42: Transfiguration (4/4), the Assumption and Cana

Continuation of 41: Transfiguration (3/4) and St. John's Gospel

The Assumption

First, in a few words, I would like to address some aspects of the Assumption of Mary into heaven with her body.

Evil is not touching her body. Death (as consequence of Evil, sin, the first sin) doesn’t have a grip over her. But not only that. If on one hand we know that Jesus ascends into heaven and that He sits "at the right hand of the Father”, on the other hand, we can say that Mary, without dying, “ascends” into heaven. She doesn’t die, she just crosses the barrier. We can as well say that she sits at Jesus' right hand.
We can say that Jesus is victorious in Her, in the sense that Mary is experiencing the total effects of the Resurrection of the body of the Lord in an exceptional way: her body is now (before the final Resurrection) admitted to be close by the body of the Lord who is seated at the right hand of the Father.

Since Mary is the archetype of Jesus' follower, we can say that the Church, and each one of us is, in a way, in Her, already victorious. This is why she is said to be "our hope". We hope to reach the point were she is. She already reached the final destination, with her body.

Mary's Coronation

Since as well we are invited to receive Mary as our Mother (John 19), our Mould, and receive in us her immaculate capacity to say "yes", to believe, to follow Jesus, and become "like her", "for Jesus", we may say that the fact that she now is at the right hand of Jesus, in heaven, this gives her (and us, in her) a totally different status and "power" (or "influence" if you prefer).
There is no place closer to Jesus, right now, than Mary's one. In this sense, He is totally victorious in her and, in a way, she is "equal" to Him, in the sense that she loves Him as He loves her.

Note: see what saint John of the Cross, in "the Living flame of love", says about the possibility of "equality of love" for us already on earth. Very important!

Cana's wedding

Now, let us go back to the Transfiguration and its very personal formulation in his Gospel by saint John (see previous posts).

This equality between Jesus and Mary, or Mary's status in front of Jesus is presented to us in Cana (John 2:1-11). It might not appear at a first glimpse, but if you give it a close and very long consideration, you'll discover it yourself.

After years and years of pondering about what happened and all the Graces he continued to receive from God, and all what he received from Mary, it seems that John re-visiting, re-saw that simple wedding (Cana’s) he attended.
He saw through it, like through a stained glass, many many deep things, to the point that he decided (certainly inspired by the Holy Spirit) to make it as his programmatic event, that gave the whole structure to his Gospel, aiming of course toward the Cross, Death and Resurrection.

Let us ask for the Help of the Holy Spirit: through the simple human wedding, the Holy Spirit showed him that "other marriage" that happens between the real Groom and the real Bride (Mary). That "other marriage", secret and sacred, happens the day of the Resurrection. Nobody saw it but John wanted to mention it in a very respectful and discrete way.
That "Marriage" reaches, in a way, a new completion the day of the Assumption. They meet, finally, equally, with their bodies. They “sit” at the same level, with no change anymore. The final victory is expressed here in the person of Mary.

This victory has total influence on us.

Let us get a closer look at Cana: Mary says: “they don’t have wine”. She doesn’t say: “we don’t have wine” because she is (sitting at his right hand) victorious (see image above). She has the Wine, in total quantity and quality. We, poorly, name that: "intercession". It is infinitely much more.

It is first: Union. There is no barrier between Jesus and her. Who can understand the union between Jesus and Mary? Since she is pure, He fills her totally, there is no space in her not occupied by Jesus and His Spirit. Linked to union, there is love = exchange of the Holy Spirit.

It is secondly: Influence. She has a powerful influence over Him. She can want; He fulfils. Difficult for us to understand that consequence of the total transformation of Mary's being in Jesus. But one can try to understand by seeing what already the saints can experience, through the descriptions made by saint John of the Cross and saint Theresa of Avila of the final stages of holiness. And then, if the saints can get all that, this means that the "Mother of all the saints" can get much more. Wouldn't you agree?

Since she is filled by His Grace, she always asks things according to His Will. But still, her “agenda” is: "taking the side" of us humans.

