Mary in the Gospel of John
Fr. J. Patrick Gaffney, SMM
John’s Gospel offers unique challenges to the reader who hopes to sound its depths. This first segment of Mary in the Gospel of John will examine some of the prerequisite interpretative tools which enable us to discover John’s deep understanding of the Mother of Jesus. In a subsequent issue, we will follow this study by a resume of contemporary thought concerning the time, author and place of composition. Only then will we be able to enter into an investigation of the mariology of John.
-1- The first tool needed in any attempt to understand John‘s rather unique thought is the evangelist’s two-tiered method of teaching. We must be careful not to consider the apparent meaning of the text as its full significance. So often there is a deeper, more profound preaching found within John’s descriptions, a meaning which can elude us if we are not especially attentive to the Gospel’s implicit references to the Old Testament. To declare that the marriage feast of Cana is nothing more than a description of an embarrassing situation—the banquet ran out of wine—which Jesus rescued by changing an incredibly enormous amount of water into wine, is to miss John’s deepest teaching. On a more profound level, the event (as we will see in some detail) is a magnificent proclamation of Jesus the fulfillment of the Old Testament: Jesus the Bridegroom, the Church His Bride.
John’s Gospel calls for arduous study and we would add, a contemplative spirit. It is as if this poetic, final canonical Gospel was written for meditation which leads us to contemplate the magnificence of the Eternal Word made flesh. At times this double significance of an event – or of a word – is made clear by Jesus or the evangelist (cf. the Nicodemus episode); at other times it is implied (cf. the marriage feast at Cana). Only by placing ourselves within the context of this “prayer group of John,” can we pierce through to the true “depth” of the evangelist’s mystical thought. It is when we perceive this double-tiered teaching of John—the “earthly” and the “heavenly” levels—that we begin to see the profound beauty of his proclamation of the Good News.
Painting: Pieta, Roger van der Weyden (1400-1461)
Mary in the Gospel of John
In a future series of articles, The Queen will present the scriptural portrait of Mary as it appears in the synoptic Gospels (i.e., Matthew, Mark and Luke). In this first of a series of articles: Mary in the Gospel of John, the divinely inspired portrait of Our Lady which John presents is more profound than that of Matthew and Mark and, in many ways, even more beautiful than that of Luke. The next several publications of The Queen will explore what the Fourth Gospel has to say about Mary.
2. Following on this two level meaning of John’s thought, is the evangelists use of misunderstanding. The audience at times becomes confused by this mystical or double-tiered preaching, and this enables Jesus or the evangelist to clarify what Jesus is stating. This is seen in Nicodemus’ misunderstanding of Jesus’ demand that he be “born again.” By limiting himself to the “earthly,” Nicodemus had failed to understand the more profound or “heavenly” meaning of Jesus’ words. It also gives Jesus the opportunity to stress the deeper significance of His preaching. This theme of misunderstanding is found in a unique manner in John’s famous discourse of the bread of life (chapter six). The synagogue audience believes that it has misunderstood Jesus when they hear Him speak of His flesh as food and His blood as drink, for the congregation is taking these words literally. But this “misunderstanding” is actually the correct understanding as Jesus repeats several times, stressing that his flesh is real food and his blood real drink. This questioning by the crowd is the occasion for Jesus to
clarify the profound truth of his Eucharistic presence.
However, as noted above, this presence of a deeper meaning is not always made explicit. Often, John seems to presume that the reader is
“spiritual” enough to plumb the depths of his Gospel.
3. Another important tool used in the study of John’s Gospel is called inclusion. A detail or specific thought found at the beginning of a section is repeated at the conclusion of the section. This teaching or “antiphon” enables John to package his Gospel into units. much like the antiphons of the Divine Office break up the psalms or canticles. Even more so, it presumes that the thought of the “antiphon” radiates throughout the contents so “included” or “packaged.” For example, the opening thought of John is the divinity of Jesus: “In the beginning was the Word . . . and the Word was God . . . and the Word became flesh.” The closing thought is identical, for in chapter 20, Thomas cries out: “My Lord and My God” (note that chapter 21 is an apparent addition – definitely inspired – to the text). This explicit stress on the divinity of Jesus (called “high Christology”) pervades the entire Gospel “antiphoned” by this detail.
There are inclusions within inclusions and there are some which are more explicit than others. For example, the detail on Cana in Galilee
explicitly packages the miracles wrought there (cf. 2:11 and 4:46, 54). That section is within an even larger unit, the reference or antiphon 0f the paschal lamb found in 1:29 and 19:36. Most important for Mariology is the reference to the presence of Mary, the Mother of Jesus, at the beginning of the signs at Cana in Galilee (chapter 2) and the repeated reference to the presence of Mary, the Mother of Jesus, at the Cross (chapter 19). Mary is the antiphon of the ministry of Jesus from His first miracle to the consummation of His ministry on Calvary. The full import of this insight for an understanding of Mary will become clearer as we proceed in our study of Mary in the Gospel of John.
Did you notice that we have packaged this entire article under the antiphon of “Mary in the Gospel of John”? An example of “inclusion’!
