.jpg)
Every year, around the Second Sunday in Ordinary Time, the Gospel reading brings us to the wedding feast at Cana. Jesus, at His mother’s gentle prompting, transforms six stone jars of water—each holding twenty to thirty gallons—into the finest wine. The master of the banquet is stunned. “Everyone serves the good wine first,” he says, “and then the inferior when the guests have become drunk; but you have kept the good wine until now” (John 2:10). For centuries, preachers have rightly seen this as a sign of Christ’s generosity, a revelation of His divinity, and a quiet affirmation that joy, celebration, and even fermented drink can have a place in the Christian life.
Yet in recent years a disturbing trend has emerged, particularly on social media and in certain Catholic circles: the miracle at Cana is being weaponized to celebrate, endorse, or minimize alcoholism. Memes proclaim “Jesus turned water into wine, not water into water—so drink up!” T-shirts boast “Cana: the original open bar.” Influencers post photos of overflowing pints with captions like “What Would Jesus Brew?” Some go further, insisting that anyone who abstains from alcohol is a “Puritan” or a “Jansenist” who rejects the spirit of the wedding feast. One popular X account with over 80,000 followers regularly declares, “Teetotalism is a heresy—Jesus was literally a winemaker.”
This is not harmless humor. It is a grotesque distortion of Sacred Scripture, a mockery of Our Lord’s first public miracle, and a pastoral failure that endangers souls struggling with addiction. Today I want to examine three things: (1) what the wine at Cana actually was, (2) why invoking this miracle to promote heavy drinking is immoral and constitutes grave abuse of Scripture, and (3) the clear teaching of the Church that alcohol consumption is neither a doctrinal requirement nor even necessary for valid consecration at Mass.
Part I: The Wine of First-Century Palestine Was Not Modern Cabernet
One of the most common sleight-of-hand tactics in the “Jesus wants you to party” crowd is to equate the “wine” (Greek: oinos) mentioned in John 2 with the 12–16% ABV (alcohol by volume) bottles we buy today. This is historically indefensible.
Fermentation in the ancient Near East was limited by technology and climate. Without airtight seals, distillation, or modern yeast strains, naturally fermented grape juice rarely exceeded 4–6% ABV before secondary fermentation turned it to vinegar. Pliny the Elder (AD 23–79) notes that the strongest wines in the Roman Empire were around 8–10% ABV, and even those were considered exceptionally potent. Most everyday wine was diluted with water at ratios ranging from 1:3 to 1:20. The Mishnah (Pesahim 10:1) and Talmud (Shabbat 77a) prescribe dilution rates that would bring the final drink to roughly 2–3% ABV—comparable to a modern near-beer.
Archaeological evidence confirms this. Residue analysis from first-century jars in Judea shows average alcohol levels between 3.5% and 5.8%. The six stone jars at Cana held purification water; filling them to the brim with undiluted high-ABV wine would have produced roughly 900 modern bottles at 14% ABV—enough to intoxicate the entire village for days. That is not what happened. The headwaiter’s surprise was not that the guests were suddenly hammered, but that the host had saved the best-tasting (not strongest) wine for last.
The Greek verb methyskō (“to become drunk”) in John 2:10 does not imply widespread inebriation at the feast; it simply acknowledges the common ancient practice of serving better wine first, before palates grew dull. St. John Chrysostom (Homily 22 on John) and St. Augustine (Tractate 9 on John) both emphasize that the miracle reveals Christ’s lordship over creation and His desire to gladden human hearts—not to sanction excess.
To claim “Jesus made 180 gallons of top-shelf booze” is to project 21st-century fraternity culture onto first-century Galilee. It is the equivalent of saying Jesus served espresso shots because the Greek oinos could theoretically mean any fermented beverage. Accuracy matters when we are dealing with the Word of God.
Part II: Using Cana to Endorse Alcoholism Is Immoral and an Abuse of Scripture
Scripture is not a wax nose to be twisted into whatever shape suits our vices. When St. Paul warns Timothy, “No longer drink only water, but use a little wine for the sake of your stomach” (1 Tim 5:23), he is giving medicinal advice, not a blank check for bar crawling. When the Psalmist sings that wine “gladdens the heart of man” (Ps 104:15), he places it alongside bread and oil—staples of life, not licenses for oblivion.
To invoke the wedding at Cana as justification for drunkenness violates at least four serious moral principles:
1. It commits the sin of sacrilegium—treating sacred things with irreverence.
Jesus’ first public sign was meant to manifest His glory (John 2:11). Reducing it to a divine stamp of approval on binge drinking drags the Savior into complicity with behavior He repeatedly condemned. Our Lord warned, “Take heed that you are not led astray” (Luke 21:8), and pronounced woe on those who “run to strong drink” (Isa 5:11, quoted by early Fathers against excess).
2. It mocks the virtue of temperance.
The Catechism teaches that “the virtue of temperance disposes us to avoid every kind of excess: the abuse of food, alcohol, tobacco, or medicine” (CCC 2290). Offenses against temperance are grave matter when they lead to loss of reason or harm to health. St. Thomas Aquinas classifies drunkenness as a mortal sin when voluntary and complete (Summa II-II, q. 150, a. 2). To joke that Jesus “invented day drinking” is to treat mortal sin as a punch line.
