Tell me more ×
Christianity Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for committed Christians, experts in Christianity and those interested in learning more. It's 100% free, no registration required.

The Wedding at Cana is the only instance AFAIK where Mary asks Jesus to perform a miracle.

Is there any indication or insight as to why she did so ? Was the family very close to her/them ?

Or was it simply the time for Jesus to perform a public miracle and it came about in this manner?

share|improve this question
1  
She must have been thirsty?! – Ingo Jan 26 at 19:43
Mary was reproved continually by Christ. She needed to do what John 3:3 admonishes. – joshua Apr 21 at 16:01

4 Answers

up vote 7 down vote accepted

Mary Makes No Request

It is important to note that Mary never specifically asks Jesus to make wine, but simply states the situation.

It is possible she understood that Jesus had the power to do something, because she does tell the servants to do whatever he tells them to do. Still, there is no direct request by Mary, and it is evident that Mary does not know what Jesus might do, if anything. It is possible that Jesus could have gone and purchased wine from somewhere else to alleviate the shame of the family.

The family would definitely experience shame for running out of wine, so perhaps Mary was concerned for the honor of the family. This seems to be the most likely reason for why Mary would share this concern with Jesus.

Mary's Requests Not Always Answered

It should also be noted that Jesus does not always respond to the requests of his mother.

In Matthew 12, Mary and Jesus' brothers comes and ask to talk with him, but Jesus seems to decline their request.

While he was still speaking to the people, behold, his mother and his brothers stood outside, asking to speak to him. But he replied to the man who told him, "Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?" And stretching out his hand toward his disciples, he said, "Here are my mother and my brothers! For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother." Matthew 12:47-50

share|improve this answer
Does this answer represent a denomination's official (or typical) teaching on the matter? It seems to downplay it, regardless of Mary's involvement, more than any denomination that's coming to mind. – svidgen Jan 23 at 15:33
@svidgen Just looking at the text itself. – Narnian Jan 23 at 15:34
I wouldn't say it seems minor. John's book is structured around wonders, which "reveal his glory" and inspire belief (2:11), and discourses. This was the first wonder John records, and he even refers back to it in 4:46. – metal Jan 23 at 17:43
@metal Ok... I just took that part out. This miracle in particular doesn't seem to me as significant as the others. – Narnian Jan 23 at 17:48
@Narnian, I'd say it is significant, because it's the first recorded miracle. If you believe in the Law of First Mention. But I agree, Mary didn't ask/tell Jesus what to do, she didn't come with proposed solutions. She came with the problem, and trusted him to be the solution. In this she is exemplary. (And this is what the Catholic priest preached last Sunday at an ecumenical service I attended). – Benjol Jan 24 at 6:59

There has been no traditional answer to this question that I'm aware of. All of the commentaries I'm familiar with echo the same sentiment: That it seems odd that she would expect Him to be able to do something about the lack of wine, even though supposedly, she had never seen Him work a miracle yet. All of the commentators seem to be scratching their heads asking the same question.

Given that, the only real answer we can give is "we don't know for sure." We can speculate, but Scripture gives no clear reason, and no major tradition or teaching has stepped forward with anything other than guesses.

A list of commentaries can be found here: http://bible.cc/john/2-3.htm (scroll down a bit.)

A few excerpts:

Clarke's Commentary on the Bible

They have no wine - Though the blessed virgin is supposed to have never seen her son work a miracle before this time, yet she seems to have expected him to do something extraordinary on this occasion; as, from her acquaintance with him, she must have formed some adequate idea of his power and goodness.

Barnes' Notes on the Bible

When they wanted wine - A marriage feast among the Jews was commonly observed for seven or eight days. It is not probable that there would be a want of wine at the marriage itself, and it is possible, therefore, that Jesus came there some time during the marriage feast.

