John 19:26

Joh 19:26. Τὸν μαθητὴν, the disciple) It is probable that Thomas also stood at a distance, ch. Joh 20:25,[391] and the others.—λέγει, He saith) He does not employ a long valediction, being about presently after to see them again.—ὁ υἱός σου, thy son) Thus Jesus honoured John by imparting to him as it were His own name; Thy son, saith He, to whom thou mayest commit thyself. Jesus even afforded an example of love towards surviving relatives and friends: but when He had discharged (performed) that office of love, He removed from His thoughts His mother, and had to do with His Father alone at the last.

[391] “Except I shall see in His hands the print of the nails,” etc.: implying, by the graphic mode of expression, that he had seen Him when the nails were in His body.—E. and T.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Joh 19:26 . John’s interest in naming the women is not obvious except in the case of the first. Ἰησοῦς … ἡ μήτηρ σου . Jesus when He saw His mother, and the disciple whom He loved standing beside her (the relevancy of the designation, τὸν μαθητὴν ὃν ἠγάπα , is here obvious, and the most convincing proof of its truth and significance is now given), says to His mother, “Woman, behold thy son”; i.e. , turning His eyes towards John, There is your son. Me you are losing, so far as the filial relation goes, but John will in this respect take my place.

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

When Jesus . . . saw his mother, and the disciple whom he loved, standing by, he saith to his mother, WOMAN, BEHOLD THY SON! Then saith he to the disciple, BEHOLD THY MOTHER!--What forgetfulness of self, what filial love, and to the "mother" and "son" what parting words!

from that hour . . . took her to his own home--or, home with him; for his father Zebedee and his mother Salome were both alive, and the latter here present (Mar 15:40). See on Mat 13:55. Now occurred the supernatural darkness, recorded by all the other Evangelists, but not here. "Now from the sixth hour (twelve o'clock, noon) there was darkness over all the land unto the ninth hour" (Mat 27:45). No ordinary eclipse of the sun could have occurred at this time, it being then full moon, and this obscuration lasted about twelve times the length of any ordinary eclipse. (Compare Exo 10:21, Exo 10:23). Beyond doubt, the divine intention of the portent was to invest this darkest of all tragedies with a gloom expressive of its real character. "And about the ninth hour Jesus cried, ELI, ELI, LAMA SABACHTHANI . . . My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?" (Mat 27:46). As the darkness commenced at the sixth hour, the second of the Jewish hours of prayer, so it continued till the ninth hour, the hour of the evening sacrifice, increasing probably in depth, and reaching its deepest gloom at the moment of this mysterious cry, when the flame of the one great "Evening Sacrifice" was burning fiercest. The words were made to His hand. They are the opening words of a Psalm (Psa 22:1) full of the last "sufferings of Christ and the following glories" (Pe1 1:11). "FATHER," was the cry in the first prayer which He uttered on the cross, for matters had not then come to the worst. "Father" was the cry of His last prayer, for matters had then passed their worst. But at this crisis of His sufferings, "Father" does not issue from His lips, for the light of a Father's countenance was then mysteriously eclipsed. He falls back, however, on a title expressive of His official relation, which, though lower and more distant in itself, yet when grasped in pure and naked faith was mighty in its claims, and rich in psalmodic associations. And what deep earnestness is conveyed by the redoubling of this title! But as for the cry itself, it will never be fully comprehended. An absolute desertion is not indeed to be thought of; but a total eclipse of the felt sense of God's presence it certainly expresses. It expre'sses surprise, as under the experience of something not only never before known, but inexplicable on the footing which had till then subsisted between Him and God. It is a question which the lost cannot utter. They are forsaken, but they know why. Jesus is forsaken, but does not know and demands to know why. It is thus the cry of conscious innocence, but of innocence unavailing to draw down, at that moment, the least token of approval from the unseen Judge--innocence whose only recognition at that moment lay in the thick surrounding gloom which but reflected the horror of great darkness that invested His own spirit. There was indeed a cause for it, and He knew it too--the "why" must not be pressed so far as to exclude this. He must taste this bitterest of the wages of sin "who did no sin" (Pe1 2:22). But that is not the point now. In Him there was no cause at all (Joh 14:30) and He takes refuge in the glorious fact. When no ray from above shines in upon Him, He strikes a light out of His own breast. If God will not own Him, He shall own Himself. On the rock of His unsullied allegiance to Heaven He will stand, till the light of Heaven returns to His spirit. And it is near to come. While He is yet speaking, the fierceness of the flame is beginning to abate. One incident and insult more, and the experience of one other predicted element of suffering, and the victory is His. The incident, and the insult springing out of it, is the misunderstanding of the cry, for we can hardly suppose that it was anything else. "Some of them that stood there, when they heard that, said, This man calleth for Elias" (Mat 27:47).

