John — Chapter 4

And Jesus saith , What is it to Me and to thee, &c. Mean- ing, What have I to do with thee in this matter? ( Quid mihi tecum in hac re est negotii t) Observe, the Blessed Virgin did not out of ostentation, or in an untimely, unbecoming, or indiscreet fashion ask this miracle of her Son, as S. Chrysostom, Theophylact, and Euthymius think: but out of necessary charity and piety, as SS. 84 S. JOHN, C. II. Cyril, Bernard, and others say. Therefore there was no blame attaching to her. Therefore Christ did not really blame her. And yet He seems to reprove her, that He might teach, not her, but us, that in things pertaining to God, and miracles, parents have no right or authority. They must not be done in accordance with their affections and desires, but only for God and charity’s sake. The meaning, therefore, is this, “ Thou, O Mother, in this matter, art not My Mother, but as it were another woman. For, from thee I have received human nature, not Divinity. It belongs to My Divine nature to work this miracle, not in accordance with thy desires, and those of relations, but in accordance with the will of God My Father. According to that will I shall work, when the hour and time decreed by God shall come.” Hear S. Augustine on this passage: “The word woman is used simply to express the female sex.” “ He, as God,” says Euthymius, “ said not * Mother/ but ‘woman.’” “He means,” says S. Bede, “that He had not received in time from His Mother the Divinity by which He was about to perform a miracle, but that He had It eternally from the Father.” “ He means to say,” says the Interlinear Gloss, “ What is there in common between My Divinity and thee My Mother accord- ing to the flesh?” “Thou didst not beget, or produce (genuisti ) My Divinity, which works the miracle,” says S. Augustine. S. Chry- sostom adds, “ He speaks thus, lest the miracle should seem to be the result of collusion. He should have been asked by those who needed the wine, not by His Mother." Mine hour , &c, t\e., when I may appropriately work this miracle. I wish to wait a little while until the wine has wholly failed, that all the guests may perceive the miracle more clearly, and that all may know that I have wrought it, and so may believe in Me. For he who does not experience the need, will not greatly feel the necessity. So S. Chrysostom. The same S. Chrysostom gives another explanation : “ Mine hour is not yet come, because I pro- posed to work My first miracle in Jerusalem, the capital of Judea : nevertheless at thy prayers, O My Mother, I will change My purpose, and will do it here in Cana of Galilee.” MODESTY OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN. 85 a Augustine gives another explanation, to the following effect : The hour of My passion is not yet come, in which I will show what I have to do with thee My Mother, that indeed I have of thee truly assumed man’s nature, and that I am thy Son. When in the weak- ness of My human nature, of which thou art the Mother, I shall hang upon the cross, then I will acknowledge thee. For He com- mended her then to His disciple.

His Mother saith, &c His mother modestly holds her peace, and rightly yields to her Son, as being the Son of God. Although the Son seems to deny His Mother, the Mother knows His filial piety. Therefore with all confidence she bids the servants what to da S. Gaudentius comments in these words, “ The Mother would not have said, Whatsoever He saith unto you do it, unless being full of the Holy Ghost from her birth she had foreseen the whole process of Christ’s turning the water into wine.” Wherefore S. Bernard on these words (Horn. 2) says, “ I see plainly that it was not as being wroth, or as wishing to confound the shrinking modesty of His Virgin Mother, that He said, What have I to do with thee, but for our sakes, that the care of parents according to the flesh should not trouble those who are converted to the Lord.” For Christ pre- sently obeys His Mother, and to honour her performs the miracle. Hear S. Chrysostom : “ Although He answered thus, yet He com- plied with His Mother’s prayer, that He might give honour to her, and not seem stubborn (contumax) to her, nor put her to shame when so many were present.” And Euthymius says, “ How very greatly He honoured her is plain from many other reasons, and also from this, that He fulfilled her exhortation.” Moreover, in these words of the Virgin her meekness, piety, charity, prudence, faith, constancy, and greatness of soul wonderfully shine forth.

