestowed upon us after Christ went back to the Father, just like the discussion on circumcision in Acts 15, these revelations become evident through the authority of the Church (which has authority only through Christ our Lord).

If I have misspoken or misrepresented the Catholic Church it was through ignorance.

Also, Mary did not have other children, both evidenced by the overwhelming support of the ancients with regards to it, and even the fact that most of the reformers believed she was always a virgin. It was only with the loss of real shepherds that such a modern heresy has come into existence.

There is no more to be said. The Church has stated that all peoples of Christ are our brothers in Christ; I am not condemning anyone. But the full truth will not be obtained by these ways foreign to the church that Christ established.

 

[Kopratic]

God gave Moses very specific instructions for the construction of the ark. It had to be perfect, and nothing imperfect could even touch it. The old ark held the stone tablets of the commandments, manna, and staff of Aaron. In other words, it held the law, the bread from Heaven, and a symbol of the priests. Jesus is all these things. Jesus dwelt in Mary. Jesus is God made flesh. I agree that everyone needs a savior – including Mary. Mary is the new ark of the covenant. It makes absolutely no sense that God would go through all this trouble to construct the original ark but not the new ark. It also makes no sense that the Word made Flesh would come into the world through a vessel tainted with sin.

There’s a popular analogy that goes something like this: “A woman was walking in the woods and falls into a mud pit; someone comes and pulls her out. Another woman was walking in the woods; someone warns her not to go into the mud pit. She goes around it.” Both people needed the “savior,” but the second person simply didn’t fall into the mud.

And no, Mary did not have other children. This is partly evidenced by the fact that Jesus committed Mary to the care of the apostle John.

She did not struggle with sin. Perhaps she struggled with temptation; however, she is full of grace {kecharitomene meaning, “having already been full of grace”}. As the new ark of the covenant, God did not allow original sin or normal sin to taint her.

 

[in_servitude]

The key is “My hour has not yet come”, in this Jesus claims the right to choose the time for working and for displaying His Divine power. Mary did wrong in going beyond her proper bounds, asking Jesus to perform a miracle before He had come into His time to make known His works as the Savior, though He is Savior all along.

Could you do me a big favor, please? Can you please tell me where Mary tell’s Jesus to perform a miracle? I don’t see that she did that. She only tells her son to fix the wine problem. He might get some guys and go next door and bring some different wine over. I do not believe you can make the case that Mary is insisting that Jesus perform a miracle.

Her anxiety about the inconvenience endured by others (about celebrating with more wine) and her desire to have it in some way mitigated, proceeded from humanity, and should be regarded as a virtue.

Yup, and I see no reason that her request has to be viewed any other way.

This passage openly warns us to beware of being superstitiously in elevating the name of mother in the Virgin Mary. She’s not the Savior, or the queen of Heaven; she’s Jesus’ mortal mother.

From what I can tell, you’ve read the scripture wrong. She isn’t claiming to be the savior.

It’s enjoyable that how, since she is His mother, she directs the waiter to ask Jesus to do something. Such a shrewd Mom-like way to get her boy to do something!

Can you please show me where the waiter is told to ask Jesus to do something? I read it completely differently. The waiter is told to do what Jesus says.

 

[patrick457]

So why did He speak that way to her in the first sentence of His dialogue with His mother? Also, why did He say His time had not yet come? Was He speaking of His time to be crucified? If so, why would He have said this in response to them being out of wine. Or was He saying it was not yet His time to perform His first miracle? If so, why did He do it right then?

The first thing you need to understand about John is that it really is a very deep gospel - even the simplest dialogue can be pregnant with double meanings.

You’re correct - the “hour” here does refer at once to the beginning of the Johannine Jesus’ ministry (although one could argue that it may have technically began much earlier when He called the disciples) and to that “hour” when (as per John) Jesus is glorified - at His death and resurrection. IMHO this is basically John’s way of saying that the Cross is the focal point of the whole gospel and the key to the right understanding of the story. You’d notice that when that hour of glory does arrive in John, the “woman” is again present in the scene.

But standing by the cross of Jesus were his mother and his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. When Jesus saw his mother and the disciple whom he loved standing nearby, he said to his mother, “Woman, behold, your son!” Then he said to the disciple, “Behold, your mother!” And from that hour the disciple took her to his own home.