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 26. The disciple - whom he loved] John, the writer of this Gospel.

Woman, behold thy son!] This is a remarkable expression, and has been much misunderstood. It conveys no idea of disrespect, nor of unconcern, as has been commonly supposed. In the way of compellation, man! and woman! were titles of as much respect among the Hebrews as sir! and madam! are among us. But why does not Jesus call her mother? Probably because he wished to spare her feelings; he would not mention a name, the very sound of which must have wrung her heart with additional sorrow. On this account he says, Behold thy son! this was the language of pure natural affection: "Consider this crucified man no longer at present as any relative of thine; but take that disciple whom my power shall preserve from evil for thy son; and, while he considers thee as his mother, account him for thy child." It is probable that it was because the keeping of the blessed virgin was entrusted to him that he was the only disciple of our Lord who died a natural death, God having preserved him for the sake of the person whom he gave him in charge. Many children are not only preserved alive, but abundantly prospered in temporal things, for the sake of the desolate parents whom God hast cast upon their care. It is very likely that Joseph was dead previously to this; and that this was the reason why the desolate virgin is committed to the care of the beloved disciple.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

26. Woman, behold thy son! As if he had said, “Henceforth I shall not be an inhabitant of the earth, so as to have it in my power to discharge to thee the duties of a son; and, therefore, I put this man in my room, that he may perform my office.” The same thing is meant, when he says to John,

Behold thy mother! For by these words he charges him to treat her as a mother, and to take as much care of her as if she had been his own mother.

In refraining from mentioning his mother’s name and in simply calling her Woman! some think that he did so, in order not to pierce her heart with a deeper wound. I do not object to this view; but there is another conjecture which is equally probable, that Christ intended to show that, after having completed the course of human life, he lays down the condition in which he had lived, and enters into the heavenly kingdom, where he will exercise dominion over angels and men; for we know that Christ was always accustomed to guard believers against looking at the flesh, and it was especially necessary that this should be done at his death.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

(26) The disciple standing by, whom he loved.—Comp. Note on Joh_13:23.

Woman, behold thy son!—Comp. Note on Joh_2:4. There were those who were called the “brethren of the Lord” who may seem to us to have been of nearer relationship (comp. Note on Mat_13:55), but He regards whosoever doeth the will of His Father which is in heaven, as “brother and sister and mother.” (Comp. Notes on Mat_12:46 et seq.) He now sees standing by the cross her who. by His death will be left without son as well as without husband, for the silence of the history can only be accounted for on the supposition that Joseph was already dead; and in the tenderness of His love He commits her to the care of him whom He Himself had loved beyond others, because beyond others he could receive His love.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

26. whom he loved] See on Joh_18:23. The expression here is not a mere periphrasis to avoid giving the name, still less a boastful insertion: it explains why Jesus committed the two to one another. (See Introduction, ii. iii. 3 b.)

