John 2:4

Jesus saith unto her, woman,.... Calling her "woman", as it was no ways contrary to her being a virgin, Gal 4:4, so it was no mark of disrespect; it being an usual way of speaking with the Jews, when they showed the greatest respect to the person spoken to; and was used by our Lord when he addressed his mother with the greatest tenderness, and strongest affection, Joh 19:26. The Jews frequently object this passage to us Christians: one of their writers his objection in this manner (p):

"they (the Christians) say, the mother of Jesus is never called a woman their law; but here her son himself calls her a man.''

Another puts it thus (q):

"it is their (the Christians) belief, that Mary, even after she brought forth Jesus, was a virgin; but if she was, as they say, why does not her son call her by the name of virgin? but he calls her a woman, which signifies one known by man, as appears from Joh 2:4.''

To which may be replied, that the mother of Jesus is never called a woman in the New Testament, is not said by us Christians: it is certain she is so called, both here, and elsewhere; but then this is no contradiction to her being a virgin; one, and the same person, may be a virgin, and a woman: the Abraham's servant was sent to take for wife for his son Isaac, is called a woman, though a virgin that had never known any man, Gen 24:5. Besides, we do not think ourselves obliged to maintain the perpetual virginity of Mary, the mother of our Lord; it is enough that she was a virgin when she conceived, and when she brought forth her firstborn: and as the Jews endeavour to take an advantage of this against the character of Mary, the Papists are very solicitous about the manner in which these words are said, lest they should be thought to contain a reproof, which they cannot bear she should be judged worthy of; or suggest any thing to her dishonour, whom they magnify as equal to her son: but certain it is, that the following words,

what have I to do with thee? show resentment and reproof. Some render the words, "what is it to thee and me?" and give this as the sense; what concern is this of ours? what business have we with it? let them look to it, who are the principal in the feast, and have the management of it. The Jew (r) objects to this sense of the words, but gives a very weak reason for it:

"but I say, (says he,) who should be concerned but the master of the feast? and he was the master of the feast:''

whereas it is a clear case that he was one of the guests, one that was invited, Joh 2:2, and that there was a governor or ruler of the feast, who might be more properly called the master of it than Jesus, Joh 2:8. However, since Christ afterwards did concern himself in it, it looks as if this was not his meaning. Others render it to the sense we do, "what have I with thee?" as the Ethiopic version; or "what business hast thou with me?" as the Persic version; and is the same with, , "what have I to do with thee?" used in Kg1 17:18, where the Septuagint use the same phrase as here; and such a way of speaking is common with Jewish writers (s): hereby signifying, that though, as man, and a son of hers, he had been subject to her, in which he had set an example of obedience to parents; yet, as God, he had a Father in heaven, whose business he came to do; and in that, and in his office, as Mediator, she had nothing to do with him; nor was he to be directed by her in that work; or to be told, or the least hint given when a miracle should be wrought, by him in confirmation of his mission and doctrine. Moreover, he adds,

mine hour is not yet come: meaning not the hour of his sufferings and death, in which sense he sometimes uses this phrase; as if the hint was, that it was not proper for him to work miracles as yet, lest it should provoke his enemies to seek his life before his time; but rather the time of his public ministry and miracles, which were to go together, and the one to be a proof of the other; though it seems to have a particular regard to the following miracle, the time of doing that was not yet come; the proper juncture, when all fit circumstances meeting together, it would be both the more useful, and the more illustrious: or his meaning is, that his time of doing miracles in public was not yet; and therefore, though he was willing to do this miracle, yet he chose to do it in the most private manner; so that only a few, and not the principal persons at the feast should know it: wherefore the reproof was not so much on the account of the motion itself, as the unseasonableness of it; and so his mother took it.

(p) Vet. Nizzachon, p. 222. (q) R. Isaac Chizzuk Emuna, par. 2. c. 42. p. 433. (r) Vet. Nizzachon, p. 223. (s) Vid. Kimchi in Psal. ii. 12. Bechinat Olam, p. 70.

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

2:4 Jesus initially distanced himself from the problem. His mission and its timing could not be set by a human agenda. • Jesus’ time (literally hour) would come in the future when he was glorified as he was lifted up on the cross (12:23; 17:1).

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Joh 2:4. Τὶ ἐμοὶ καὶ σοί; what is there[common] to Me and thee?) Thy thoughts are one thing, saith He, mine another. Similarly the disciples are disciplined, ch. Joh 6:6, “Jesus saith to Philip, Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat? and this He said to prove him;” ch. Joh 13:7, [Jesus to Peter, when about to wash his feet] “What I do thou knowest not now, but thou shalt know hereafter.”—γύναι) He does not say, Mary, nor mother; but woman; which appellation held a middle place, and was especially becoming for the Lord to use: ch. Joh 19:26, “Woman, behold thy son;” perhaps, also, it was peculiar [in its use] to Him. The Lord had regard to the Father above all things; not even did He know His mother, according to the flesh. 2Co 5:16, “Though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we Him no more.” Comp. note on Joh 20:13. Especially was the appellation of mother unsuitable to this formula, What is there to Me and thee? However, the Greek γύναι, having no synonym in our language, has a more respectful sound than Woman [ch. Joh 19:26 shows it betrays no want of tender respect], mulier, [Germ.] Weib, as contradistinguished from [female, lady] femina, [Germ.] Frau: and woman is used for mother, Isa 45:10, “Woe unto him, that saith—to the woman, What hast thou brought forth?”—οὔτω ἥκει) is not yet come. The same word [occurs], ch. Joh 4:47, Joh 8:42.—ὥρα, hour) of doing what you hint to Me, i.e. of withdrawing. Certainly his hour of assisting them was come.

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

Joh_2:4. Jesus understands His mothers wish, but He has in His mind a method of help altogether different from what she meant. He therefore repels her interference, in the consciousness of the call which here is given Him to begin His Messianic ministry of miracles, and holds out the prospect of rendering help at a later period.

