Mary = Woman


#1

In John 24 and John 19:26 Jesus addresses Mary, His mother as Woman. Based on what I have read here and in other sources, Jesus uses this to equate Mary with the woman of Gen 3:15. Today I noticed that His mother is not the only person Jesus refers to as Woman. In John 20:13, 15 He uses that for Mary Magdalene.

If that title equates Jesus’ mother with the woman of Gen 3:15, why does it not do likewise for Mary Magdalene? They can’t both be the woman of Gen 3:15.


#2

[quote="garysibio, post:1, topic:311003"]
In John 24 and John 19:26 Jesus addresses Mary, His mother as Woman. Based on what I have read here and in other sources, Jesus uses this to equate Mary with the woman of Gen 3:15. Today I noticed that His mother is not the only person Jesus refers to as Woman. In John 20:13, 15 He uses that for Mary Magdalene.

If that title equates Jesus' mother with the woman of Gen 3:15, why does it not do likewise for Mary Magdalene? They can't both be the woman of Gen 3:15.

[/quote]

Actually, in verse 13 it was angels who addressed her.

As for verse 15, some of Jesus' post-Resurrection appearances involved him not being recognized at first. For what reason, only He knows. He addressed her as "woman" to delay recognition. That's all.


#3

[quote="SonCatcher, post:2, topic:311003"]
Actually, in verse 13 it was angels who addressed her.

[/quote]

Oops. You're right.

As for verse 15, some of Jesus' post-Resurrection appearances involved him not being recognized at first. For what reason, only He knows. He addressed her as "woman" to delay recognition. That's all.

Sorry, but that's more avoiding my question than answering it. Jesus called both women "Woman." How do you know that He meant something different in each case?

(I'm sorry if that sounded rude. That was not my intention.)


#4

Addressing a woman as “Woman” or “Lady” (gune, in Greek) was polite. Like us saying, “Madame.”

However, it’s true that Jesus calling his mother “Woman” was talking about her in terms that recalled Eve, because she was the New Eve like He was the New Adam.

But since Jesus was talking to Mary Magdalene in a garden – he was addressing her as an “Eve” also – in this case, as a Christian woman witnessing to His Resurrection. Mary Magdalene was the first “church lady.” She was also talking to the right person in the garden, instead of Eve asking the wrong snake in the Garden. She spoke to God as He walked in the garden, whereas Eve ran from Him at the end in the Garden.

And then she bore the Good News to the Apostles in her heart and mind and soul, just as Mary bore Jesus to all of us in her womb – and a happy rewrite of how Eve bore us all, carrying both life from God and original sin from herself and Adam.


#5

That’s a very good point! Calling her “Woman” addresses her as the New Eve. I never thought of that before!


#6

[quote="Mintaka, post:4, topic:311003"]
Addressing a woman as "Woman" or "Lady" (gune, in Greek) was polite. Like us saying, "Madame."

However, it's true that Jesus calling his mother "Woman" was talking about her in terms that recalled Eve, because she was the New Eve like He was the New Adam.

But since Jesus was talking to Mary Magdalene in a garden -- he was addressing her as an "Eve" also -- in this case, as a Christian woman witnessing to His Resurrection. Mary Magdalene was the first "church lady." She was also talking to the right person in the garden, instead of Eve asking the wrong snake in the Garden. She spoke to God as He walked in the garden, whereas Eve ran from Him at the end in the Garden.

And then she bore the Good News to the Apostles in her heart and mind and soul, just as Mary bore Jesus to all of us in her womb -- and a happy rewrite of how Eve bore us all, carrying both life from God and original sin from herself and Adam.

[/quote]

What I'm looking for is any evidence that Jesus meant something different when He calls His mother "Woman" than when He called Mary Magdalene "Woman." Just saying He meant something different without backing it up is not helpful and saying that ths is the case because it fits in with Catholic theology would certainly not convince a Protestant.


#7

I’ve been reading this for years and it never occurred to me before. It happened by accident. I was listening to a podcast from Catholic Answers Radio and they talked about Jesus calling Mary, His mother, “Woman.” I wanted to make a note about it but didn’t catch the reference so I used an on-line Bible to do a search and saw the other quote as well.


#8

[quote="garysibio, post:6, topic:311003"]
What I'm looking for is any evidence that Jesus meant something different when He calls His mother "Woman" than when He called Mary Magdalene "Woman." Just saying He meant something different without backing it up is not helpful and saying that ths is the case because it fits in with Catholic theology would certainly not convince a Protestant.

[/quote]

I think the evidence is in the context.

With Mother Mary, she knew it was Jesus, and he would have had no reason to try to distance himself from her unless he was trying to convey a point, as the others have suggested.

However, with Mary Magdalene, she did not know it was him, and he decided not to reveal himself to her. If he had mentioned her by name, she might have then recognized it was him. But by calling her woman, he delayed that revelation. If it was not his intention to delay, then why did he not just say "Hey, it's me, Jesus". From the context, if it wasn't to delay recognition, then I would see no point in the delay of her recognition of him.


#9

The only difference that I can think of is the fact that the Blessed Virgin Mary is His Mother and that it might not be common for a Son to address His Mother in this manner?


#10

While what you say is true, I don’t see how it explains the problem. Why would their recognition or lack of recognition change anything regarding the significance of calling either of them Woman?


#11

[quote="AHJE, post:9, topic:311003"]
The only difference that I can think of is the fact that the Blessed Virgin Mary is His Mother and that it might not be common for a Son to address His Mother in this manner?