There were set, &c. Christ then made use of these water- pots that it might be the more clearly evident that they had no wine in them ; and so the turning the water into wine in such vessels might be the more conspicuous. Purification : by which the Jews according to their traditions were 86 S. JOHN, C. II. accustomed at their feasts ceremonially to wash their hands, if they happened to touch anything unclean at the table. (See S. Mark vii. 3.) Tropologically, S. Bernard expounds thus (Serm. 1, in Domin. 1, post. Oct. Epiph.) : The six waterpots are the six purifying virtues of the soul. 44 The first waterpot, and the first cleansing, is in com- punction, of which we read, that in the very hour in which the sinner shall groan, I will no more remember all their iniquities. The second is confession ; for all things are washed by confession. The third is the giving of alms ; for we read in the Gospel, ‘ Give alms, and behold all things are clean unto you.' The fourth, forgive- ness of injuries ; for we say when we pray, 4 Forgive us our debts, for we also forgive those who are indebted to us.* The fifth is affliction of the body ; for we pray that we, being purified by abstinence, may sing glory to God. The sixth is obedience to the commandments: even as the disciples heard what may we too deserve to hear, 4 Ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you.’ * He then applies the rest as follows : 44 They are filled with water, that they may be kept in the fear of God, since the fear of the Lord is a fountain of life.” Then he adds: “But by the Divine power the water is changed into wine when perfect love casts out fear. Now the waterpots are said to be of stone, not because of hardness, but for steadfastness ; for they contained two or three firkins apiece.” Two or three firkins — Greek, measures . This measure was the same as the Hebrew ephah , or bath.

Jesus saith, &c. S. Chrysostom asks, “But why did not He Himself fill the waterpots with water, and then turn it into wine?” He gives the right answer, saying, in order that He might have them as witnesses to the miracle who had drawn the water, lest any fraud or trickery should be supposed. To the brim : lest, if any vacant space were left, Christ might have been supposed to have poured wine on the top of the water, which might have communicated the flavour of wine to the water underneath. WATER CHANGED TO WINE. »7

And Jesus saith , &c. Draw out of the great waterpots, and pour into smaller vessels, and carry it to the master of the feast, and let him judge how good the wine is. As Christ said this, He in one moment by His Almighty power changed the whole of the water in the six waterpots into wine. Listen to Nonnus: “Sud- denly was the miracle wrought ; and the water, changing its colour, flowed with a ruddy glow instead of its own pale colour, and was changed into purple wine.” As S. Cyril says, “ What is difficult to Almighty God, or why should not He, who called all things into being out of nothing, much more easily change one thing into another?” From this conversion of water into wine, the Fathers prove the conversion of bread and wine in the Eucharist into the Body and Blood of Christ. And they add that it seems to be a greater miracle for Christ to turn water into wine than wine into blood. For wine is nearer akin to blood than water is to wine. So S. Cyril of Jerusalem {Cat. 4), S. Cyprian ( Epist coni. Aquar .), S. Irenaeus (/. 3, c. 11). S. Isidore of Pelusium asks (/. 1, Epist 393) why Christ willed this to be His first miracle? He gives the answer mystically, that it was because He wished to supply what was wanting to the Law. “For the Law,” he says, “only baptized with water, but He perfected the sacred initiation with His own Blood, joining both in Himself, and uniting the Law with grace.” For water was the symbol of the old Law, which purified all things by water, but only with a corporeal cleansing. But wine is the symbol of the Blood of Christ, which, being shed upon the cross, cleanses souls. For Christ changes wine into His own Blood in the Eucharist. Christ, therefore, by changing water into wine at the beginning of His preaching, signified that He was about to change the Law of Moses, which was as cold and insipid as water, into the Gospel of His grace. Master of the feast S. Gaudentius says, that when marriages were celebrated amongst the Jews, a priest was assigned to preside over the proper ceremonies. The same person took care of con- jugal modesty and ordered the provision fpr the least, and the 88 S. JOHN. c. II. ministers ; wherefore he was called the master, or governor of the feast Christ therefore orders that the water which had been made wine should be borne to this master of the feast, because he by his office was a most sober and responsible person, and also well skilled in the flavour of wine. Therefore he was the best able to judge of the excellence of this wine, and to make known Christ’s miracle unto all. They bore it It is probable that Christ turned the water into red wine, both because red wine is the only kind used in Palestine, and also that it might be the more evident that the water had been changed into wine. They bore then with joy, gladly obeying, and contributing their part to this miracle of Christ For their prompt obedience in drawing the water contributed not a little to this miracle.