τί ἐμοὶ καὶ σοί;] a rejection of fellowship (מַה־לִּי וָלָךְ, Jos_22:24; Jdg_11:12, al.; Mat_8:29; Mat_27:19; Mar_1:24; Luk_8:28; also in the classics; see Bernhardy, p. 98), here with reference to the help to be rendered, which He Himself, without His mothers assistance, and independently of her, would accomplish, according to His own divinely determined call and will, and in a miraculous manner. Godet well says: Sa devise sera désormais: mon père et moi. Comp. Dorner, Jesu sündlose Vollkommenh. p. 11. The appellation γύναι added to the τί

σοί (which Hofmann thinks should be joined to what follows; but why?) does not contain anything unfriendly (duriter respondet, Melancthon), as is clear already from Joh_19:21; see also Wetstein. Comp. Joh_20:15. But His not saying μῆτερ followed involuntarily from the consciousness of His higher wonder-working capacity and will, by virtue of which, as an ἀμήτωρ, He rejected any, interference proceeding from feminine weakness, even such as, was presented here before Him in His mother. The remark of Euthymius Zigabenus is not happy (comp. Augustine): He spoke thus as God; while that of Epiphanius, Beza, Calvin, and many others, is singular: His aim was to oppose that future Mariolatry which He foresaw. Still, the passage tells against that worship. Schenkel says erroneously, quoting Mar_3:21, He was at variance with the members of His family.

ἡ ὥρα μου] can only mean, the moment when it will he for me to help.[135] So also Hengstenberg, in keeping with the context. Jesus, conscious of His close communion with the Father, sees clearly that this His first manifestation of Himself as Messiah in the working of miracles stands, even with reference to the time when it is to begin, in close connection with the divine appointment; and He feels that the moment (ἡ ὥρα = ὁ καιρός, as in Joh_16:21, and often in the N. T. and the classics) for this first Messianio display of power is not yet present when His mother refers to the want of wine. How He was conscious of the exact horas et moras for working, cannot be more precisely determined. Euthymius Zigabenus is substantially right: ἡ τοῦ θαυματουργῆσαι; and Ewald: the hour of full Messianic sense of power. Strangely attributing to Mary thoughts of that kind, Baumgarten Crusius remarks, the moment of my public appearance as Messiah; and Godet: lheure de lavénement royal. Anticipating Joh_2:11, Lücke, Tholuck, Brückner, Maier, Baur, Baumgarten render: the moment of the revelation of my glory. Comp. Luthardt: This miracle, as the figurative prolepsis of Christs subsequent full revelation of Himself before the eyes of men, was of significance only for that narrow circle, and was intended to lead Jesus on from it into public life,of which, however, the text contains no hint either in John 2 :or elsewhere.

[135] It is an error to suppose that ἡ ὥρα μου in John always signifies the hour of Christs death. Its reference depends entirely upon the context, as in Joh_7:30, Joh_8:20, where it means the hour of Christs seizure; and Joh_13:1, where the more precise definition is expressly given. Already τινὲς in Chrysostom, Ebrard, and many, take it here as meaning the hour of Christs death. Hilgenfeld understands it of the hour of the glorification of Jesus, the culminating point of which was certainly the crucifixion; and that Jesus, according to John, gives expression to the full consciousness of the Logos, and its superhuman independence of all human counsel.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Joh 2:4 . His complete reply is, τί ἐμοὶ καὶ σοί , γύναι ; οὔπω ἥκει ἡ ὥρα μου . γύναι is a term of respect, not equivalent to our “woman”. See chap. Joh 19:26 , Joh 20:13 , Luk 13:12 . In the Greek tragedians it is constantly used in addressing queens and persons of distinction. Augustus addresses Cleopatra as γύναι (Dio, quoted by Wetstein). Calvin goes too far when he says that this term of address was used to correct the superstitious adoration of the Virgin which was to arise. But while there is neither harshness nor disrespect, there is distance in the expression. Wetstein hits the point when he says: “Non poterat dicere: quid mihi tecum est, mater?” τί ἐμοὶ καὶ σοί represents the Hebrew מַה־לִּי וָלָךְ (Jdg 11:12 ), and means: What have we in common? Trench gives the sense: “Let me alone; what is there common to thee and me; we stand in this matter on altogether different grounds”. Or, as Holtzmann gives it, Our point of view an interests are wholly diverse; why do you mingle them? οὔπω ἥκει ἡ ὥρα μου . not as Bengel, “discedendi hora,” but, mine hour for bringing relief. This implies that He too had observed the failure of the wine and was waiting a fitting opportunity to interfere. That the same formula is more than once used by Jesus of His death (see chap. Joh 7:30 , Joh 8:20 ) merely indicates that it could be used of any critical time. Euthymius says it here means “the hour of miracle working”. Wetstein quotes from R. Sira “non quavis hora fit miraculum”. Especially true is this of the first miracle-of the Messiah, which would commit Him to a life of publicity ending in an ignominious death. That Mary found hope in the οὔπω is obvious from Joh 2:5 . She did not find His reply wholly refusal. She therefore says to the servants (Joh 2:5 ), ὅ τι ἂν λέγῃ ὑμῖν ποιήσατε . The διακόνοι , or servants waiting at table, might not otherwise have obeyed an unimportant guest. His orders might perhaps be of an unusual kind.

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

Mine appointed time.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

Woman--no term of disrespect in the language of that day (Joh 19:26).

what . . . to do with thee--that is, "In my Father's business I have to do with Him only." It was a gentle rebuke for officious interference, entering a region from which all creatures were excluded (compare Act 4:19-20).

mine hour, &c.--hinting that He would do something, but at His own time; and so she understood it (Joh 2:5).