Woman] See on Joh_2:4.

behold thy son.] If, as has just been maintained (2nd note on Joh_19:25), S. John was the Virgin’s nephew, and if, as is probable (see on Joh_2:12), Christ’s ‘brethren’ were the sons of Joseph by a former marriage, the fact that Christ committed His mother to her nephew and His own beloved disciple rather than to her step-sons requires no explanation. Even if His ‘brethren’ were the sons of Joseph and Mary, their not believing on Him (Joh_7:5) would sufficiently account for their being set aside; and we have no evidence that they believed until after the Resurrection (Act_1:14).

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

When Jesus therefore saw his mother,.... Standing near him, within the reach of his voice, as well as sight, he took notice of her, and showed a concern for her temporal, as well as for her eternal good:

and the disciple standing by; either by his cross, his mother, or both:

whom he loved: meaning John, the writer of this Gospel, who for modesty's sake often describes himself in this manner; he being distinguished by Christ from the rest, by some peculiar marks of affection as man; though as God, and as the Redeemer, he loved his disciples alike, as he does all his true and faithful followers:

he saith unto his mother, woman, behold thy son; meaning not himself, but the disciple, who was her son, not by nature, nor adoption; but who would show himself as a son, by his filial affection for, care of, honour and respect unto her. Christ calls her not mother, but woman; not out of disrespect to her, or as ashamed of her; but partly that he might not raise, or add strength to her passions, by a tenderness of speaking; and partly to conceal her from the mob, and lest she should be exposed to their rude insults; as also to let her know that all natural relation was now ceasing between them; though this is a title he sometimes used to give her before.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

26 When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy son!

Ver. 26. When Jesus therefore saw his mother] In the midst of his miseries he thinks of his mother, and takes care for her well-doing after his decease. Doctor Taylor, the martyr, among other things he said to his son at his death, laid this charge upon him: When thy mother is waxed old, forsake her not, but provide for her to thy power, and that she lack nothing; for so will God bless thee, and give thee long life upon earth and prosperity. The Athenians punished such with death as nourished not their aged parents. And St Paul saith, that to requite parents is good and acceptable before God, 1Ti 5:4. καλον, sc. coram hominibus. (Scult.)

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

The disciple ...whom he loved - See Joh 13:23.

Woman - This appellation certainly implied no disrespect. See the notes at Joh 2:4.

Behold thy son! - This refers to John, not to Jesus himself. Behold, my beloved disciple shall be to you a son, and provide for you, and discharge toward you the duties of an affectionate child. Mary was poor. It would even seem that now she had no home. Jesus, in his dying moments, filled with tender regard for his mother, secured for her an adopted son, obtained for her a home, and consoled her grief by the prospect of attention from him who was the most beloved of all the apostles. What an example of filial attention! What a model to all children! And how lovely appears the dying Saviour, thus remembering his afflicted mother, and making her welfare one of his last cares on the cross, and even when making atonement for the sins of the world!

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

We have often heard that John was the beloved disciple, and usually expressed under the notion of him whom Jesus loved. Our Lord commendeth his mother to the care of John, whom he had ordered to take care of her, as if he had been her own son: this letteth us know that Joseph was at this time dead, otherwise it is not probable that Christ would have committed his mother to any other guardian.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