When the governor of the feast , &c. Tasted: he did not give credit entirely to the smell and ruddy colour, but he tasted, and found that it was the very best and most excellent wine. For tasting was the surest way of judging. And when men are inebriated (Vulg.), well drunk (Eng. Vers.), Le. t exhilarated . For intoxication in Scripture often means a liberal draught which gladdens the mind, but does not deprive it of the use of reason. For if these guests had been really drunk, surely Jesus would never have turned water into wine for them, for then He would have assisted and encouraged their drunkenness. Much rather would He have put a stop to their potations, and sent them home. And the Blessed Virgin would have done the same. Then that which is worse: because, when the stomach is filled with wine, it is a poor judge of the quality. This is a type of the deceitfulness of the world, which at the beginning presents things that are fair to the eye, and afterwards brings in what is vile and worthless, and so deceives and deludes its lovers. But thou hast kept, &c. Hence it is plain that this wine was most excellent as being the work of Christ, and therefore Divine. For the works of God are perfect Thus the loaves which Christ multiplied to feed the four thousand were as sweet as manna. And VERIFICATION OF THE MIRACLE. 89 S. Chrysostom says that the limbs of those persons which Christ restored became stronger than they were originally. All these things were wisely ordered by Christ, so that the miracle might be perfectly well attested. For the master of the feast called the bridegroom, and asked him from whence was this wine. He replied that he knew nothing about it Then, learning from the servants the sequence of what had been done, they came to the waterpots, and found them all full of the best wine. Where- upon they burst forth in praise of Jesus as the author of the miracle, and their benefactor, and made known what had been done to all the guests. Jesus, avoiding vainglory, retired, first admonishing them to use this wine with moderation, to the praise of God, with giving of thanks to Him.

This beginnings &c. ; glory, ie., His Omnipotence and Divinity. And believed \ i.e., their faith grew. Beginning. From hence the Fathers gather passim that this miracle was absolutely the first which Christ publicly wrought. This is the refutation of the book on the lt Infancy of the Saviour,” con- demned by Pope Gelasius, which was forged by the heretics ; and in which it is related that Christ publicly wrought miracles when He was yet a boy. Yet there is no reason, says Maldonatus, against our thinking that Christ may have wrought miracles privately before, and may by them have assisted the poverty of His parents. It might seem as if His Mother, animated by the recollection of such, had here asked for, and expected, a similar miracle. But Christ could have relieved His Mother’s wants by some special providence short of a miracle. You will ask why Christ willed this to be His first miracle? I reply, because it was especially appropriate to the time, the place, and the persons. For wine is the most noble beverage, which makes glad both God and man (Judges ix. 13). Wherefore Noah, immediately after the Deluge, discovered wine, and was a type of Christ here making wine. Again, Christ by this miracle showed that He is the self-same Being who, year by year, does the same thing in the vines by converting their watery sap into wine. “ The 90 S. JOHN, C. II. only difference is,” as S. Chrysostom says, “that in the vine-tree He effects by a process extending over a considerable time what He did at the marriage in a moment ,, For what else is wine but water changed by the rays of the sun ? The symbolical reason is, because wine is the most fitting symbol of the grace, charity, devotion, fervour, strength, with which Christ indues His own. Whence S. Bernard says (in Sentent :), " The wine in the cup of God has a threefold colour. It is red in the long- suffering of the saints. This made Isaac glad in his sickness. It is white in the recompense of the just. With this was Noah inebri- ated. It is black and sour in the damnation of the wicked. Of this Jesus tasted, but would not drink.’’ Allegorically, the reason was because this marriage represented the marriage union of Christ with human nature, which took place in His Incarnation. Wherefore it was celebrated on the third day, that is, in the third stage of the world. For the first state was the law of nature, the second was the law of Moses, the third is the law of Christ It was done in Galilee of the Gentiles, because Christ calls all the Gentiles to His marriage with our humanity. Also it was done in Cana of Galilee, i.e. 9 in the transmigration of the posses- sion , or the Christian people, which is Christ’s possession, bought with His own Blood, and therefore it passes from earth to heaven. In His possession Christ gives wine, i.e ., the doctrine and grace of the Gospel, which makes glad and inebriates the soul Here also He changes wine into His Blood in the Eucharist Tropologically, the reason was that by these nuptials and by wine He signified the union, and as it were the marriage of our soul, through grace and charity, with God. The Mother of Jesus was there, that is, virginal chastity, and the simple faith of the disciples of Jesus, such faith as when humbly acknowledging the wine of our devotion and fervour is failing, we entreat Him to bestow it upon us. Then He changes the insipidity of our soul into the good wine of His heavenly grace, by which we refresh and inebriate, not only our- selves, but others, and make them to glow with the love of God. Anagogically, the marriage of the I^amb will be perfected in CHRIST LEAVES NAZARETH. 91 heaven. There Christ will give us new wine and Divine nectar. He will inebriate us out of the fatness of the house of God, and will give us to drink of the torrent of His pleasures.