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 4. Woman, what have I to do with thee?] τι εμοι και σοι γυναι: O, woman, what is this to thee and me? This is an abrupt denial, as if he had said: "WE are not employed to provide the necessaries for this feast: this matter belongs to others, who should have made a proper and sufficient provision for the persons they had invited." The words seem to convey a reproof to the virgin, for meddling with that which did not particularly concern her. The holiest persons are always liable to errors of judgment: and should ever conduct themselves with modesty and humility, especially in those things in which the providence of God is particularly concerned. But here indeed there appears to be no blame. It is very likely the bride or bridegroom's family were relatives of the blessed virgin; and she would naturally suppose that our Lord would feel interested for the honour and comfort of the family, and, knowing that he possessed extraordinary power, made this application to him to come forward to their assistance. Our Lord's answer to his mother, if properly translated, is far from being disrespectful. He addresses the virgin as he did the Syrophoenician woman, Mt 15:28; as he did the Samaritan woman, Joh 4:21, as he addressed his disconsolate mother when he hung upon the cross, Joh 19:26; as he did his most affectionate friend Mary Magdalene, Joh 20:15, and as the angels had addressed her before, Joh 20:13; and as St. Paul does the believing Christian woman, 1Co 7:16; in all which places the same term, γυναι which occurs in this verse, is used; and where certainly no kind of disrespect is intended, but, on the contrary, complaisance, affability, tenderness, and concern and in this sense it is used in the best Greek writers.

Mine hour is not yet come.] Or, my time, for in this sense the word ωρα is often taken. My time for working a miracle is not yet fully come. What I do, I do when necessary, and not before. Nature is unsteady-full of haste; and ever blundering, in consequence. It is the folly and sin of men that they are ever finding fault with the Divine providence. According to them, God never does any thing in due time-he is too early or too late: whereas it is utterly impossible for the Divine wisdom to forestall itself; or for the Divine goodness to delay what is necessary.

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

4. Woman, what have I to do with thee? Why does Christ repel her so rashly? I reply, though she was not moved by ambition, nor by any carnal affection, still she did wrong in going beyond her proper bounds. Her anxiety about the inconvenience endured by others, and her desire to have it in some way mitigated, proceeded from humanity, and ought to be regarded as a virtue; but still, by putting herself forward, she might obscure the glory of Christ. Though it ought also to be observed, that what Christ spoke was not so much for her sake as for the sake of others. Her modesty and piety were too great, to need so severe a chastisement. Besides, she did not knowingly and willingly offend; but Christ only meets the danger, that no improper use may be made of what his mother had said, as if it were in obedience to her command that he afterwards performed the miracle.

The Greek words (Τί ἐμοὶ καὶ σοὶ) literally mean, What to me and to thee? But the Greek phraseology is of the same import with the Latin — Quid tibi mecum? (what hast thou to do with me?) The old translator led many people into a mistake, by supposing Christ to have asserted, that it was no concern of his, or of his mother’s, if the wine fell short. But from the second clause we may easily conclude how far removed this is from Christ’s meaning; for he takes upon himself this concern, and declares that it belongs to him to do so, when he adds, my hour is not yet come. Both ought to be joined together — that Christ understands what it is necessary for him to do, and yet that he will not act in this matter at his mother’s suggestion.

It is a remarkable passage certainly; for why does he absolutely refuse to his mother what he freely granted afterwards, on so many occasions, to all sorts of persons? Again, why is he not satisfied with a bare refusal? and why does he reduce her to the ordinary rank of women, and not even deign to call her mother? This saying of Christ openly and manifestly warns men to beware lest, by too superstitiously elevating the honor of the name of mother in the Virgin Mary, they transfer to her what belongs exclusively to God. Christ, therefore, addresses his mother in this manner, in order to lay down a perpetual and general instruction to all ages, that his divine glory must not be obscured by excessive honor paid to his mother.

How necessary this warning became, in consequence of the gross and disgraceful superstitions which followed afterwards, is too well known. For Mary has been constituted the Queen of Heaven, the Hope, the Life, and the Salvation of the world; and, in short, their fury and madness proceeded so far that they stripped Christ of his spoils, and left him almost naked. And when we condemn those horrid blasphemies against the Son of God, the Papists call us malignant and envious; and — what is worse — they maliciously slander us as deadly foes to the honor of the holy Virgin. As if she had not all the honor that is due to her, unless she were made a Goddess; or as if it were treating her with respect, to adorn her with blasphemous titles, and to substitute her in the room of Christ. The Papists, therefore, offer a grievous insult to Mary when, in order to disfigure her by false praises, they take from God what belongs to Him.

My hour is not yet come. He means that he has not hitherto delayed through carelessness or indolence, but at the same time he states indirectly that he will attend to the matter, when the proper time for it shall arrive. As he reproves his mother for unseasonable haste, so, on the other hand, he gives reason to expect a miracle. The holy Virgin acknowledges both, for she abstains from addressing him any farther; and when she advises the servants to do whatever he commands, she shows that she expects something now. But the instruction conveyed here is still more extensive that whenever the Lord holds us in suspense, and delays his aid, he is not therefore asleep, but, on the contrary, regulates all His works in such a manner that he does nothing but at the proper time. Those who have applied this passage to prove that the time of events is appointed by Fate, are too ridiculous to require a single word to be said for refuting them. The hour of Christ sometimes denotes the hour which had been appointed to him by the Father; and by his time he will afterwards designate what he found to be convenient and suitable for executing the commands of his Father; but in this place he claims the right to take and choose the time for working and for displaying his Divine power.

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.

(4) Woman, what have I to do with thee?—This is an old battle-ground between Protestant and Romanist expositors. The former have found in each clause of the sentence a condemnation of Mariolatry; the latter have sought explanations not inconsistent with their faith and practice. It may be hoped that the day is now past, when anything other than thoughts of reverence and honour is to be connected with the title “Woman,” least of all in the words of One who claimed as His own highest dignity Sonship of, identity with, humanity; and who was here addressing the mother to whom He had been subject, and from whom His own humanity had been derived. Were proof needed of the tenderness which underlies the word as used by Him, it would be found in the other instances which the Gospels supply. . It is spoken only to the Syro-Phœnician whose faith is great (Mat_15:28); to the daughter of Abraham loosed from her infirmity (Luk_13:12); and, in this Gospel, to the Samaritan embracing the higher faith (Joh_4:21); perhaps to the sinner whom He does not condemn (Joh_8:10); to the same mother from the cross (Joh_19:26); and to Mary Magdalene in tears (Joh_20:13; Joh_20:15).