[/quote]

Can you elaborate?


#12

[quote="garysibio, post:10, topic:311003"]
While what you say is true, I don't see how it explains the problem. Why would their recognition or lack of recognition change anything regarding the significance of calling either of them Woman?

[/quote]

The lack of recognition had less to do with the use of the word "woman" but is somehow connected to the Mystery of the Resurrection.

The disciples walking to Emmaus didn't recognize Jesus throughout their entire conversation with them. The Apostles gathered in the Upper Room supposed that He was a ghost when He first appeared to them. Mary Magdalene supposed He was the gardener.

There are different layers of meaning in Scripture so there is room for both in the passage.


#13

Adam was the first prophet.

The LORD God then built up into a woman the rib that he had taken from the man. When he brought her to the man, the man said: "This one, at last, is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; This one shall be called 'woman,’ for out of ‘her man’ this one has been taken." (Genesis 2:23-24)

Notice that Adam speaks in the future tense - shall be called. This is prophecy.

Jesus said to her, “Woman, how does your concern affect me? (John 2:4)

Jesus fulfills Adam’s prophecy that she shall be called woman. Genesis 2:24 is prophecy. John 2:4 is fulfilled prophecy.

John even puts the fulfillment of the prophecy in the same place as the prophecy itself, right at the beginning of the narrative. The words of Adam are at the very beginning of the Torah and so John puts the fulfillment of the prophecy in the same place, right at the beginning of his Gospel.

-Tim-


#14

What about in other languages? How do they explain W0-man in German or French?


#15

[quote="Mintaka, post:4, topic:311003"]
Addressing a woman as "Woman" or "Lady" (gune, in Greek) was polite. Like us saying, "Madame."

However, it's true that Jesus calling his mother "Woman" was talking about her in terms that recalled Eve, because she was the New Eve like He was the New Adam.

But since Jesus was talking to Mary Magdalene in a garden -- he was addressing her as an "Eve" also -- in this case, as a Christian woman witnessing to His Resurrection. Mary Magdalene was the first "church lady." She was also talking to the right person in the garden, instead of Eve asking the wrong snake in the Garden. She spoke to God as He walked in the garden, whereas Eve ran from Him at the end in the Garden.

And then she bore the Good News to the Apostles in her heart and mind and soul, just as Mary bore Jesus to all of us in her womb -- and a happy rewrite of how Eve bore us all, carrying both life from God and original sin from herself and Adam.

[/quote]

[quote="Mintaka, post:4, topic:311003"]
Addressing a woman as "Woman" or "Lady" (gune, in Greek) was polite. Like us saying, "Madame."

[/quote]

Expounding and taking what you quoted further I've read that the term usage custom of "Woman" back then was like a respectful endearment.

Imagine how women today would object to that term usage in a dimunitive manner.
Yet; I have heard some husbands call their wives woman and by all respects meant no insult as it was used as an endearment.


#16

I’m sorry but what does the lack of recognition have to do with the significance of Jesus calling them both Woman? My problem is that Catholics use Jesus calling His mother Woman to tie her to the woman of Gen 3:15. If that applies to His mother it must also apply to Mar Magdalen but they cannot both be the woman of Gen 3:15. Do you see my problem?


#17

[quote="TimothyH, post:13, topic:311003"]
Adam was the first prophet.

The LORD God then built up into a woman the rib that he had taken from the man. When he brought her to the man, the man said: "This one, at last, is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; This one shall be called 'woman,' for out of 'her man' this one has been taken." (Genesis 2:23-24)

Notice that Adam speaks in the future tense - shall be called. This is prophecy.

Jesus said to her, “Woman, how does your concern affect me? (John 2:4)

Jesus fulfills Adam's prophecy that she shall be called woman. Genesis 2:24 is prophecy. John 2:4 is fulfilled prophecy.

John even puts the fulfillment of the prophecy in the same place as the prophecy itself, right at the beginning of the narrative. The words of Adam are at the very beginning of the Torah and so John puts the fulfillment of the prophecy in the same place, right at the beginning of his Gospel.

-Tim-

[/quote]

If John 3:4 is fulfilled prophecy, why isn't John 20:15?

I looked up Gen 3:15-16 again and saw another issue. Look at verse 16. It says that the woman shall bear children (plural) in pain. There is a long-standing tradition that Mary did not experience pain when she gave birth to Jesus Now that's not a doctrine so that's no big deal but it is Catholic dogma that Mary had only one child so the plural here means that woman here cannot possibly be Mary without admitting that we are wrong about her perpetual virginity. That's a huge problem.


#18

[quote="qui_est_ce, post:14, topic:311003"]
What about in other languages? How do they explain W0-man in German or French?

[/quote]

German uses the word Weib for in John 2:4 & 20:15. Weib means woman or female.Gen 3:16 also uses Weib (actually Weibe because it's the object of a preposition).

I don't know any French but I do know a little Spanish so I checked a Spanish Bible. Gen 3:16 uses mujer which means woman. Mujer is also used in John 2:4 & 20:15.

Can anyone compare the LXX Gen 3:16 to the passages in John?


#19

Thanks. What I was looking for is in English, it’s Wo-man because she came from man. I guess I could look the passage up in a German dictionary to see how that translates. I’ll post it later when I have more time to look that up.


#20

I’m not sure of the relevance. I believe you are correct in that woman, at least in Hebrew, means ‘from man.’ I don’t think that anyone would argue that either Mary did not have a biological father, however. Apart from that, what would the significance be?


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.