 

[WaitingForJesus]

Thanks for this post! It sounds really interesting but unfortunately I am having a hard time comprehending it. Would you please condense it into shorter paragraphs that briefly explain what you are saying? I would appreciate it. I’m not very intelligent.

Holly I have done some revising to try to more directly answer your questions.

So why did He speak that way to her in the first sentence of His dialogue with His mother?

As others have noted, our Lord’s use of the term “woman” here isn’t necessarily disrespectful. Jesus uses the same address to his Mother as he is dying on the cross. The use of the word “woman” is intended to turn our thoughts back to Genesis 3:15 and to make us see that this woman is doing things differently than Eve. Unlike Eve, Mary wants to do God’s will.

Also, why did He say His time had not yet come?

This is the mystery. That is a strange statement to make in response to Mary’s request for him to help with the wine. There are things NOT being said, and that is where we must be guided by the Holy Spirit and the Church.

Was He speaking of His time to be crucified?

Yes. He means the start of his ministry through performing a miracle, which will ultimately culminate in his death on the cross.

If so, why would He have said this in response to them being out of wine?

Jesus and Mary were spiritually united in a way we can’t fully understand. It is like when you have a friend you know so well that you are able to finish each other’s sentences, but more.

I believe when he says “My hour has not come” that he is asking Mary to confirm he wants her to perform the miracle at this time.

Now this is where my thoughts tend to run wild. The question I have is did Mary know that by performing this miracle, he was starting the countdown to his death? We know from the other gospels that Jesus informed the disciples that he was going to die. And, Simeon had prophesied to Mary that a sword would pierce her soul. So, even if she didn’t know the details, my own view is that she knew this was a significant turning point that would lead to some very difficult things for her.

If so, then when he says “My hour has not yet come”, what he is really saying is this: “Mother, if I perform this miracle, it is going to start my ministry and all that comes with it. Are you sure you want me to do this now”? It is like he is giving her a chance to say yes or no, just as he did when the angel Gabriel asked for her consent to conceive.

Her response to the servants, “Do whatever he says”, suggests that she believes this miracle and all of its consequences are the Father’s will. It also displays great confidence that Jesus will do exactly what she asks. Her reaction says: “Yes I know what I am asking. Yes it is time”.

It reminds me of Abraham taking Isaac up onto that mountain with the intent to sacrifice him when that is what God told him to do.

Even if I am all wet, we should not overlook what Mary did for us. Remember that in choosing to be born of Mary, our Lord entrusted himself to her…a human. He trusted her to raise Jesus, to help him prepare for and execute his mission, and to support the apostles after his death.

We have no idea why he chose to humble himself in that way, but it is so amazing that he came to us through her…that he performed his first miracle at her request…and that he gave her to us as our Mother on the cross. And this is why it is right for us even now to love her and ask for her help whenever we can. That is what we should learn from Cana. Mary will help us.

If so, why did He do it right then?

Because his Mother asked him to.

 

[SighGuy]

^Hm, I don’t understand what you mean when you say “even if I am all wet”

Rest of it, good stuff.

 

[WaitingForJesus]

^Hm, I don’t understand what you mean when you say “even if I am all wet”

Rest of it, good stuff.

Oh I mean if I am confused or something. I come from a Protestant family, so I get a lot of negative (name removed by moderator)ut on some of my views about the Blessed Mother. So, sometimes I worry that I am not thinking straight.

Glad to hear it made sense to somebody.

 

[chero23]

The key is “My hour has not yet come”, in this Jesus claims the right to choose the time for working and for displaying His Divine power. Mary did wrong in going beyond her proper bounds, asking Jesus to perform a miracle before He had come into His time to make known His works as the Savior, though He is Savior all along. Her anxiety about the inconvenience endured by others (about celebrating with more wine) and her desire to have it in some way mitigated, proceeded from humanity, and should be regarded as a virtue. This passage openly warns us to beware of being superstitiously in elevating the name of mother in the Virgin Mary. She’s not the Savior, or the queen of Heaven; she’s Jesus’ mortal mother. It’s enjoyable that how, since she is His mother, she directs the waiter to ask Jesus to do something. Such a shrewd Mom-like way to get her boy to do something!