Still the second part of the sentence declares beyond all doubt that the two regarded His life-work from stand-points so different that there is nothing common between them. It is literally, What is that to me and to thee? The parallels for the form of the question are Jos_22:24; Jdg_11:12; 2Sa_16:10; 1Ki_17:18; 2Ki_3:13; and the thrice-recorded question of the demoniac (Mat_8:29; Mar_1:24; Luk_8:28). The real parallel is in this Gospel in Joh_7:6. Mother and brethren alike regarded life in its events; for Him it is an unchanging principle. For them, action is determined by the outer stimulus; for Him, by the eternal will of the Father. Their hour is always ready; His is the development of a law. His answer is another form of that question kept in her heart: “Wist ye not that I must be about My Father’s business?” but “they understood not the saying which He spake unto them” (Luk_2:49).

Mine hour is not yet come—i.e., the hour for My being openly manifested as the Messiah. (Comp. especially Joh_2:16; Joh_8:20; Joh_12:23; Joh_17:1.)

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

4. Woman, what have I to do with thee?] S. John alone of all the Evangelists never gives the Virgin’s name. Here, as so often, he assumes that his readers know the main points in the Gospel narrative: or it may be part of the reserve which he exhibits with regard to all that nearly concerns himself. Christ’s Mother had become his mother (Joh_19:26-27). He nowhere mentions his brother James.

Treatises have been written to shew that these words do not contain a rebuke; for if Christ here rebukes His Mother, it cannot be maintained that she is immaculate. ‘Woman’ of course implies no rebuke; the Greek might more fairly be rendered ‘Lady’ (comp. Joh_19:26), At the same time it marks a difference between the Divine Son and the earthly parent: He does not say, ‘Mother.’ But ‘what have I to do with thee?’ does imply rebuke, as is evident from the other passages where the phrase occurs, Jdg_11:12; 1Ki_17:18; 2Ki_3:13; Mat_8:29; Mar_1:24; Luk_8:28. Only in one passage does the meaning seem to vary: in 2Ch_35:21 the question seems to mean ‘why need we quarrel?’ rather than ‘what have we in common?’ But such a meaning, if possible there, would be quite inappropriate here. The further question has been asked,—what was she rebuked for? Chrysostom thinks for vanity; she wished to glorify herself through her Son. More probably for interference: He will help, but in His own way, and in His own time. Comp. Luk_2:51.

mine hour] The meaning of ‘My hour’ and ‘His hour’ in this Gospel depends in each case on the context. There cannot here be any reference to His death; rather it means His hour for ‘manifesting forth His glory’ (Joh_2:11) as the Messiah by working miracles. The exact moment was still in the future. Comp. Joh_7:8, where He for the moment refuses what He soon after does; and Joh_12:23, Joh_17:1, which confirm the meaning here given to ‘hour.’

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.

4 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come.

Ver. 4. What have I to do with thee? &c.] Is it fit to prescribe to the only wise God? to send for the king by a post? The Chinese whip their gods if they come not at a call.

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.

Woman - This term, as used here, seems to imply reproof, as if she was interfering in that which did not properly concern her; but it is evident that no such reproof or disrespect was intended by the use of the term “woman” instead of “mother.” It is the same term by which he tenderly addressed Mary Magdalene after his resurrection Joh 20:15, and his mother when he was on the cross, Joh 19:26. Compare also Mat 15:28; Joh 4:21; 1Co 7:16.

What have I to do with thee? - See the notes at Mat 8:29. This expression is sometimes used to denote indignation or contempt. See Jdg 11:12; 2Sa 16:10; 1Ki 17:18. But it is not probable that it denoted either in this place; if it did, it was a mild reproof of Mary for attempting to control or direct him in his power of working miracles. Most of the ancients supposed this to be the intention of Jesus. The words sound to us harsh, but they might have been spoken in a tender manner, and not have been intended as a reproof. It is clear that he did not intend to refuse to provide wine, but only to delay it a little; and the design was, therefore, to compose the anxiety of Mary, and to prevent her being solicitous about it. It may, then, be thus expressed: “My mother, be not anxious. To you and to me this should not be a matter of solicitude. The proper time of my interfering has not yet come. When that is come I will furnish a supply, and in the meantime neither you nor I should be solicitous.” Thus understood, it is so far from being a “harsh reproof,” that it was a mild exhortation for her to dismiss her fears and to put proper trust in him.

Mine hour ... - My time. The proper time for my interposing. Perhaps the wine was not yet entirely exhausted. The wine had begun to fail, but he would not work a miracle until it was entirely gone, that the miracle might be free-from all possibility of suspicion. It does not mean that the proper time for his working a miracle, or entering. on his public work had not come, but that the proper time for his interposing there had not arrived.

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

Some of the Fathers have spoken without sufficient precaution on this action of the blessed Virgin; supposing she was actuated by some inclination to vanity, in begging her Son perform a miracle on this occasion; that some of the glory of it might accrue to her, and that on this account our Saviour answers her with severity, saying, Woman, (not Mother) what is it to thee or me. Other Fathers, with more reason, attribute the interference of the blessed Virgin to her charity and compassion for the new married couple. Whatever turn be given to our Saviour’s answer, it must be acknowledged it has in it the appearance of something severe. But the Fathers have explained it with mildness, observing that our Saviour only meant to say, Mother, what affair is it of ours if they want wine? Ought we to concern ourselves about that? Others think that he wished, by these words, to let his Mother know that she must not forestall the time appointed by the heavenly Father, as if her demand were unseasonable and out of time. But most of the Fathers and best commentators understand, that he speaks here not as man and Son of Mary, but as God; and in that quality, he observes to his Mother, I have nothing in common with you. It is not for you to prescribe when miracles are to be performed, which are not to be expected in compliance with any human respect. I know when my power is to be manifested for the greater glory of God. (Calmet) ---See the like forms of speech, Mark i. 24; Luke iv. 34; &c. --- My hour is not yet come. It is not yet time. He waited till the wine was quite done, lest any should believe that he had only increased the quantity, or had only mixed water with the wine. He would have his first miracle to be incontestable, and that all the company should be witnesses of it. (St. Augustine, et alii patres passim. --- Christ’s first miracle in the New Testament, was a kind of transubstantiation in changing water into wine; the first miracle Moses performed when sent to the Jews, was transubstantiation. (Exodus iv.) The first Moses and Aaron performed, when sent to the Egyptians, was transubstantiation. (Exodus vii.)

