Wedding Cana Jesus
In order to produce a culturally contextual interpretation of John2:1-12, I will begin by highlighting three aspects of first-century Mediterranean culture which intersect in the narrative of the wedding at Cana: (1) the gender-specific division of labor and space, (2) relations between mother and son, and (3) the maintenance of honor through reciprocal relationships. Together, they provide the context, which helps us understand the characters and their interaction with one another described in the narrative. John 2:1-12 read in context is a story about a widowed mother at a wedding who brokers from her son a favor that preserves the honor of the groom's family and enhances her son's honor in an unexpectedway.
The events in John 2:1-12 took place at a wedding in the Galilean village of Cana (v 1). The steward's compliments in vv9-10 indicate that the bridegroom in his home is hosting the festivities. This is not just a private family celebration; it is a public event recognizing the union of two households and their honor. The celebrations will be drawn out over a period of several days, and during that time the groom's house will be open to the scrutiny of his guests. To ensure that an appropriate quantity and quality of food and drink are available, the groom must have drawn on the resources of some of his colleagues. In such circumstances, running out of wine represents a loss of honor, since it makes it evident to all that the groom lacks both material and social resources (Grayston, 29). Not only does he suffer from an inadequate supply of wine at his own wedding; he does not have the social connections necessary to preserve his family's public reputation.
That the wine has run out does not appear to be known to everyone in the house. Indeed, through the entire narrative the groom, his chief steward, and his guests remain blissfully unaware of the disaster hanging over their heads. Only the servants (whose gender is not specified, but who probably are women, some of them at the very least), and at least one female guest, the mother of Jesus, know what is happening (Lefkowitz and Fant, 64). How does Jesus' mother come by this information? The narrative gives no indication that Jesus' mother has any specific role or authority in the groom's household (Scott, 178). The author, simply assuming that the readers will know how private matters of this nature are handled, does not provide details. For modern readers, however, the situation is no longer transparent. Does Jesus' mother overhear the servants whispering among themselves? Does she have some responsibility for the catering, as one commentator suggests? A more plausible solution is to situate Mary's knowledge within the context of the establishment and maintenance of reciprocal relations.
Mary informs Jesus that "they have no wine" (v 3). Implicit in this statement is a request that her son do something to resolve this situation. Nothing in the Johannine narrative necessitates the conclusion that Mary expects Jesus to perform a miracle (Buby, 98; Diel and Solotareff, 80); nevertheless, it is 0clear that she believes he can do something. Implicit in Mary's statement may also be a reminder of her son's family obligations. In the Johannine narrative, Jesus' activities prior to this wedding include his meeting with John the Baptist at the Jordan where he began gathering a following (1:29-42), continuing to do so in Galilee (1:43-51). In other words, Jesus has been off doing his own thing. It is no surprise, therefore, that when he meets his family at Cana, his mother sees the opportunity to remind her wayward son of his duty as head of the family. An additional factor that cannot be excluded is Jesus' rising status and prestige. He has gathered a following of those who believe he is the Messiah (1:41) and who are impressed by his prophetic insight (1:47-51). His immediate family would naturally expect to benefit from his fame and participate in it. (Crossan, 347)
Jesus replies with those enigmatic words Ti emoi kai soi, gynai? oupo hekei he hora mou (2:4). Traditional interpretations of this passage identify Ti emoi kai soi as a "Semitism" used in the Hebrew Scriptures to protest unjust treatment (e.g., in Judg 11:12; 2 Chr 35:21; 1 Kgs 17:18) or to dissociate oneself from the issue at hand (e.g., in 2 Kgs 3:13; Hos 14:8). In the Synoptic Gospels (Matt 8:29; Mark 1:24; 5:7; Luke 4:34; 8:28) the phrase occurs only on the lips of the possessed, as a protest to their imminent destruction by Jesus. On the basis of these verbal parallels, Jesus' words are interpreted as a negative response signifying a rebuke, a protest, or a sign of dissociation. To determine the meaning of Jesus' words to his mother on the basis of these verbal parallels from documents written many hundreds of years apart is highly problematic. Such an attempt assumes, falsely, not only that the meaning of words and phrases remains constant over time but also that the meaning of words and phrases remains constant regardless of context. Only by means of a thorough investigation of the context in which a phrase is used, can its precise meaning be determined.
As we have seen, a request for help constitutes a positive challenge to a person's honor, an intrusion into another's social space. In this instance, a positive challenge in the form of a request for help is put to Jesus. But who is intruding into Jesus' social space? Who desires a stake in Jesus' honor? Jesus' mother asks a favor not for herself but for the bridegroom's family, which is on the verge of social humiliation. "They," who have no wine, are the ones who are in need of patronage, of a share in someone else's honor. Mary's brokerage of this positive challenge puts her in a tenuous position. On the one hand, she already participates in Jesus' social status and prestige by virtue of her relation to him. Any enhancement of her son's honor increases that of the entire family. This is what she seeks to accomplish by her brokerage. On the other hand, she has made someone else's problem her own. If her son refuses to help the groom's family, he also rejects her attempt to function as broker on his behalf. She is both a part of the intrusion and a part of what is being intruded on. In this instance, Ti emoi kai soi? signifies something like What concern is that (the shortage of wine) to me and to you? That is the groom's problem, why should you and I get involved?