Verbatim: The Greek words in this passage are “Τί ἐμοὶ καὶ σοὶ” & aren;t as harsh as our modern interpretations might make it seem. They literally mean, “What to me and to thee?”, yet the Greek phraseology loses none of its importance as the Latin, “Quid tibi ecum?” meaning “What have you to do with me?”

Mary did nothing wrong, the reason why Jesus said, woman what do you want me, was not in any way to disrespect her, but she was letting the general audience know, hey this is the woman who was prophecized in Genesis 3:15.

The reason why Jesus said, my time has not come was bc on that day, in his calendar it said no miracles today. So for him when Mary told him, hey they rainout of wine, he was cornered. On 1 hand he came to do the will of the Father, but on the other hand his mother has just asked him for a huge favor. So Jesus was in a peculiar situation.

 

[57Bill]

The first thing you need to understand about John is that it really is a very deep gospel - even the simplest dialogue can be pregnant with double meanings.

You’re correct - the “hour” here does refer at once to the beginning of the Johannine Jesus’ ministry (although one could argue that it may have technically began much earlier when He called the disciples) and to that “hour” when (as per John) Jesus is glorified - at His death and resurrection. IMHO this is basically John’s way of saying that the Cross is the focal point of the whole gospel and the key to the right understanding of the story. You’d notice that when that hour of glory does arrive in John, the “woman” is again present in the scene.

But standing by the cross of Jesus were his mother and his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. When Jesus saw his mother and the disciple whom he loved standing nearby, he said to his mother, “Woman, behold, your son!” Then he said to the disciple, “Behold, your mother!” And from that hour the disciple took her to his own home.

What is amazing to me and not to overshadow the miracle but what appears to be the absolute faith, trust and obedience of the servants to “Do as he says.” No grumbling, no doubt, no leaving their post…they just did as he said at the request of Mary.

Are there any Church writings on tying these two instances together as you mentioned above?

That does go deeper than ‘woman’ is not derogatory and ‘proof’ that Jesus had no other brothers?

 

[PJM]

=Holly3278;11151630]Hey everyone. I have a question. Why did Jesus speak to His Blessed Mother, Mary, the way He did at the Wedding at Cana? I am not saying that He was disrespectful or anything of the sort as I do not believe for one moment that He would be. However, the Scripture is confusing. Here it is:

On the third day there was a marriage at Cana in Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there; Jesus also was invited to the marriage, with his disciples. When the wine failed, the mother of Jesus said to him, “They have no wine.” And Jesus said to her, “O woman, what have you to do with me? My hour has not yet come.” His mother said to the servants, “Do whatever he tells you.” Now six stone jars were standing there, for the Jewish rites of purification, each holding twenty or thirty gallons. Jesus said to them, “Fill the jars with water.” And they filled them up to the brim. He said to them, “Now draw some out, and take it to the steward of the feast.” So they took it. When the steward of the feast tasted the water now become wine, and did not know where it came from (though the servants who had drawn the water knew), the steward of the feast called the bridegroom and said to him, “Every man serves the good wine first; and when men have drunk freely, then the poor wine; but you have kept the good wine until now.” This, the first of his signs, Jesus did at Cana in Galilee, and manifested his glory; and his disciples believed in him.
(John 2:1-11 RSV-CE)

So why did He speak that way to her in the first sentence of His dialogue with His mother? Also, why did He say His time had not yet come? Was He speaking of His time to be crucified? If so, why would He have said this in response to them being out of wine. Or was He saying it was not yet His time to perform His first miracle? If so, why did He do it right then?

I have also heard it translated as: ITS NOT MY [OUR CONCERN]

What it means IS:

The time for MY Mynistry is not tet arrived.

NOTE the responce: DO WHATEVER HE TELLS YOU

In EFFECT Mary, inspired by the HS in a real sense “rushes” Christ trip to His Cross.

She KNEW He WOULD NOT DNY HER Request!

TAKE CAREFUL NOTE THAT JESUS CALLS HER 'WOMEN" NOT MOTHER.

This is a universal code for “all of humanity” and is used again by Jesus from His Cross when He appoints Mary as “WOMEN- here is YOUR Son”] our Mother too!