They have no wine - It is not known why Mary told this to Jesus. It would seem that she had a belief that he was able to supply it, though he had as yet worked no miracle.

share|improve this answer
These commentaries are quite interesting too. Also, this event only appears in John and not other Gospels, so I'm wondering if this was not recorded, would we never recognize Mary as an intercessor? However, @swidgen's answer introduces an additional view – JoseK Jan 23 at 9:07

Catholics love Mary, as you may know. And this particular detail of the Wedding of Cana reaffirms the Catholic devotion to Mary as an intercessor.

The Gospel reveals to us how Mary prays and intercedes in faith. At Cana, the mother of Jesus asks her son for the needs of a wedding feast; this is the sign of another feast—that of the wedding of the Lamb where he gives his body and blood at the request of the Church, his Bride. It is at the hour of the New Covenant, at the foot of the cross, that Mary is heard as the Woman, the new Eve, the true “Mother of all the living.” (Catechism of the Catholic Church)

As Christ is an embodiment of something, that of God's self-proclamation and self-incarnation of His own saving power, Mary is also an embodiment of something, namely the human "yes" to God's will. As such, she is the primary intercessor of the Church to Christ.

Extrapolating a little: By her acceptance to receive God in her flesh, we acknowledge her mission as an intercessor (Queen among many) from God to man. And by her request at the wedding of Cana (which Jesus was undoubtedly waiting for), we acknowledge the validity of her mission as an intercessor from man to God.

share|improve this answer
1  
Now that's an interesting take. The symbolism is obvious now that you point it out, and officially supported. +1. – David Stratton Jan 23 at 6:22
But as Narnian points out in their answer, Mary's requests are apparently not always answered. – metal Jan 23 at 17:46
@metal Not a completely relevant point. Firstly, because it doesn't change the official Catholic belief. Secondly, Jesus' response is recorded in Gospel, but not his actions immediately following. And, as a good Jew and "the fulfillment of the Law", He quite likely did "honor His mother" in acquiescence to her request. Thirdly, because it could attests, at worst, to the possibility that Mary's intercessions don't always yield the expected results; this doesn't invalidate an intercessory role. – svidgen Jan 23 at 18:10
But mostly, the point that Jesus didn't acquiesce to His Mother in any given incidence X doesn't change Catholic doctrine. And the point here (on Christianity.SE) is to provide doctrinally sound answers from the perspective of denomination(s) X; not to debate the validity of those doctrines. – svidgen Jan 23 at 18:14
Agreed that this particular question is not the place to debate which view of Mary is best and why (though I think Christianity.SE would be the right forum for such a dialog). As to the original question, I find it strange that your answer seems to imply that Mary's motivation for asking Jesus to assist (or John's intent for including said request) is intended to demonstrate Mary's special intercessory role, both here and in perpetuity. I'm accustomed to analogical and typological readings, but I still can't quite see this reading as a plausible one. Have I misunderstood? – metal Jan 23 at 21:07
show 1 more comment

She must have been close to have been told about a disgracing issue.

Or was it simply the time for Jesus to perform a public miracle and it came about in this manner?

Luke 3:23 NET So Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years old. He was the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli,

Jesus was waiting till He was thirty, following law. But God was telling Him that things were going to be different, that from now on He would be controlled by displays of faith.

Faith makes Him start his ministry before He is thirty, where Law insists He wait.

John 2:4-5 NET Jesus replied, “Woman, why are you saying this to me? My time has not yet come.” His mother told the servants, “Whatever he tells you, do it.”

Faith makes him minister to Gentiles, whilst Law requires he attends only to the house of Israel.

Matthew 15:24-25 NET So he answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” But she came and bowed down before him and said, “Lord, help me!”

Lack of faith shuts down ministry, where Law promises unconditional blessings.

Mark 6:4-5 NET Then Jesus said to them, “A prophet is not without honor except in his hometown, and among his relatives, and in his own house.” He was not able to do a miracle there, except to lay his hands on a few sick people and heal them.

Romans 10:4 NET For Christ is the end of the law, with the result that there is righteousness for everyone who believes.

These are all foreshadowing of the end of the Mosaic Law.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.