Let us accept and explore that "new world order", that “wedding” of another dimension.

The servants (us) must still listen to Him (“do as much as He’ll tell you to do” (John 2))… but now, with "new ears". Hers.

They will deal with water.

Wine will appear.

They make a human effort (water), helped with the ordinary initial grace, and, through Mary's help/faith, the "new wine" appears. They couldn't even ask for it, they didn't know what it is!!

Thirdly: She has the "new wine". Constantly. She knew the "new wine" will appear. She had no doubt. She has the "new wine" already, therefore what she is asking for in Cana is not for herself (even if she is totally grateful to Jesus, in anticipation, for her own salvation).

John is writing his Gospel very late in his life, much after the Assumption of Mary. This means that he can as contemplate even better Mary in this "position" and can tell us about her with greater depth. With John, don’t you see her sitting, body, soul and spirit, at His Side? Jesus' "door" is totally and constantly opened for her. She has total access to Him. This is as well His will.

It is a fact.

Try to contemplated her, beside Him, you’ll see that “she has the new wine”. All the new wine. Any time. All the time.

The Transfiguration

Fourthly: did you notice that for the Transfiguration, we have a powerful, almost inhuman, event, that scares the 3 Apostles, and that for Cana, it is much more gentle. For the Transfiguration the Eternal Father speaks. For Cana, Mary speaks. Both point out toward Jesus. Both remind us of Moses, coming down from the Mountain, mentioning the Words of God (the two tables of the Covenant), and that the people of God have to listen to them and put them into practise.
- The Father says: "here is my only begotten Son, listen to him".
- Mary would say: here is my son, listen to Him. She actually says: "do whatever He asks you to do" (see John 2).

The Father shows* us His own Son      •      Mary shows* us her own Son

(* "shows" : guides us toward) I am in awe. John seems to have humanised the Transfiguration. Determined to offer it to everybody, through Cana he seems to have made it more accessible, more possible: he saw through that simple wedding that happened in Cana.

More on Cana

Still, Jesus won't call his mother: "mother".
He'll do something better. He'll call her "Woman", "Ishsha".
"Ishsha" (Mary) is taken fro Ish (Jesus).
When for the first time the word "Ishsha" (woman) appears in the Bible? And who uses it for the first time?
"And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman (Ishsha), because she was taken out of Man (Ish)." (Genesis 2:23) Mary is the "New Eve".
That was for the first creation (Genesis 2).
For the "new creation", through Redemption, for the "New Day" that God made (the Resurrection) at Cana, "the third day" (see John 2:1), the New Man calls the one who resembles him and can help him (Genesis 2:18): Woman, Ishsha.
Mary is "bone of his bones" and "flesh of his flesh". The First being to come out of the side of Jesus on the Cross in TheWoman, the New Eve.

This description of Mary goes far beyond what we can imagine!

(End)

41: Transfiguration (3/4) and St. John's Gospel

Continuation of 40: Transfiguration (2/4) and Mass

In this third consecutive Post on the Transfiguration, I would like to address an aspect of it that is rarely addressed by theology: the relationship between St. John (his writings) and the Transfiguration. Let me explain my point:

If we accept (you don't have to) that all the writings of the Bible put under the name of “John” are of the same person,

if we accept that (you don't have to) that same person is John the Apostle,

if we accept that he was one of the three admitted to be the witness of the Lord's Transfiguration, and

if we consider the Transfiguration as something of a transcendental meaning/importance

then we seriously have to wonder:

“how come John is not mentioning the Transfiguration in his Gospel?!”

In other words we can say: “The Transfiguration certainly left a great and living influence on St. John, and he most probably meditated upon it, time and time again. Since the Transfiguration is that central in Christ's message, one dares to think that most probably John decided to insert it in his Gospel. He didn't do it in an obvious, literal way: there is no account of the Transfiguration in his Gospel. So he probably found a way to mention it, or at least to mention it's essential message. He probably chose to place the Transfiguration in a more “central way”. Indeed, the way the “Transfiguration” is inserted in the Synoptics (Matthew, Mark and Luke) looks a bit off-centred, like a meteorite that landed from nowhere.