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

That it was ordinary with the Jews, speaking to women, to call them by the name of their sex, is plain from Mat 15:28; Luk 13:12; Luk 22:57; Joh 4:21. But that, speaking to their relations, they were wont to own their relation in their compellation, sometimes is also evident, from 1Ki 2:20, Ask on, my mother. So as our Saviour’s here calling the blessed virgin, Woman, not mother, is agreed by most to signify to her, that in this thing he did not own her as his mother, and so clothed with an authority to command him. And indeed so much the next words (what have I to do with thee?) signify, which is a form of speech that both signifies some displeasure for her unseasonable interrupting him, and also that she had no right nor authority upon him in this thing. See the use of the same phrase, Jdg 11:12; 2Sa 16:10; Ezr 4:3; Mat 8:29; 27:19. None was more obedient and respective to his parents than our Saviour, Luk 2:51, therein fulfilling the will of God, Jer 35:13,14; but in the business of his calling he regarded them not, Mat 12:48; Luk 2:49; and hath hereby taught us our duty, to prefer our obedience to our heavenly Father before our obedience to any earthly relation, Mat 5:37; Luk 14:26. He hath also hereby taught us, that the blessed virgin is not to be preferred before her Son (as the papists do). Besides this, our Lord giveth another reason for his not present hearkening to his mother,

mine hour is not yet come; either, because the time was not yet come to work miracles publicly; or to show her, that she was not to prescribe the time to him when he should work miraculously; thereby also showing us, that for things in this life we are to submit our desires to the Divine will, and to wait God’s leisure; yet by this expression he also gives her some hopes that he would in his own time supply this want.

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

4. Woman—The fact that our Lord on the cross (Joh_19:26) addressed his mother by the same term woman, at the most tender moment of his earthly life, shows that the word is as respectful as the term lady, and scarcely less affectionate than the term mother. See Mat_15:28; Luk_13:12; Joh_4:21; Joh_20:13. The question, What have I to do with thee? reads literally, What to me and to thee? The phrase occurs repeatedly in Scripture. Jos_22:24; Jdg_11:12; Mar_1:24. It clearly intimates that a matter is started upon which there could be no argument or discussion. The Protestant Church rightly interprets the language as informing the mother, that over the exercise of his official functions neither the authority of his human parent, nor the influence of his blood relations or private friends, have any right of control or interference. As in the temptation Jesus had established the principle that miracles must not be performed (for his own low self-interest, so, now, he declares that no fleshly relationship must expect to derive profit of a worldly nature from its connection with him.

Mine hour is not yet come—By his hour or time, we understand some divinely-appointed crisis, or some transition-point in his history, opening some new stage, or initiating some new event. He did not go to be baptized by John until his hour arrived. He was led of the Spirit, (Mat_4:1,) at the proper point or hour, to his temptation. He uttered no self-testimony until the Baptist had attested him. Thus his every instant was obediently regulated by the Divine order. His every movement, being connected with the clock-work of God’s oversight, was timed by the pointing of the minute or second hand to its dot. The witness of the Father’s spirit with his own spirit announces to him the instant when his hour is come. In the present case his hour is the point of time when his era of miracles should commence. Jesus had now a request for miracle from his human mother; but no signal from his divine Father. So (Joh_7:30) his hour was not yet come to surrender to his murderers; until (Joh_17:1) he ejaculates, Father, the hour IS come! namely, of his glorification through death. Also (Joh_7:8) my time is not yet fully come; namely, of going up to the Feast of Tabernacles. Compare Joh_7:30; Joh_8:30; Joh_12:23; Joh_12:27; Joh_13:1; Joh_16:21.

But how happens it that his hour did come so soon? For, probably, upon the same day it was that the miracle was performed. We reply that his hour probably came immediately upon uttering this last sentence. As soon as all fleshly claim to hold control over, or gain emolument by, his Messianic power was rejected—as soon as his mother retired to her proper position—then was the last obstacle removed; his area of action immediately opened, and the hour to manifest forth by miracle his glory had arrived.

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

With this thought, the reply of Jesus to the premature suggestion of the mother becomes perfectly comprehensible. What is there to me and thee, O woman? Mine hour has not yet come. The appellation "woman" was used by him upon the cross, when he was concerned most humanly and tenderly with her great grief and desolation, and therefore had no breath of unfilial harshness in it. (cf. Joh_19:26; Dio Cassius, "Hist.," 51:12, where Augustus addresses Cleopatra, Yarsei w gunai . Maldonatus admits that Catholics "in varias tamen de sensu hujus loci sententias distracti sunt But the proverbial Ti emoi kai soi ; wheresoever the words occur, imply, if net personal estrangement, yet as to the matter in hand some divergence of feeling. (see Mat_8:29 Mar_1:24 Luk_8:28; see also 2Sa_16:10 2Ch_35:21) Almost all commentators seem to suggest that our Lord refused to be guided by a mother"s direction; that he wished her to understand that he was breaking off from her control and from that silent submission which he had hitherto willingly yielded (so Meyer, Hengstenberg, Godet, Westcott, Tholuck, Ebrard, and Lange). Schaff has quoted from the Fathers before the Nestorian controversy dear proof that they admitted censure, and therefore blame, in the blessed Virgin Mary.