After this Jesus went down , &c. After the marriage Jesus returned with His Mother and friends to their house at Naza- reth. Nazareth was situated upon higher ground, so that He would descend from it to Capharnaum, which was on ground sloping down to the Sea of Galilee. The reason why He went was because He did not wish to make Nazareth, a poor and ignoble town, and by whose inhabitants He was despised as a carpenter, and the son of a carpenter, the headquarters of His preaching. For this He destined Capharnaum, which was by the sea-side, and famous for its commerce and concourse of people, so that He might have more fruit of His ministry. Now this journey of Christ took place before the imprisonment of John the Baptist, as may be clearly gathered from chaps. iiL 24 and iv. 1. It was different therefore from that of which S. Matthew speaks (iv. 13). For that took place after John was put in prison, when Christ actually transferred His place of abode to Capharnaum, and there opened a public school of His doctrine and teaching. The pre- sent occasion was only preparatory. This visit was only by the way, as it were in transitu , intending to proceed from hence to Jerusalem to keep the Passover, which was now nigh at hand. So Jansen. And His brethren, i.e., His cousins, James the Less, Joseph, Simon, and Judas (Matt. xiii. 55). Also John and James the Greater. And the Passover , &c. This was the first Passover after Christ's baptism.

15, 16. — And He found in the Temple, See. I have explained all these things in S. Matthew xxi. 12. Observe, however, that this was a different driving out of the buyers and sellers from that recorded in the 21st of S. Matthew, which occurred very shortly before Christ's passion. But this took place at the very beginning of His ministry.

His disciples remembered, See. This zeal of Christ was righteous indignation, says Euthymius, or rather ardour to do away 92 S. JOHN, C. II. with what was repugnant to God’s honour, so that He boldly exposed Himself, His life and His good name, to defend the honour of God, whom He loved above all things. For Christ did this before the proud and covetous Scribes and Pharisees, who opposed Him. The meaning then is, “ The zeal, that is, the burning desire, of caring for the glory of Thy Temple, in which thou, O Lord, dwellest as Thine abode, and the indignation which I have conceived against the traders who profane it, have eaten , that is, have absorbed Me.” Symmachus translates consumed Me, as fire eats away iron, and so transmutes it into itself, that it no longer seems to be iron, but fire itself. S. Augustine asks, “ Who is eaten up with zeal for the house of God ? ” and answers, “ He who strives to amend everything which he sees amiss. He does not rest if he cannot rectify it He groans and says within himself, * My zeal has caused me to consume away because mine enemies have forgotten Thy words’” (Ps. cxix. 139). Wherefore Bede saith, on this passage, “ Let us have zeal for the house of God, my brethren. If we see a brother who belongs to the house of God swelling with pride, given to detraction, a slave to drunkenness, enervated with luxury, disturbed by anger, or subject to any other fault, let us strive, so far as in us lies, to rebuke him, to amend what is corrupt and perverse. And if we are powerless to amend any of these things, let us not endure them without the most bitter grief. And especially in the house of prayer, where the Body of God is consecrated, where without doubt the angels are always present, let no folly take place, let us strive with all our might that nothing may hinder our own, or our brethren’s prayers.”