The more one deepens the Transfiguration (spending years on meditating on it) the more one sees its transcendental importance, the more one is convinced that: it is impossible for John - who witnessed it - to remain totally silent about it.

It is puzzling! unless one thinks that he probably found a solution to say it, to present it, in a way that is “integral to the message”, and all together “less abstract” (landing from nowhere in the middle of the Gospel, with no other text related to it), “less frightening” (hearing the Voice of the Father, falling scared of the floor: “When the disciples heard this, they fell facedown to the ground, terrified” (Mt 17:6).)

What would you say?

The first thing that one notices in St John's Gospel is the way he presents Jesus' Passion and the Cross. It is not all a suffering moment, it is first and foremost the main moment where God reveals His Glory. On the Cross God is glorified, and the Son is Glorified. The Passion is a moment of Victory for Jesus. One would say that John did meditate that much the Passion and the Cross that God introduced him in a greater depth. You can see John's reaction when he sees Jesus' side transpierced by a spear: “one of the soldiers pierced Jesus’ side with a spear, bringing a sudden flow of blood and water. The man who saw it has given testimony, and his testimony is true. He knows that he tells the truth, and he testifies so that you also may believe.” (John 19:34-35)

More texts about God's Glory at the Cross: “And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began.” (John 17:5; see as well John 13:32) The death of Jesus glorifies God the father. The death of Jesus' disciples does glorify God as well: “Jesus said this to indicate the kind of death by which Peter would glorify God” (John 21:19).

The Cross is then for John the highest point of the manifestation of the Glory of God in Jesus. In that sense, why would one put in the Gospel an “off-centred event” that speaks about the Glory of God (the Transfiguration). In that same vein, you can already see that Luke starts to orientate the Transfiguration toward the Cross and its Glory: “And behold, two men were talking with Him; and they were Moses and Elijah, who, appearing in glory, were speaking of His Exodus [departure] which He was about to accomplish at Jerusalem.“ (Luke 9:30-31)

So, reasonably, one has to find the essence of the Transfiguration and its relationship with the Cross, and how did John plan his Gospel according to this “combination”.

The main structure of the Transfiguration in the the Synoptics (Mt, Mk and Lk) is simple:

a- A Promise of a vision (some who are present here will see the Son of God coming in his Kingdom)

b- The realisation of the Promise (the event itself of the Transfiguration with its 3 steps: climbing, the transfiguration (clothes, face, Moses and Elijah), and the overshadowing (the Cloud and the Voice of the Father).

c- Mentioning that that was a vision.

You'll be amazed to discover that in the Gospel of saint John you can find an event that has the same structure: Cana's wedding (John 2:1-11).

a- The wedding is preceded by a Promise: “Truly, truly, I say to you, you will see the heavens opened and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man” (John 1:51).

b- The wedding itself is the realisation (in a “symbolic” and prophetical way) of this Promise, waiting for the Cross to be the real realisation of it.

c- The wedding ends by a strong statement: “This beginning of His signs Jesus did in Cana of Galilee, and manifested His glory, and His disciples believed in Him.” (John 2:11)

John decides to structure his Gospel, all his Gospel with an event: a wedding.

Note: the least we can say is that this wedding is mysterious. We don't know who is the Groom, who is the Bride. You can guess, but it is not clear. It speaks about “Jesus' hour”. The text itself, if it is read simply as the account of a wedding, it doesn't work. There are too many “holes”/”bumps” that don't allow us to say that John wanted to tell us about a simple miracle (and not a “sign” as he says), and a miracle performed in a wedding. Did Jesus ever perform a useless miracle?! Of course not. What is the point of having “new wine” if the “new wine” didn't mean something else. This mysterious wedding can only be understood at another level because the text itself is not complete or intelligible if taken “to the letter”.

John decides to put something else equivalent to the Transfiguration not only in the beginning of his Gospel, but as a structural event that will dictate its structure to the whole Gospel (we will go through that).

You have the right to complain about these assertions, saying that: there are not proofs. Just give me some time in order, not to proof anything (because you are the one who can see it for yourself), but just to show it.