Still, it seems to me that the cause of the censure, coupled with an immediate response to her special request about the wine, has not been sufficiently appreciated, he said, "Mine hour is not yet come." It would have come if the provision of wine was the ground of divergence of sentiment; if the moment for the supply of these temporal wants were the point of difference between them. The "hour" for Christ to tell the world all that Mary knew had not come. The hour of the full revelation of his Messianic claims had not come, nor did it come in the temple, or by the lake, or in the feast day; not till the awful moment of rejection, when death was hovering over him, and the blow was about to fall, did he say, "The hour has come" (see Joh_12:23 Joh_17:1) the hour of his greatest glory. "The hour had not yet come." The hour would come when rivers of living water would be supplied to all those who come to him; when the blood he would shed would be a Divine stream, clear as crystal, for the refreshment of all nations; when at another marriage supper of a saved humanity the precious blood should be an ample supply of costly wine for all the world. Moreover, the link at the present moment between our Lord and his mother must begin to shade into something more spiritual. It was not possible that he should be holden by it. A sword would pierce through her maternal heart when she became gradually alive to the fact that they that do the will of his Father, the same were his "brothers, sisters, and mother.

"Mine hour is not yet come.

God has his own times for all his works. His Son, Christ Jesus, knew no haste; he laboured sometimes to exhaustion; he shrank from no suffering or privation. Yet he was thirty years of age before he began his ministry; and now and again in the course of that ministry he withdrew from the public gaze. When the time came for conflict and death, he was ready for the encounter. But until the time came he was not to be forced into the position which he knew he was to take. Neither the urgency of his mother and his brethren, nor the restlessness of some of his disciples, nor the impulses of the multitude, could move him to take a step for which he was not yet prepared. "Mine hour," said he, "is not yet come." There was

I AN HOUR FOR HIS ADVENT. This seems to us to have come late in the history of our sinful humanity. But it was in "the fulness of the time" that Jesus came.

II A SEASON FOR HIS ENTRANCE UPON THE PUBLIC MINISTRY. Why this should have been deferred so long, it is impossible for us to say; but there was a sufficient reason. A delay which seems to us protracted is as a moment to the Eternal.

III A TIME FOR THE MANIFESTATION OF HIS GLORY BY MIRACLES. Again and again the Jews, and even his own disciples, impatiently urged the Lord to assert his supernatural power. It was characteristic of him that he commenced his series of "signs" in the quiet domestic scene at Cana. He was not to be hastened in this or in any of his plans.

IV AN HOUR FOR HIS GIVING UP OF HIMSELF TO DIE. We cannot read the words of the text, spoken at the commencement of his public life, without having our thoughts carried, by way of contrast, to the close of that wonderful career, when our Lord exclaimed, "Father, the hour is come!" Until then, none could take from him his life.

V A TIME FOR THE OUTPOURING OF THE HOLY SPIRIT, AND FOR THE EVANGELIZATION OF THE WORLD. Jesus had waited, and, after his ascension, his disciples were enjoined to wait. The promise of the Father was to be fulfilled in its appointed time; when they should receive power from on high, then was to commence the great work of their life.

VI AN HOUR FOR THE SECOND COMING. "God hath appointed a day." "Of that day and hour knoweth no man." Why should we, like Mary, like the short-sighted disciples, urge and implore the immediate appearance of the Lord? His hour has not yet arrived, or he himself would be here. It is ours reverently to expect, patiently to wait and hope. "He that cometh will come, and will not tarry. T.

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

Jesus saith to her, Woman - So our Lord speaks also, chap. xix, 26. It is probable this was the constant appellation which he used to her. He regarded his Father above all, not knowing even his mother after the flesh. What is it to me and thee? A mild reproof of her inordinate concern and untimely interposal. Mine hour is not yet come - The time of my working this miracle, or of my going away. May we not learn hence, if his mother was rebuked for attempting to direct him in the days of his flesh, how absurd it is to address her as if she had a right to command him, on the throne of his glory? Likewise how indecent it is for us to direct his supreme wisdom, as to the time or manner in which he shall appear for us in any of the exigencies of life!

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

4. Woman, what have I do to with thee? These words in our language sound harsh and almost rude, but the term rendered woman was respectful and gentle (John 19:26). This language, partly a rebuke, to Mary, shows very plainly that the Catholic fiction of Mary being immaculate, the “Queen of Heaven,” and “the Mother of God,” is all nonsensical. Mine hour is not yet come. The hour of his full manifestation, as the divine King of Israel.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

4. τί ἐμοὶ κ. σοί, γύναι; S. John alone of all the Evangelists never gives the Virgin’s name. Here, as so often, he assumes that his readers know the main points in the Gospel narrative: or it may be part of the reserve which he exhibits with regard to all that nearly concerns himself. Christ’s Mother had become his mother (Joh 19:26-27). He nowhere mentions his brother James.

Treatises have been written to shew that these words do not contain a rebuke; for if Christ here rebukes His Mother, it cannot be maintained that she is immaculate. ‘Woman’ of course implies no rebuke; the Greek might more fairly be rendered ‘Lady’ (comp. Joh 19:26). At the same time it marks a difference between the Divine Son and the earthly parent: He does not say, ‘Mother.’ The sword is beginning to pierce her heart, as the earthly ties between parent and child begin to be severed. The severance is taken a stage further, Mat 12:46-50, and completed on the Cross (Joh 19:26). But ‘what have I to do with thee?’ does imply rebuke, as is evident from the other passages where the phrase occurs, Jdg 11:12; 1Ki 17:18; 2Ki 3:13; Mat 8:29; Mar 1:24; Luk 8:28. Only in one passage does the meaning seem to vary: in 2Ch 35:21 the question seems to mean ‘why need we quarrel?’ rather than ‘what have we in common?’ But such a meaning, if possible there, would be quite inappropriate here. The further question has been asked,—what was she rebuked for? S. Chrysostom thinks for vanity; she wished to glorify herself through her Son. More probably for interference: He will help, and He will manifest Himself, but in His own way, and in His own time. Comp. Luk 2:51.

ἡ ὥρα μου. The meaning of ‘My hour’ and ‘His hour’ in this Gospel depends in each case on the context. There cannot here be any reference to His death; rather it means His hour for ‘manifesting forth His glory’ (Joh 2:11) as the Messiah by working miracles. The exact moment was still in the future. Comp. Joh 7:8, where He for the moment refuses what He soon after does; and Joh 12:23, Joh 17:1, which confirm the meaning here given to ‘hour.’

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.