What about Jesus' use of gynai in v 4? There are no precedents in either Jewish or Greek sources for a son's addressing his mother as "Woman." It is a characteristic feature of Jesus' discourse with women, however; he seems to address most females as "Woman." It may be that when Jesus addresses his mother this way he is denying her maternal claims on him, distancing himself from her by placing her on par with the other women he so addresses (Witherington, 84-85; Painter, 51). Jesus' addressing his mother as "Woman," however, is insufficient evidence that they are estranged from one another. Its function as a distancing mechanism is called into question when at Calvary Jesus performs his last act, an act of filial piety ensuring that his mother will be cared for after his death. There, just as at Cana, he addresses his mother as "Woman" (19:26). The familial intimacy of their interaction at the cross precludes seeing this form of address by itself as an indicator of dissociation. The context in which "Woman" is used in direct address in place of a name must, in the end, determine what that use connotes.
Summary and Conclusions
Treating 2:1-12 as a historically plausible incident, I have attempted to provide a culturally contextual interpretation of the narrative of the wedding at Cana. In such an interpretation one must take into account the overriding concern for maintaining honor which drove people in the first century A.D., as well as the public nature of weddings in Mediterranean societies, past and present. For the groom to run out of wine in the midst of his wedding celebrations would be for him to lose his honor, his reputation, and his prestige in the community. If he were faced with such a catastrophe, his only recourse would be to find a colleague or patron who could replenish the supply of wine.
The presence of Jesus' family at the wedding celebrations indicates that they and the groom's family are initiating or continuing an ongoing reciprocal relationship. When the mother of Jesus learns of the wine shortage, she seizes the opportunity to enhance her family's honor and extend its web of reciprocal relations. Implicit in her statement to Jesus that "they have no wine" (2:3) are a request that he rectify the situation and a reminder of his obligations as head of her family. Using her privileged access to her son, Mary seeks to broker a favor from him that would establish him as patron of a local family, thereby enhancing his honor and that of his family.
Jesus' response to his mother is a double query: "What concern is that to me and to you, Woman? Has not my hour come?" (2:4). His words signal that he is well aware that he and his honor are being challenged indirectly by the family of the groom who is in need of help. Jesus' answer is a recognition that his mother is trying to draw him into the local game of honor and patronage. Although his words indicate that there is tension between him and his mother over the question of his patronage and its brokerage, they do not constitute a refusal, rebuff, or rebuke. In Mary's ears they are no more than a complaint, a grumbling objection that is not even worth a comeback. Sure of herself and of her son's favor, she instructs the servants to obey him (2:5).
By changing the water into wine Jesus not only preserves the groom's honor but enhances it by the quality of the wine, which is now served. The groom, his chief steward, and his guests continue celebrating, unaware that the wine is a gift, an act of patronage. Jesus' honor, too, is enhanced, not in the eyes of the public, who remain ignorant of his actions, but in the eyes of his disciples, who in the changing of the water into wine have witnessed his "glory" and believed in him (2:11). His mother and brothers, apparently satisfied with the outcome of the incident, accompany him and his disciples to Capernaum and stay there with him for some time (2:12).
The incident at Cana reflects some tension between Jesus and his mother. In spite of this tension, Jesus does not dissociate himself from her in this or in any other Johannine narrative, in contrast to what one sees in the Synoptics. When a rift between Jesus and his family members does appear in the Fourth Gospel, it is a rift between him and his brothers (7:1-9), not between him and his mother. Jesus himself in fact, dissociates Mary from the brothers when he places her in the care of the Beloved Disciple (19:26-27).
In this story, Jesus' honor is enhanced, but in an unexpected and ironic way. Mary is a widowed mother urging her wayward son to actions intended to preserve and enhance the family's status and prestige. Although Jesus questions his mother's interference, he is depicted as an obedient son. What appears, at first, to be a potential distraction from his divinely appointed mission turns out, in the end, to serve the purpose for which he was called.
A culturally contextual interpretation of the story in John 2:1-12 might be carried further by an examination of its significance in the context of the Fourth Gospel as a whole. Why did John include this story in his gospel? What place does it play in his "theology?" One might explore, for example, the significance of this miracle as the "first sign" (12:11), or the possible symbolism of the wedding feast, of the wine, and of the water jars. Even more important might be the significance of Jesus' mother for the Fourth Evangelist and his audience. In the story of the wedding feast at Cana she is not a marginal figure; her role there is central, albeit ambivalent.
Works Cited
Ben Witherington III, Women in the Ministry of Jesus: A Study of Jesus' Attitudes to Women and Their Roles as Reflected in His Earthly Life (SNTSMS 51; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984) 84-85
Bertrand Buby, Mary the Faithful Disciple (New York: Paulist Press, 1985) 98;
John Dominic Crossan, The Historical Jesus: The Life of a Mediterranean Jewish Peasant (San Francisco: HarperCollins, 1991) 347
John Painter, "Quest Stories in John 1-4," JSNT 41 (1991) 51
Kenneth Grayston (The Gospel of John [Epworth Commentaries; London: Epworth, 1990] 29)
Martin Scott, Sophia and the Johannine Jesus (JSNT Sup 71; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1992) 178
Mary R. Lefkowitz and Maureen B. Fant, Women's Life in Greece and Rome: A Source Book in Translation (2d ed.; Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1992) 64.
Paul Diel and Jeannine Solotareff, Symbolism in the Gospel of John (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1988) 80
We provide a professional essay writing service that thousands of our customers use as an effective way of improving their grades, improving their research and saving them lots of time.