(to be continued...)

Are you sure you know Jesus? 2/..

Is anybody there waiting for Jesus, the Risen Lord, early morning on Sunday?

This is a crucial question that we hardly address, while the Lord Himself, in the Gospel, urges us to address a very close issue: in Matthew, chapter 25:1-13 the Lord tells us a parable, the so called parable of the 10 virgins. The lesson of this parable is given in the end of the parable: “Therefore keep watch, because you do not know the day or the hour”.

The frame of the parable is: “meeting the Bridegroom” when He comes back. In order to “be there” when He comes back, one has to “keep watch”, to remain alert, to be ready (the oil), in order to “enter with Him”.

“At that time the kingdom of heaven will be like ten virgins who took their lamps and went out to meet the Bridegroom. 2 Five of them were foolish and five were wise. 3 The foolish ones took their lamps but did not take any oil with them. 4 The wise ones, however, took oil in jars along with their lamps. 5 The bridegroom was a long time in coming, and they all became drowsy and fell asleep.

6 “At midnight the cry rang out: ‘Here’s the bridegroom! Come out to meet him!’

7 “Then all the virgins woke up and trimmed their lamps. 8 The foolish ones said to the wise, ‘Give us some of your oil; our lamps are going out.’ 9 “‘No,’ they replied, ‘there may not be enough for both us and you. Instead, go to those who sell oil and buy some for yourselves.’

10 “But while they were on their way to buy the oil, the Bridegroom arrived. The virgins who were ready went in with him to the wedding banquet. And the door was shut. 11 “Later the others also came. ‘Lord, Lord,’ they said, ‘open the door for us!’ 12 “But he replied, ‘Truly I tell you, I don’t know you.’

13 “Therefore keep watch, because you do not know the day or the hour.” (Mt 25:1-13)

I am not intending at all to comment or interpret this parable, this is not my aim. To me, on top of its proper intended meaning ("keep watch"), this parable sheds an intense light on the very moment of the Resurrection of the Lord, seen as a “coming back”, “from far” (from death, and hell), “victorious of death” and on the necessity to wait for Him, and be ready when He comes.

I see the Resurrection as a "meeting moment", and an "entering in the Kingdom". Let us just appreciate the intense Light it sheds on the Resurrection. Please don't hesitate to re-read this Parable thinking of these hours after Jesus' Death, and if there is anybody "waiting" for Him, when He rises.

This is why I ask insistingly: "is anybody there to greet Him, to meet Him, to “enter with Him” in the Eternal Joy of the Resurrection? Is anybody there, ready, waiting for Him until He Rises?"

I see the fact of meeting the Lord at His Resurrection as a vital fact for the future of Christianity. It is the vital and necessary bridge that reunites what happened before His Death, and what unfolded after His Resurrection. Otherwise, there is a gap, an abyss, a missing link between these two blocks. We take His Resurrection for granted. We think: "oh well, He had to rise anyway". But in fact, it is not true. If there is no flowing communication between the realities of the Kingdom before the Resurrection and what can happen after His Resurrection, we are facing a disconnection, a very dangerous hiatus.

Therefore, I do consider the presence of somebody who waits for Him, desires his Resurrection, wants it, pray for it, the presence of somebody to greet Him at His Resurrection and “enter with Him to the Wedding Banquet” as crucial as the lesson told by the parable, if not more.

In oder to “be part of” the eternal “Wedding Banquet”, the Kingdom of God, it is important to “be there”, in order to greet the Bridegroom.

The two Annunciations

In order to answer to this question we will go back to the beginning of saint Luke's Gospel.

The structure of saint Luke's Gospel opening chapter is fundamental. Saint Luke offers us two annunciations made by the same very High Messenger of God: the ArchAngel Gabriel.

First, to Zachariah, priest, who represents the people of Israel, praying and waiting for the Messiah,

Annunciation to Zachariah

Second, to Mary, young girl, who prays as well, and awaits for the coming of the Messiah, God announces the "good news", by sending His Angel, carrying the Sacred Message.