26. Woman—The same respectful but not affectionate title addressed by Jesus to his mother at the wedding at Cana of Galilee. But for this repetition of the title, we should certainly infer that it was here used to avoid exposing his mother to the notice of the multitude. Why, then, did he not address her in this moment of sorrow by the endearing title of mother? We cannot but conclude that the title used indicates that officially he was a son no longer. Her maternity is transferred to another. And yet, in this moment of overwhelming suffering, the mind of Jesus takes care to remember the obligations due to the ties of nature. His garments, his last property, his foes have parted among themselves. His mother alone remaining, he places her as a precious deposit, not with her sons but with his best beloved disciple. See note on Mat_13:55.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Jesus then, seeing the (his) mother, and the disciple whom he loved standing near, saith to the (his) mother, Woman, behold thy son! The term "Woman" was on his lips an honorific title rather than an expression of coldness. No atom of disrespect or failure of affection is evinced, nor can we conceive it possible that our Lord was here separating himself in his mediatorial character from all relationship with the mother who bore him! This view, adopted by Hengstenberg in part, by Steinmeyer, Luthardt, Alford, and originally by Professor Hoffmann of Erlangen, seems utterly inconsistent with the spirit of Christ. True, he had warned her not to intrude upon his modes of activity, (Joh_2:4) and had said that his disciples were his brothers, sisters, mother; but the greatness of his heart is human to the last. No Monophy-site explanation of the status majestaticus, no Nestorian severance of the Divine and human Christ, is needed. Christ yearned over the mother whose heart was being pierced by his agony, and with filial anxiety entrusted her, not to those brothers of his whatever was the degree of their relationship to him who, nevertheless, did not believe on him, but to the disciple whom he loved.

Vers. 26, 27. The third word from the cross.

Whoever of our Lord"s friends, followers, and kindred were absent during the awful hours of the Crucifixion, we know that his nearest relative, his mother, was there, and that his most intimate and congenial friend and disciple, John, was a witness of the solemn scene. These, with some others, lingered by the cross. Not unseen by the dying Redeemer, his nearest friends were the objects of his affectionate regard; and, as these verses relate, some of his last thoughts were of them, and his last provision concerned their future relations.

I WE CANNOT BUT REVERENTIALLY ADMIRE THE SELFFORGETFULNESS OF THE CRUCIFIED REDEEMER. The absorbing nature of extreme bodily suffering is well known. In the hour of agony it is hard for the sufferer to think of aught but his own pains and torture. We know that the Lord Jesus was exquisitely sensitive to suffering. Yet even amidst the anguish of body and of mind which he was then enduring, the Savior was able to turn away his thoughts from himself to her who gave him birth, who had often shared the honors and the trials of his ministry, and who had now, with noble fortitude and sympathy, come to witness his death.

II WE ARE INSTRUCTED BY THE REVELATION OF THE HIGH PLACE WHICH HUMAN LOVE HELD IN OUR SAVIOR"S HEART. Mary was now advancing in life; her husband Joseph was probably dead. Her long-proved affection was reciprocated by that Son whose filial devotion had been perfect, and who had not now to remember one unfilial act, or word, or even thought. As he looked upon her he saw that the prediction was now fulfilled, "A sword shall pierce through thine own heart also." He had loved her all his life, and his love was never more grateful, more tender, more compassionate, than now. He was bearing the burden of a world"s sin and sorrow; yet there was room in his sacred heart for affectionate thoughts of his beloved mother. John, too, who records this incident, in which he occupied a part so prominent, took pleasure in speaking of himself as "the disciple whom Jesus loved." He had reclined on the Master"s breast at the Supper: right and meet it was that he should take his station at his Master"s cross. Jesus, who had loved him in life, cherished the same affection towards John in this his own hour of anguish. As it would have been a comfort to Jesus had his three favored apostles watched with him in the garden, so no doubt it was a comfort to him that the beloved disciple was standing hard by the cross of ignominy and woe. Jesus loved his friend for his faithfulness, and rewarded him for it even in the hour of his own decease. We thus recognize with gratitude the persistence of Immanuel"s tender affection: "Having loved his own... he loved them even to the end.