4.] The answer of our Lord is beyond question one of reproof, and disclaimer of participation in the grounds on which the request was made. See instances, besides reff., in Jos 22:24: Mar 1:24. And so all the early expositors understood it. Irenæus (iii. 16. 6, p. 206) says, “Dominus repellens ejus intempestivam festinationem, dixit,” &c.;—and Chrysostom, ἐβούλετο.… ἑαυτὴν λαμπροτέραν ποιῆσαι διὰ τοῦ παιδός, and therefore He σφοδρότερον ἀπεκρίνατο. Hom. xxi. in Joh., vol. viii. p. 122. The Romanist expositors mostly endeavour to divest the answer of any aspect of rebuke, and maintain that it was so uttered for our sakes alone, to teach us that He did not perform His miracles from regard to human affinity, but solely from love and His object of manifesting His glory. So Maldonatus. And this is true:—but first among those to be taught this, was she herself, who had tempted Him to work a miracle from that regard.

It has perhaps not been enough noticed, that in this answer the Lord declares His period of subjection to her as His earthly parent to be at an end. Henceforth His thoughts are not her thoughts. At twelve years of age, see Luk 2:49, He answers ‘thy father and I,’ by ‘My Father:’—now, He is to be no longer before the world as Mary’s son, but as sanctified by the Father and sent into the world:—compare Mat 12:48-50, and Luk 11:27, Luk 11:28, and see Stier’s admirable remarks, R. J. i. 39, edn. 2, also Olshausen’s, ii. 81.

γύναι] There is no reproach in this term: but rather respect. The Lord henceforth uses it towards her, not calling her ‘mother,’ even on the Cross (see ch. 19:26), doubtless for the reason alleged above.

οὔπω ἥκ. ἡ ὥρα μου] This expression is generally used in John of the time of the Death of Christ: see reff. But it is only so used because His death is in those passages the subject naturally underlying the narrative. It is, any fixed or appointed time;—and therefore here, the appointed time of His self-manifestation by miracles. This time was not yet come, but was close at hand. Some have supposed that the wine was not yet wholly exhausted, and that our Lord would wait till the miracle should be undoubted (so Trench, p. 192): but Stier well remarks that the known depth of all His early sayings forbids us from attaching only this meaning to it;—and he sees in it a reference to the great marriage-feast and the new fruit of the vine in the Kingdom of God (i. 41, edn. 2). If this be so, it can be only in the background; the words must have had a present meaning, and I believe it to be, ‘My time, the time at which, from the Father’s appointment and my own concurring will, I am to begin miraculous working, is not yet arrived: forestall it not.’ Very similarly He speaks, ch. 7:6, to His brethren, and yet afterwards goes up to the feast. The notion that ἡ ὥρα μου refers to the hour of our Lord’s human infirmity on the Cross when (ch. 19:27) He “acknowledged her as His mother,” Wordsw., seems wholly unfounded. Where do we find any such special acknowledgment there? And why should we go out of our way for a fanciful sense of words which bear an excellent meaning as referring to circumstances then present?

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

4. τί ἐμοὶ καὶ σοί; is a phrase, translated from the Hebrew, occurring several times in the Greek Bible, and always suggestive of diversity of opinion or interest. Thus in Jdg 11:12 Jephthah says τί ἐμοὶ καὶ σοί; in hostile challenge to the King of the Ammonites. David (2Sa 16:10) says τί ἐμοὶ καὶ ὑμῖν; to the sons of Zeruiah, meaning that he does not agree with their advice. The Woman of Sarepta (1Ki 17:18) reproaches Elijah with the same phrase. Elisha uses it in declining to help King Jehoram (2Ki 3:13). Neco, King of Egypt, says to Josiah, τί ἐμοὶ καὶ σοι; meaning, “Why should we fight? I am not marching against you” (2Ch 35:21). And in Mar 5:7 the man with the unclean spirit says the same thing to Jesus, “Why do you concern yourself with me? Let me alone” (cf. Mar 1:24, Mat 8:29).

The phrase does not always imply reproach, but it suggests it. Here it seems to be a gentle suggestion of misunderstanding: “I shall see to that; it will be better that you should leave it to me.” This is the view of Irenaeus: “Dominus repellens eius intempestivam festinationem, dixit, etc.” (Hær. iii. 17. 7).

γύναι, as a vocative, does not convey any idea of rebuke or reproach, as is clear from the tender γύναι, ἴδε ὁ υἱός σου of 19:26. It was thus that Augustus addressed Cleopatra (Dio, Lev 12:5) and Ulysses addressed Penelope (Odyssey, 19. 555). But, nevertheless, that Jesus should call His mother γύναι, and not μήτερ, as would be natural, indicates that the time is past for the exercise of any maternal authority on her part.

οὔπω ἥκει ἡ ὥρα μου means primarily, in this context, that the moment had not come for Jesus to intervene; that He was conscious of the failure of the wine, and did not need to be reminded of it. At the proper moment, He would act, if necessary.

The evangelist, however, means something more by the record of this saying of Jesus. He places similar words in His mouth more than once. ὁ καιρὸς ὁ ἐμὸς οὔπω πάρεστιν (πεπλήρωται) (7:6, 8) means that the time had not come for the public manifestation of Himself as Messiah. At 12:23 Jesus says that the hour of His Death has come: ἐλήλυθευ ἡ ὥρα ἵνα δοξασθῇ ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου (cf. 12:27); and, again, Πάτερ, ἐλήλυθεν ἡ ὥρα (17:1; cf. 13:1). Jn. in his own person speaks similarly of the appointed hour of the manifestation and death of Jesus, e.g. οὔπω ἐληλύθει ἡ ὥρα αὐτοῦ (7:30; cf. 8:20).

Twice in Mt.’s account of the Passion, similar phrases are used, viz. ὁ καιρός μου ἐγγύς ἐστι (Mat 26:18) and ἤγγικεν ἡ ὥρα (Mat 26:45, Mar 14:41); and Jesus frequently in the Synoptic narrative predicts death as the conclusion of His public ministry. But the Fourth Gospel is written from beginning to end sub specie æternitatis; the predestined end is foreseen from the beginning. (See on 3:14 for Jn.’s use of δεῖ.) It is as inevitable as is the hour of a woman’s travail (16:21). Bearing this in mind, it is probable that Jn. meant his readers to understand by the words “Mine hour is not yet come” spoken at the Marriage Feast at Cana, that the moment had not yet come for the public manifestation by Jesus of Himself as Messiah, the first sign of this Epiphany being the miracle of the water turned into wine.