3. It scandalizes the weak and endangers souls in recovery.
St. Paul would rather never eat meat again than cause a brother to stumble (1 Cor 8:13). One in ten American adults suffers from alcohol use disorder. Countless Catholic men and women in AA or Celebrate Recovery hear priests and influencers joke that “real Catholics drink like fish because of Cana.” That is not pastoral accompaniment; that is spiritual malpractice. As Our Lady of Fatima warned Sister Lucia, more souls go to hell for sins of the flesh than any other reason—and alcohol is the primary gateway drug to many of those sins.
4. It distorts the nuptial symbolism of the miracle.
The Fathers saw Cana as a foreshadowing of the Eucharistic banquet and the wedding feast of the Lamb (Rev 19:9). Ephraim the Syrian, Cyril of Alexandria, and Rupert of Deutz all interpret the “good wine saved for last” as the Blood of Christ reserved for the eschatological banquet. To reduce this profound typology to “Jesus supports tailgating” is exegetical vandalism.
Part III: The Church Has Never Taught That Catholics Must Drink Alcohol
Some defenders of the “Cana party culture” claim that teetotalism is “Protestant” or “rigorist.” This is ahistorical nonsense.
- Pope Pius XII explicitly praised the Pioneer Total Abstinence Association in 1950, calling their pledge “a wise and generous act of renunciation.”
- St. John Paul II told recovering alcoholics in 1995: “Your witness of total abstinence is a great gift to the Church.”
- The 1917 Code of Canon Law (canon 1269) allowed bishops to require total abstinence pledges in mission territories.
- Venerable Matt Talbot (1856–1925), an Irish alcoholic turned mystic, is on the path to canonization precisely because he embraced lifelong abstinence after years of drunkenness.
Even more telling: the Church does not require alcohol in the Eucharist itself.
Canon 924 §3 of the 1983 Code states: “The wine must be natural, from the fruit of the grape, pure and incorrupt, not mixed with other substances… It is altogether forbidden to use wine of doubtful authenticity or quality.” The phrase “natural wine” has been interpreted by the Congregation for Divine Worship to permit mustum—fresh grape juice with fermentation just begun and immediately arrested—so low in alcohol (usually <1% ABV) that recovering alcoholics may receive under this form with episcopal permission.
Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, as Prefect of the CDF, wrote in 1994: “The Church has always recognized the legitimacy of using mustum… The use of mustum is a concession made out of pastoral solicitude for priests who are alcoholics.” If the Precious Blood can be confected validly with virtually no alcohol, then no Catholic can claim that “real sacramental life” requires drinking.
Part IV: A Personal Appeal
I write this not as a teetotaler lobbing stones from the sidelines. I enjoy a good stout on feast days. My family keeps a bottle of Barolo for Easter. But I have buried friends who died of cirrhosis before age forty. I have held the hands of wives whose husbands chose the pub over their children, quoting Cana memes as justification. I have heard confession lines where men weep because they cannot receive Communion on Sunday after blacking out on Saturday—yet their parish men’s group calls sobriety “unmanly.”
Enough.
The miracle at Cana reveals a Savior who enters into human joy so fully that He will not allow a wedding to end in embarrassment. But the same Savior who multiplied loaves also fasted forty days. The same Christ who made wine also overturned tables. Joy and austerity are not enemies in the Gospel; they are dance partners.
If you struggle with alcohol, know this: the Church does not demand that you drink. Jesus does not love you less because you choose water, coffee, or O’Doul’s. Your sobriety is not a defect; it is a share in the Cross that perfects your love.
And to those who post the memes, sell the T-shirts, and preach “moderate drunkenness” from the ambo: stop. You are not defending Catholic culture. You are profaning the Scriptures and jeopardizing souls for likes and laughs. Repent. Delete the posts. Make reparations.
Our Lady of Cana, who noticed the servants’ need before anyone else, pray for us. May she teach us to hear the quiet voice that says, “Do whatever He tells you”—even when He tells us to put the cup down.
Sources
- Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2nd ed. (Vatican City: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1997), nos. 1803, 1866, 2288–2291.
- Code of Canon Law (1983), canons 924 §3, 927.
- Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, “Circular Letter Concerning the Use of Mustum and Low-Gluten Hosts” (24 July 2003).
- St. John Chrysostom, Homilies on the Gospel of John, Homily 22 (PG 59:131–134).
- St. Augustine, Tractates on the Gospel of John, Tractate 9 (PL 35:1460–1463).
- St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae II-II, q. 150.
- Pliny the Elder, Natural History XIV.58.
- Patrick E. McGovern, Ancient Wine: The Search for the Origins of Viniculture (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2003).
- Pius XII, Address to the Pioneer Total Abstinence Association (9 September 1950).
- John Paul II, Address to Alcoholics Anonymous (24 August 1995).
- Mishnah Pesahim 10:1; Babylonian Talmud Shabbat 77a.
- Instruction Redemptionis Sacramentum (25 March 2004), no. 50.
- Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, Letter on Mustum (24 October 1994).
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you for reading and for your comment. All comments are subject to approval. They must be free of vulgarity, ad hominem and must be relevant to the blog posting subject matter.