III WE ARE ASTONISHED AT THE FORETHOUGHT AND WISDOM EXERCISED BY THE DYING SAVIOR. He had already prayed for his murderers; he had already cheered his fellow-sufferer by words of grace and promise. He now turned his thoughtful regard to the mother who stood weeping among her friends. The arrangement which he proposed was one the propriety and suitableness of which are most apparent. Who so fit to take his place as far as that place could be taken as the beloved disciple? There is a pathetic grace and beauty in thelanguage in which Jesus commended the two to each other. He acknowledged the mother"s fidelity and devotion to himself; he foresaw the desolation which must come to her; he provided for her not only a protector and a home, but that solace which would come with common memories and mutual sympathy. There were those, perhaps, nearer of kin, but none could be nearer in heart, to Mary than Jesus" most intimate and trusted friend. Thus it was secured that Mary should be removed from the distressing scene, and should be assured of constant and affectionate tendance. Nor can we doubt that this arrangement was a permanent one that Mary enjoyed the friendship and ministrations of John until she went to see her Son in that glory which followed upon his bitter humiliation. Thus love and wisdom went together in this as in preceding acts of the Son of man. And what Jesus said and did upon this occasion was an earnest of his work for humanity at large. Hone are so happy, so safe, so strong, as those to whom the Savior reveals his heart, and for whom he in his wisdom takes holy, helpful thought. T.

Vers. 26, 27. Filial love strong in death.

Notice

I THE INFERIORITY OF HUMAN RELATIONSHIPS. Our Lord addresses his mother as "woman a term of tenderness and respect; still suggesting at once the inferiority of human relationships when compared with spiritual ones.

1. Human relationships belong to this world. They belong to the natural, physical, and visible order of things. They are the outcome of our existence, the arrangements of wise Providence, and important for the government of the human race, their social order, progress, and happiness, and capable of serving our highest interests.

2. Christ spoke of and treated them as inferior to spiritual relationships. Although he was the most obedient, affectionate, and exemplary of sons, yet he ever spoke of his spiritual and Divine relationships as being superior and more important those arising from a Divine and spiritual birth, from the will of God, as superior to those arising from physical birth, or the will of the flesh. The former had ever his preference, and he was louder of his relations after the spirit than of those after the flesh. Once. when told that his mother and his brethren were outside, seeking him, he said, "He that doeth the will of my Father," etc.

3. At death human relationships are merged into those of a higher life. He saith, "woman," not "mother;" and, pointing to John, and not to himself, "Behold thy son!" As much as to say, in the old sense of the term, "Henceforth I cease to be thy Son, and thou ceasest to be my mother." She had to think of him, not as her Son, but as her Lord and Savior. By the regenerative influence of Christianity and the transition of death, the material is lost in the spiritual, the human in the Divine, and the temporal in the Eternal.

II THE PERFORMANCE OF FILIAL DUTY. "When he saw his mother," etc. This duty involved provisions for the future support and comfort of his mother.

1. This duty is felt and admitted by Christ. This implies:

(1) That human relationships involve special duties. Brothers have special duties to brothers, parents to children, and children to parents. Christ felt that his widowed mother was dependent upon him for support and comfort, and he feels it his sacred duty to provide for her.

(2) These duties are incumbent, although the relationships whence they arise are about to cease. Jesus was about to cease to be Mary"s Son, in the old sense; he was about to enter into a higher life. Still he felt it is duty to provide for her. The spiritual does not atone for the material. The obligations of every state of existence should be performed in that stage. Our obligations survive the relationships which gave rise to them.

(3) Christianity makes all under its influence more alive to the duties of human relationships. It is not Christ-like to leave the world as thieves and those who loved and were dependent upon us as absconders. The higher life of Christ inspired him to perform the duties of this, Christianity ennobles every relationship, and consecrates every duty of life. The Christian son will be the most affectionate and careful of his surviving mother.

2. This duty was performed by Christ under the most trying circumstances. This duty was done amidst the most excruciating sufferings, physical, mental, and spiritual. It was done in the very act of dying. When uttering these words of tenderness, he was in the grip of the most painful death. It was done when performing the most important work of his life. When providing for the spiritual wants of the world, he provided for the temporal wants of his mother. These facts prove:

(1) His utter self-obliviousness. "He made himself of no reputation." Not himself, but others. Not his own agonies, but the comfort of his surviving and stricken mother.

