John 2:3

Ver. 3. “ And when the wine failed, the mother of Jesus saith to Him: They have no wine. ”

The marriage feasts sometimes continued several days, even a whole week (Genesis 29:27; Judges 14:15; Tob. 9:12; 10:1). The failure of the wine is commonly explained by this circumstance. However this may be, it is scarcely possible to doubt that this failure was connected with the unexpected arrival of six or seven guests, Jesus and His disciples. The reading of the Sinaitic MS.: “And they had no more wine, for the wine of the wedding-feast was entirely consumed,” is evidently a diluted paraphrase of the primitive text?

What does Mary mean by saying to Jesus: “ They have no wine? ” Bengel and Paulus have thought that Mary wished to induce Jesus to withdraw and thus to give the rest of the company the signal to depart. The reply of Jesus would signify: “What right hast thou to prescribe to me? The hour for leaving has not yet come for me.” Such an explanation has no need to be refuted. The expression “ my hour,” always used, in our Gospel, in a grave and solemn sense, would be enough to make us feel the impossibility of it. The same thing is true of Calvin's explanation, according to which Mary wished “to admonish Jesus to offer some religious exhortation, for fear that the company might be wearied, and also courteously to cover the shame of the bridegroom.”

This expression, “ They have no wine,” has a certain analogy to the message of the sisters of Lazarus: “ He whom thou lovest is sick. ” It is certainly a tacit request for assistance. But how does it occur to Mary to resort to Jesus in order to ask His aid in a case of this kind? Does she dream of a miracle? Meyer, Weiss and Reuss think not; for, according to John 2:11, Jesus had not yet performed any. Mary, thus, would only think of natural aid, and the reply of Jesus, far from rejecting this request as an inconsiderate claim, would mean: “Leave me to act! I have in my possession means of which thou knowest not, and whose effect thou shalt see as soon as the hour appointed by my Father shall have struck.” After this, the order of Mary to the servants, “ Do whatsoever He shall say to you,” presents no further difficulty. But this explanation, which supposes that Mary asks less than what Jesus is disposed to do, is contradictory to the natural meaning of the words “ What is there between me and thee? ” which lead rather to the supposition of an encroachment by Mary on a domain which Jesus reserves exclusively to Himself, an inadmissible interference in His office as Messiah. Besides, by what means other than a miracle could Jesus have extricated the bridegroom from his embarrassment? Meyer gives no explanation of this point. Weiss thinks of friends (like Nathanael) who had relations at Cana, and by means of whom Jesus could provide a remedy for the condition of things. But even in this sense we cannot understand the answer of Jesus, by which He certainly wishes to cause Mary to go back within her own bounds, beyond which she had, consequently, just passed. What she wished to ask for, is therefore a striking, miraculous aid worthy of the Messiah.

Whence can such an idea have come to her mind? Hase and Tholuck have supposed that Jesus had already wrought miracles within the limits of His family. John 2:11 excludes this hypothesis. Lucke amends it, by saying that He had simply manifested, in the perplexities of domestic life, peculiar gifts and skill: one of those convenient middle-course suggestions which are frequently met with in this commentator and which have procured for him such vigorous censure on the part of Baur. It affirms, in fact, too much or too little. It seems to me that the state of extraordinary exaltation is forgotten in which, at this moment, that whole company, and especially Mary, must have been. Can it be imagined for an instant, that the disciples had not related everything which had just occurred in Judea, the solemn declarations of John the Baptist, the miraculous scene of the baptism proclaimed by John, the proof of supernatural knowledge which Jesus had given on meeting Nathanael, finally that magnificent promise of greater things impending, of an open heaven, of angels ascending and descending, which their eyes were going henceforth to behold? How should not the expectation of the marvelous that seeking after miracles, which St. Paul indicates as the characteristic feature of Jewish piety have existed, at that moment, in all those who were present, in the highest degree?

The single fact that Jesus arrived surrounded by disciples, must have been sufficient to make them understand that a new phase was opening at that hour, that the time of obscurity and retirement had come to its end, and that the period of Messianic manifestations was about to begin. Let us add, finally, with reference to Mary herself, the mighty waking up of recollections, so long held closely in her maternal heart, the return of her thoughts to the marvelous circumstances which accompanied the birth of her son. The hour so long and so impatiently waited for had, then, at last struck! Is it not to her, Mary, that it belongs to give the decisive signal of this hour? She is accustomed to obedience from her Son; she does not doubt that He will act at her suggestion. If the words of Mary are carried back to this general situation, we easily understand that what she wishes is not merely aid given to the embarrassed bridegroom, but, on this occasion, a brilliant act fitted to inaugurate the Messianic royalty.

On the occasion of this failure of the wine, she sees the heaven opening, the angel descending, a marvelous manifestation exhibiting itself and opening the series of wonders. Any other difficulty in life would have served her as a pretext for seeking to obtain the same result: “Thou art the Messiah: it is time to show thyself!” As to Jesus, the temptation in the wilderness is here seen reproducing itself in its third form (Luke 4:9). He is invited to make an exhibition of His miraculous power by passing beyond the measure strictly indicated by the providential call. It is what He can no more do at the prayer of His mother than at the suggestion of Satan or at the demand of the Pharisees. Hence the tone of Jesus' reply, the firmness of which goes even to the point of severity.