The Jews therefore answered , &c. Meaning, what miracle dost Thou show, that Thou takest upon Thyself, contrary to the custom, to cast the sellers out of the Temple, as having received authority from God : for from man, that is, from pontiff or governor, we know Thou hast none ? For Christ had intimated that He was sent by God, yea, that He was the Son of God ; for He had said (ver. 16), Make not My Father's house a house of merchandise . They ask Him therefore to prove that He was the Son of God, and Messiah, even the LoRt) of The temple. 93 is Moses had shown signs and prodigies from heaven, by which he demonstrated to Pharaoh and the Egyptians that he was sent by God. So Ruperti.

Jesus answered , &c. Appositely does He prove His authority over the Temple by His power of rebuilding the Temple. This Temple , viz., His body, which Christ pointed out by moving His hand to His breast Observe : the Body of Christ is called a temple because in It dwelt the fulness of the Deity, not merely by grace as it dwells in us, but corporeally and personally (Col. ii. 9). So S. Cyril. As though He said, “You, O ye incredulous Jews, ask of Me a sign, or a miracle ; lo, I give you one, even My resur- rection from the dead. This thing is now indeed dark unto you, because ye are unbelieving. But after a little while ye will under- stand it, or at least ye might easily understand, when ye shall see that I am risen on the third day. For then ye shall understand who I am, and how great I was, that I was in truth the Lord of My Own Body, that of My own will I gave Myself to die, and rose to life again. Thus, in consequence, ye may understand that much more am I the Lord of this Temple, which is only a type and shadow of My Body ; and therefore that I have power to cast out of it the buyers and sellers.” So Bede. Moreover, Christ calls his Body a temple rather than anything else because this contention took place in the Temple and about the Temple. As though He said, That ye may know, O ye Jews, that I am Lord of the Temple, loose ye, that is, I permit you to destroy the temple of My Body, which ye will do when ye kill and crucify Me, and I rise again by My own power on the third day. “ Destroy ye” not as inciting them to His destruction ; but predicting in figurative language what He knew they were about to do. So Euthymius.