(2) His wonderful sovereignty over the most adverse circumstances of life. In the midst of sufferings and indignities he was perfectly calm and self-possessed. He had full control over his feelings, actions, sufferings, and even death. He kept death at bay till he performed the last duty of love pertaining to this life.

(3) The strength of his filial affection.

(4) His continued inherent interest in those he loved. In his beloved mother and disciple. And this interest, which blazed so brightly in the gloom of death, was net likely to be extinguished in the happiness and effulgence of the life beyond.

(5) The minuteness and. tenderness of his loving care. While we contemplate this, his last act of filial love, under the circumstances in which it was performed, we are ready to exclaim, "How human! how Divine! how comprehensive! how minute! how God-like! How like the Father of all!" While he governs and sustains the vast universe, he forgets not a single object not even the smallest. He lights the sun and guides the stars, but forgets not the glow-worm nor to smile on the rose and the lily. And so the Divine Son now on the cross, while he made an atonement for sin, satisfied justice, and honored the Law; still, at the very time, his mother is not forgotten.

3. This duty was performed in the best way.

(1) in the most efficient way. He entrusted her to the care of his best earthly friend, one with the means and the heart, the will and the way. He could do nothing else. He had no means to bequeath to her; but he had a loving heart at his command, which would ever be kind to her.

(2) In the most natural way. What could comfort the bereaved mother as much as another son, and so loved by and so like the lost one? John would remind her of Jesus, and their society would be congenial, and their conversation sweet as to the past and the future.

(3) In the most suitable time. Up to this time he was with her; there was no need of any one else. But now his life is past hope; his mother was in the suppressed agonies of grief and sorrow the sword was through her heart. Then another son was introduced who would never cease to care for her a very present help.

III THE EXERCISE OF LOVING OBEDIENCE. This is illustrated in the mother and in the disciple.

1. The new relationship is most naturally felt and realized. It jars not on the feelings of either; but a flush of a new kinship passes over their countenance.

2. The sacred charge was most cheerfully accepted. There was no need of along lecture; only the brief introduction, "Behold," etc.! By his Spirit and providence he had prepared both for the new relationship.

3. It was practically accepted. He took her to his own home. Loving obedience is ever practical and full. To his own home, which was the home of love.

4. It was immediately practical. There was no delay. "From that hour." The obedience of love is hearty and prompt. Probably that very minute he took her away.

(1) For her own sake. She could scarcely stand the heart-rending scene any longer. Her motherly instincts would cling to the cross till the last; bat the tender instincts of her newly adopted son would considerately lead her away. It was enough.

(2) For Christ"s sake. His human eyes should see the obedience of love. The sacred charge would be taken at once, and his will immediately executed. This should not press a moment on him. A weeping mother should not hold him back from death. Would not even Christ die more happily after seeing his mother cared for?

LESSONS.

1. There are some whom Jesus loves more than others. John was such. He specially loved him on account of his specially loving qualities and his likeness to him.

2. Those whom Jesus specially loves he specially honors honors with his confidence, friendship, mind, and treasures.

3. The greatest honor which Christ can confer upon us is to employ us in his special service.

4. Jesus has many poor relations still in need of care. Those who befriend the orphan and the widow are doing Jesus special service. We hear still from the cross the words, "Son, behold thy mother!" etc. B.T.

Vers. 26, 27. The great Model of filial duty.

The last hours of Jesus, as might be expected, were marked by a very deep feeling of the tie that bound him to his Father in heaven. The ruling motive was strong in death. But the human mother was equally remembered according to her claims and needs. Even in the midst of intense pain, and on the verge of death, Jesus thinks of everybody who ought to be thought of. The pain, intense as it is, will soon be over, but the Father in heaven will remain, with whom Jesus has to dwell in power and glory, and the mother on earth will remain, provided for through the ministry of a trusted friend. Jesus seems to have had a trying time with his relatives; well is it that this last glimpse is so beautiful.