Who is ready to receive the Messiah? Both are praying, Zachariah (the whole people of Israel) and Mary. Who can believe? Who can open his heart and his whole being to the coming of God-amongst-us?

Saint Luke here is not giving us just an account, or telling a story. He is giving us a crucial element for our future: how can be we believe?

The two annunciations are put in parallel, in order to help us contemplate the difference between Zachariah and Mary. At the core we have the “capacity to believe”. Not only that, but Zachariah's failed annunciation is redeemed by Mary's double act: she believes “for herself”, and “for Zachariah” who didn't believe. In the sense that she had to believe as well that her cousin, Elisabeth, is as well pregnant by the action of God who healed her infertility, at a very old age.

This diptych (twofold parallel story) is fundamental to help us understand that Mary is really the first fruit of the Redemption. She is “full of grace” by a grace of God, a grace totally coming from “Her Saviour” (as she states it in Luke 1:47), from His Salvation realised on the Cross. It is true that the Salvation on the Cross happens, in the stream of time, after Mary's birth, but the Cross transcends time, covers all the times. Foreseeing the Salvation of the Cross, God extracts Mary from Jesus' side, as the "New Eve". Dante rightly calls Mary: “daughter of your son”.

Without Mary's faith, we wouldn't have had Jesus, this is true. But without Mary's faith, Elisabeth and Zachariah wouldn't be able to believe in Jesus. Both Mary's fruits are important.

Are you with me here?

It is not enough to have "the Redeemer", "the Divine Seed", "the Heavenly Wine", we need as well "the capacity to receive Him". This is why Mary is called the “one who believed” (Luke 1:45), the “Good earth” (Mt 13), the “New Skin” for the new wine. She is as well called “Jacob's ladder” (see John 1:51), because in Cana she is the one who can believe in Jesus, and she is the one who leads us, in her faith, to Him. We do “climb” on that Divine Ladder, given by God to us, in order to believe in Jesus, and reach his Side, and say again with Thomas: “My Lord and My God” (John 20).

In our Baptism, God gives us two things then: the "object" of our Faith: Jesus, who is everything for us, our “All”; and the “subject” of our Faith, Mary's capacity to “believe” and follow Jesus.

Mary continues to believe throughout her life, and reaches the point, at 3 pm, Good Friday, where again and again, she is alone, and having to believe in the Core of Jesus Message: “I will die and will rise, the third day” (see previous post). She is the one who carries the “Fire” of that Promise, protects it, against the stormy attacks of death, hell, and so forth... and keeps it intact, waiting, praying, fighting, aspiring, desiring to meet the Risen Lord, when He comes back from the land of death.

And what happens at the early hours of Sunday? “At the Third Day, there was a Wedding” (John 2:1). Do you see what I see?

Do you see the wedding? Who is the Bridegroom, the Bride?

Contemplation

I'll leave you with these thoughts now. Just go back to John 2:1-11 and try to see it under the light of what was unveiled above.

"On the third day a wedding took place at Cana in Galilee. Jesus’ mother was there, 2 and Jesus and his disciples had also been invited to the wedding. 3 When the wine was gone, Jesus’ mother said to him, “They have no more wine.”4 “Woman, what is between you and me?” Jesus replied. “My hour has not yet come.”5 His mother said to the servants, “Do whatever he tells you.”6 Nearby stood six stone water jars, the kind used by the Jews for ceremonial washing, each holding from twenty to thirty gallons.7 Jesus said to the servants, “Fill the jars with water”; so they filled them to the brim.8 Then he told them, “Now draw some out and take it to the master of the banquet.”They did so, 9 and the master of the banquet tasted the water that had been turned into wine.He did not realise where it had come from, though the servants who had drawn the water knew. Then he called the bridegroom aside 10 and said, “Everyone brings out the choice wine first and then the cheaper wine after the guests have had too much to drink; but you have saved the best till now.”11 What Jesus did here in Cana of Galilee was the first of the signs through which he revealed his glory; and his disciples believed in him." (John 2:1-11)

(To be continued ...)