The Jews then said , &c. There were three buildings of the Temple of Jerusalem. The first was by Solomon, and occupied seven years. The second was the rebuilding after its destruction by the Babylonians, by Zorobabel and his companions, under Cyrus, King of Persia. This rebuilding occupied fifteen years only, though many ancient and modem writers have erroneously supposed it to 94 S. JOHN, C. II. have occupied forty-six years, and to have been here referred to by the Jews. The third was the rebuilding of the Temple by Herod of Ascalon, who murdered the innocents of Bethlehem. He built the Temple afresh for the Jews, in order that he might secure the kingdom for himself and his posterity, and that he might be accounted by them as the true Messiah. And it is exceedingly probable that the Jews were here referring to this rebuilding from their use of the pronoun this. For “ this ” points out an existing Temple. And inasmuch as the two former Temples were destroyed, they could not be thus pointed out. Herod began his erection of the third Temple in the eighteenth year of his reign. For it was at that time he made known his intention of rebuilding the Temple, as Josephus testifies (Ant., lib. 15, c. 14). Wherefore, since Christ was born in the thirty-fifth year of the reign of Herod, as I have shown on Luke ii. 1, it follows that from his beginning to build until the birth of Christ, sixteen years had elapsed. Add thirty years of the life of Christ and you have forty-six. For it was in His thirtieth year, in which also He was baptized, that Christ had this disputation with the Jews. You may say that Josephus, in the passage cited above, says that Herod completed the building of the Temple in eight years instead of forty-six. I answer that he finished building as far as the most important parts of the Temple, such as the holy place and the Holy of Holies, were concerned : but both he himself and his successors laboured for many years after, even to Christ’s thirtieth year, in adorning the same. For in constructing the courts, the porticoes, and in beautifying the whole, inside as well as out, eighteen thou- sand men laboured all that time, as the same Josephus records (Ant. 20, 8). Finally, some think that the Jews spoke of both Temples, viz., Zorobabel’s and Herod’s. For Herod did not so much build a new Temple as adorn the old Temple of Zorobabel, so as to make it loftier and grander. This Vilalpandus clearly proves from Hege- sippus and other authors. The Temple then of Zorobabel occupied fifteen years in building. It was afterwards for several more years THE BUILDING OF THE TEMPLE. 95 enlarged and adorned by the Maccabees, by Simon the son of Onias the High Priest (Ecclus. L i), and by Herod. If you reckon up all these years you will easily make them come to forty-six years. Similarly the Basilica of S. Peter at Rome, the ancient one of Con- stantine the Great having been destroyed, has occupied a hundred years in building, and even at the present time we see continually in process of erection turrets, altars, pillars, chapels, &c. Symbolically, the forty-six years of the building of the Temple signify that the Body of Christ was built up in as many days. Hear S. Augustine (de Trim., lib. 14, c. 5.) : “This number answers to the perfection of the Body of Christ ; for forty-six times six make two hundred and seventy-six, that is, nine months and six days ; for in so long time was the Body of Christ coming to perfection.” The same (in Joan, tract. 10) says, “ Christ received a body from Adam. Now the Greek for the east is toaroXrj, for the west dfag, for the north &£xroe, for the south luewfyia, which four letters form Adam’s name, even the elect who are to be gathered from the four winds when the Lord shall come to judgment The letters also of Adam’s name count for forty-six, according to the Greek numeration ; for alpha signifies one, delta four, alpha one, and mu forty, in all forty-six. Thus Bede, S. Cyprian, Clement of Alexandria, and others. Ver. a 1. — But He spake, &c. S. Chrysostom asks, “Why He did not explain to them, being in doubt, that He called His flesh the Temple?” and answers that “since they had no belief in Him, even if He had explained the Jews would have derided Him, and treated Him still worse.”

When therefore He was risen , &c. They believed the Scripture, which foretold that Christ would rise from the dead This, which they did not previously understand, they understood when they saw it actually fulfilled in the resurrection of Christ Such a Scripture is that verse of the Psalms (xvi. 10), “Thou shalt not leave My soul in hell, nor suffer Thine Holy One to see corruption.”

But when He was at Jerusalem, &c. They believed in His name, that is, that He bore truly the name of Messiah, or Christ, i 96 S. JOHN, C. II. as He Himself named Himself, and was so publicly named and celebrated by the faithful.

But Jesus did not, &c. He did not trust, />., He did not confide. For although He knew that they believed in Him, yet He also knew that they were fickle, and would easily fall back from this faith, and be perverted by His numerous enemies, the Scribes and Pharisees. For the authority and power of those men was great For this reason Christ neither securely, nor for long, con- versed with them, but went away into other parts of Judea, for He knew not only what they were then doing and thinking, but what they were hereafter about to think and do against Him, to persecute Him even unto the death of the cross.

For He had no need \ &c. For He was searching the heart of each, whether it were constant, or fickle and inconstant. Where- fore, as S. Chrysostom says, “ He did not regard outward words who enters into the mind itself, who penetrates human thoughts, who knew how soon their fervour would grow cold. Jesus had no need of testimony to know the minds which He had formed.” Augustine adds, “That the Maker knew better what was in His work than the work what was in itself. Man's Creator knew what was in man.” ( 97 )