I CONTRAST WITH THE WAY IN WHICH THE RELATIVES OF JESUS TREATED HIM. This is the only transaction of Jesus with his kinsfolk in which he takes the initiative. Jesus had to guard himself from the plausible suggestions of those who felt they had a claim to shape or at least to modify his course. His difficulties in this way would begin long before he emerged into public life. We may be sure Jesus did not love opposition or contradiction for opposition"s or contradiction"s sake. But when his natural kinsfolk pointed one way, and his heavenly Father another, there could be no doubt in his own mind which way to take. And we must learn, as Jesus did, to make little of kindred as advisers, and yet remain loving and helpful to them as kindred. That a man is your father does not make him more competent to advise you; it may only make him more powerful to mislead and ruin you, if his advice is bad.

II KINSFOLK MUST EVER BE TREATED AS KINSFOLK. The time comes when the claim of nature is recognized, and met all the better because other claims had to be refused before. If Jesus had listened to the expostulations of his kindred, he himself might have supported the old age of his mother, and soothed her dying pillow. But he did something far better. Whatever Mary may have lost in the natural, she had the chance of gaining far more in the spiritual. Mary was among the praying band in the upper room, waiting for Pentecost, and doubtless, when the Spirit of power came down, she would rejoice with exceeding gladness that her Son had gone on in single-hearted devotion to his Father"s will. Jesus, therefore, is a great Example and Guide to us in all dealings with kinsfolk. In such dealings we peculiarly need an example and guide. He would not let his kinsfolk go beyond their rights, but all the time he was keenly observant of their claims. As we read of him providing a protector and son for his mother, we cannot but remember his indignant exposure of those who kept back helpful gifts from father and mother under pretence that they were dedicated to God. To please Christ we must both attend to the legitimate claim of natural kinship, and also we must be ready for the claim that comes upon the human friend. Y.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

26, 27. ἴδε (S. John’s usual form) for ἰδού, with אB and others against A.

26. ὃν ἠγάπα. See on Joh 13:23: it is no mere periphrasis to avoid naming him, still less a boastful insertion. It explains why Jesus committed him to His Mother and His Mother to him.

γύναι, ἴδε ὁ υἱὸς σου. See on Joh 2:4. The act is one of filial care for the soul-pierced Mother (Luk 2:35), who perhaps was thus spared the agony of seeing her Son die. If S. John took her home at once, this accounts for his omitting the third and fourth Words (Appendix C), which would be uttered during his absence. He who had just asked God’s forgiveness for His murderers and promised Paradise to His fellow-sufferer, now gives another son to His Mother, another mother to His friend. If S. John was the Virgin’s nephew, and if Christ’s ‘brethren’ were the sons of Joseph by a former marriage, the fact that Christ committed His Mother to her nephew and His own beloved disciple rather than to her step-sons requires no explanation. Even if His ‘brethren’ were the sons of Joseph and Mary, their not believing on Him (Joh 7:5) would account for their being set aside; and we have no evidence that they believed till after the Resurrection (Act 1:14).

εἰς τὰ ἴδια. see on Joh 1:11 and Joh 16:32. Although the commendation was double, each being given to the other, yet (as was natural) S. John assumes the care of Mary rather than she of him. This shews the untenability of the view that not only S. John, but in him all the Apostles, were committed by Christ to the guardianship of Mary. That S. John was known to the high-priest (Joh 18:15) and that his family had hired servants (Mar 1:20) would seem to imply that he was a man of some position and substance.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

26. ἰδὲ ὁ υἱός σου] The relationship in the flesh between the Lord and His mother was about to close; hence He commends her to another son who should care for and protect her. Thus,—as at the marriage in Cana, when His official independence of her was to be testified, so now,—He addresses her as γύναι.

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

26. Ἰησοῦς κτλ. For the omission the article before Ἰησοῦς when followed by οὖν, see on 6:15.