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

Woman. Implying no severity nor disrespect. Compare Joh 20:13, 15. It was a highly respectful and affectionate mode of address.

What have I to do with thee [τι εμοι και σοι] . Literally, what is there to me and to thee. See on Mr 5:7, and compare Mt 8:29; Mt 27:19; Mr 1:24; Luk 8:28. It occurs often in the Old Testament, 2Sa 16:10; 1Ki 17:18, etc. Though in a gentle and affectionate manner, Jesus rejects her interference, intending to supply the demand in His own way. Compare Joh 6:6. Wyc., What to me and to thee, thou woman ?

Mine hour is not yet come. Compare Joh 8:20; Joh 12:23; Joh 13:1. In every case the coming of the hour indicates some crisis in the personal life of the Lord, more commonly His passion. Here the hour of His Messianic manifestation (ver. 11).

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

Ver. 4. “Jesus saith to her: What is there between me and thee, woman? My hour is not yet come.”

Jesus makes Mary sensible of her incompetency in the region into which she intrudes. The career on which He has just entered, is that in which He depends only on His Father; His motto henceforth is: My Father and I. Mary must learn to know in her son theservant of Jehovah, of Jehovah only. The expression “What is there between me and thee?” is a frequent one in the Old Testament. Comp. Jdg 11:12; 2Sa 16:10; 1Ki 17:18; 2Ki 3:13. We even meet it, sometimes, in profane Greek; thus the reply of a Stoic to a jester is quoted, who asked him, at the moment when their vessel was about to sink, whether shipwreck was an evil or not: “What is there between us and thee, O man? We perish, and thou permittest thyself to jest!” This formula signifies, that the community of feeling to which one of the interlocutors appeals is rejected by the other, at least in the particular point which is in question. Mary had, no doubt, well understood that a great change was being wrought in the life of her son; but, as often happens with our religious knowledge, she had not drawn from this grave fact the practical consequence which concerned her personally. And thus, as Baumlein says, Jesus finds Himself in a position to reject the influence which she presumes still to exercise over Him. The address γύναι, woman, is thereby explained. In the language in which Jesus spoke, as well as in the Greek language, this term involves nothing contrary to respect and affection. In Dio Cassius, a queen is accosted by Augustus with this expression. Jesus Himself uses it in addressing His mother at a moment of inexpressible tenderness, when, from His elevation on the cross, He speaks to her for the last time, Joh 19:26. Here this expression, entirely respectful though it may be, gives Mary to understand, that, in the sphere on which Jesus has just entered, her title of mother has no longer any part to play.

“Here for Mary,” as Luthardt well observes, “is the beginning of a painful education.” The middle point of this education will be marked by the question of Jesus, “Who is my mother, and who are my brethren?” (Luk 8:19 f.) The end will be that second address: Woman (Joh 19:26), which will definitely break the earthly relation between the mother and the son. Mary feels at this moment, for the first time, the point of the sword which, at the foot of the cross, shall pierce through her heart. After having made her sensible of her incompetency, Jesus gives the ground of His refusal.

The words: “My hour is not yet come” have been understood by Euthymius, Meyer, Hengstenberg, Lange and Riggenbach (Leben des Herru Jesu, p. 374), in a very restricted sense: “the hour for performing the desired miracle.” The following words of Mary to the servants, according to this view, would imply two things: the first, that Jesus received a little later from His Father an inward sign which permitted Him to comply with His mother’s wish; and the second, that by a gesture or a word, He made known to her this new circumstance. This is to add much to the text. Besides, how could Jesus, before having received any indication of His Father’s will, have said: “not yet,” a word which would necessarily mean that the permission will be granted Him later. Finally, this weakened sense which is here given to the expression “my hour” does not correspond with the solemn meaning which is attached to this term throughout our whole Gospel. If it were desired to hold to this weakened meaning, it would be still better to give to this clause, with Gregory of Nazianzum, an interrogative turn: “Is not the hour (of my emancipation, of my autonomy) come?”

Let us remark that the expression “my hour” is here connected with the verb is come, as in all the passages in John where it is taken in its weightiest sense: “His hour was not yet come” (Joh 7:30; Joh 8:20, comp. Joh 13:1); “The hour is come” (Joh 12:23; Joh 17:1). His hour, in all these passages, is that of His Messianic manifestation, especially through His death and through the glorification which should follow it. The analogous expression my time, Joh 7:6, is also applied to His Messianic manifestation, but through the royal entry into Jerusalem. This is the meaning which seems to me to prevail here. Jesus makes known to Mary, impatient to see Him mount the steps of His throne, that the hour of the inauguration of His Messianic royalty has not yet struck. It is in His capital, Jerusalem, in His palace, the Temple, and not in the centre of His family, that His solemn manifestation as Messiah must take place (Mal 3:1 : “And then He shall enter into His temple”).

This sense of the expression “my hour” could not be strange to the mind of Mary. How many times, in her conversations with Jesus, she had doubtless herself used this expression when asking Him: Will thine hour come at last? That hour was the one towards which all her desire as an Israelite and a mother moved forward. Jesus rejects Mary’s request, but only so far as it has something of ambition. How often in His conversations, He replies less to the question which is addressed to Him than to the spirit in which it is put (comp. Joh 2:19; Joh 3:3; Joh 6:26). He thus lays hold of the person of His interlocutor even in his inmost self. Mary desires a brilliant miracle, as a public sign of His coming. Jesus penetrates this ambitious thought and traces a boundary for Mary’s desires which she should no more attempt to cross. But this does not prevent His understanding that along with this, there is something to be done in view of the present difficulty.

Frédéric Louis Godet — Commentaries on Luke, John, Romans, and 1 Corinthians — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1870s–1890s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.