τῇ μητρί. So אBL. ADsuppNLΓΔΘ, some O.L. texts, and the Coptic Q add αὐτοῦ, as in the rec. text.

The true reading, both here and in v. 27, seems to be ἴδε (a favourite word with Jn.; see on 1:29), and not ἰδού which occurs only 16:32, 19:5. In v 26 אAΘ give ἰδού, but BDsuppN have ἴδε. In v. 27 ἰδού is read by ADsupp, ἴδε being read by אBLNΘ.

The Coptic Q and the O.L. e omit the introductory γύναι, perhaps feeling it to be harsh.

The reasons for identifying “the disciple whom Jesus loved” with John the son of Zebedee and Salome, the maternal cousin of Jesus, have been given in the Introduction, p. xxxvif. We now find John at the Cross, with the women, including the Virgin Mother and his own mother Salome.

It was natural that the Virgin should be commended to his care, rather than to the care of “the brethren,” James and Simon and Joseph and Jude, with whom she had been so intimately associated in the past, and whose home she had probably shared (see on 2:12), because they were not yet disciples; they had not accepted the claims of Jesus or believed in His mission. As we have seen, John was nephew to Mary, and in sympathy he was nearer to her than these stepsons. And so Jesus bade His mother look to John, His beloved friend and cousin, to be her “son.” He is going from her, but John will take His place in such measure as is possible

The words “Woman, behold thy son … behold thy mother” are more than a mere commendation1 or suggestion from a dying friend. They convey a command from Him who was, to Mary, as well as to John, Master and Lord. He did not address her as “Mother,” even while He shows tender solicitude for her future. “Mother,” as a title of address by Jesus, was abandoned long since, and for it “Woman,” a usual title of respect, has been substituted. See on 2:4.

When Jesus said to John “Behold thy mother,” John’s own mother, Salome, was present and may have overheard the words. But the Virgin was her sister, broken-hearted and desolate, with whom she was in complete sympathy, for she too had accepted Jesus as Master. She was not necessarily set aside or superseded by the charge to her son to regard her sister Mary as a second mother, and treat her with filial care.

The place which this farewell charge occupies among the Words from the Cross is noteworthy, as will be seen if they are read in their probable sequence.

Additional Note on the Words From the Cross

The evangelical narratives of the Passion reflect at least three distinct lines of tradition. The Marcan tradition (which according to Papias goes back to Peter, whose disciple Mark was) is followed with amplifications of a later date by Matthew. It is also followed by Luke, who seems, however, to have had some additional source of information. His account of the trial before Herod (23:8-12), e.g., has no parallel in the other Gospels; and it has been often observed that Luke alone mentions Joanna, the wife of Chuza, Herod’s steward, as one of the women who accompanied Jesus in His public ministry (Luk 8:3) and were present at the Crucifixion (Luk 23:49) and heralds of the Resurrection (Luk 23:55, Luk 24:10). To this Joanna, Luke’s special information as to the Passion may possibly be due. The third distinct tradition of the Passion is that of Jn., which goes back for details to the personal witness of the Beloved Disciple (19:35).

The Marcan tradition reports one Word from the Cross, the Lucan tradition three, and the Johannine tradition yet another three. There is nothing surprising in this variation. Independent witnesses may honestly and truthfully give different, although not inconsistent, reports of the same events. They report only what they have personally observed, and only such part of that as has specially impressed them or is suitable for the purposes of their narrative, if they are writing one. It may not be possible to harmonise precisely the various accounts of the Passion, or to place the Words from the Cross in exact chronological sequence. But there is no critical objection to the order which has generally commended itself to students of the Gospels, as being suggested by the sacred text. It may be set out as follows:

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Woman. See on 2 4.

Behold. Canon Westcott remarks upon the four exclamations in this chapter - Behold the man! Behold your King! Behold thy son! Behold thy mother! as a remarkable picture of what Christ is, and what He reveals men to be.

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.