Cana

In Galilee. A small village near Nazareth. This place is rendered memorable in the gospel, being honoured with our Lord’s presence at a marriage. and first miracle that he wrought of turning water into wine. (John 2:)

a town of Galilee, where Jesus performed his first miracle, Joh 2:1-2, &c. It lay in the tribe of Zebulun, not far from Nazareth. Cana was visited by Dr. E. D. Clarke, who says, “It is worthy of note, that, walking among the ruins of a church, we saw large massy stone pots, answering the description given of the ancient vessels of the country; these were not preserved nor exhibited as reliques, but lying about, disregarded by the present inhabitants, as antiquities with whose original use they were unacquainted. From their appearance, and the number of them, it was quite evident that a practice of keeping water in large stone pots, each holding from eighteen to twenty-seven gallons, was once common in the country.”

Ca´na, a town in Galilee, not far from Capernaum, where Christ performed his first miracle by turning water into wine (Joh 4:46). This Cana is not named in the Old Testament, but is mentioned by Josephus as a village of Galilee. The site has long been identified with the present Kefr Kenna, a small place about four miles north-east from Nazareth, on one of the roads to Tiberias.

There is a ruined place called Kâna el-Jelil, about eight miles N. ½ E. from Nazareth, which Dr. Robinson is inclined to regard as the more probable site of Cana. His reasons are certainly of considerable weight.

The birthplace of Nathanael, the city in which our Lord performed his first miracle, and from which he soon after sent a miraculous healing to the nobleman’s son at Capernaum, eighteen miles off, Joh 2:1-11 ; 4:46-54; 21:2. It was called Cana of Galilee, now Kana-el-Jelil, and lay seven miles north of Nazareth. This is Robinson’s view. The commonly received site is nearer Nazareth. Cana is now in ruins.\par

Ca’na. (place of reeds) Cana of Galilee, once Cana in Galilee. A village or town, not far from Capernaum, memorable as the scene of Christ’s first miracle, Joh 2:1; Joh 2:11; Joh 4:46, as well as of a subsequent one, Joh 4:46; Joh 4:54, and also as the native place of the apostle Nathanael. Joh 21:2. The traditional site is at Kefr-Kenna, a small village about 4 1/2 miles northwest of Nazareth. The rival site is a village situated farther north, about five miles north of Seffurieh (Sepphoris), and nine miles north of Nazareth.

Cana of Galilee. A town where Jesus performed His first miracle, turning the water into wine, and a second one, healing the nobleman’s or courtier’s son at Capernaum, by a word spoken at a distance (John 2; Joh 4:46; Joh 4:54). Nathanael belonged to Cana (Joh 21:2); it was more elevated than Capernaum, as Jesus "went down" from it there (Joh 2:12). The traditional site is Kefr Kenna, 5 miles N.E. of Nazareth. Another site has been proposed by Dr. Robinson, namely, Khirbet Kana or Kana el Jelil, but the balance of evidence supports the traditional spot. (See WINE.)

Cana of Galilee (kâ’nah). A town noted as the scene of Christ’s first miracle, Joh 2:1-11, and of another miracle, 4:46-54, and as the home of Nathanael. 21:2. Tradition places it at Kefr-Kenna, about four English miles northeast of Nazareth, and the traveller is now shown an earthen jar, which is claimed to be one of the water-jars used at the wedding. Robinson and others, with fair probability, identify Cana with Kâna-el-Jelîl, about nine miles north of Nazareth. It has a fine situation, and the ruins indicate the existence in former times of a considerable village.

CANA (Κανὰ τῆς Γαλιλαίας) is mentioned four times in the Fourth Gospel. It was the scene of our Lord’s first miracle (Joh 2:1; Joh 2:11); the place to which ‘a certain king’s officer (βασιλικός), whose son was sick at Capernaum,’ came to find Jesus (Joh 4:46); and the native place of the disciple Nathanael (Joh 21:2). After the miracle, Jesus ‘went down’ (κατέβη) to Capernaum; and the king’s officer besought him to ‘come down’ (καταβῇ) to heal his son. Those references place Cana of Galilee on higher ground than Capernaum. There is no other direct evidence as to its position.

Josephus states (Vita, 16) that he resided for a time ‘in a village of Galilee which is named Cana.’ From this village he made a descent during the night upon Tiberias (17). Later (41) he speaks of residing in the great plain, the name of which was Asochis. If these residences are one and the same place, the Cana of Josephus may well be Khirbet Kâna or Kânat el-Jelîl, on the N. slopes of the plain of Buttauf, and about 8 miles N. of Nazareth. This, however, would not decide the site of St. John’s Cana. [The Κανά of Ant. xv. v. 1 should be, according to BJ i. xix. 1, Καναθά].

Etymology and tradition are divided between the above mentioned site on the plain of Buttauf and Kefr Kennâ, a hamlet on the direct road to the lake, and about 3½ miles N.E. of Nazareth, where there is a fine spring. Etymology certainly favours Khirbet Kâna, the doubling of the medial ‘nun’ being against Kefr Kennâ. Tradition is indecisive. The references in Placentinus (Itin. 4), Phocas, John of Würzburg, Quaresmius (Elucidationes, ii. 852f.), etc., favour Kefr Kennâ, where the monks of the Greek and Latin Churches have considerable ecclesiastical properties. On the other hand, the notices of Theodosius (a.d. 530), Saewulf, Brocardus, Fetellus, Marinus Sanutus (p. 253), and others, suit the northern site.

In later times, Robinson (BR^{P [Note: RP Biblical Researches in Palestine.] 2 [Note: designates the particular edition of the work referred]} ii. 348f., iii. 108) supports the claims of Khirbet Kâna, and is followed by Hitter, Thomson, Ewald, Socin, Keim, and others. Eusebius and Jerome (Onom. s.v. Κανα) identify Cana with Kanah^{* [Note: This Kanah is probably the modern village of Kana, 7 miles S.E. of Tyre (Encyc. Bibl. ii. 2652; Hastings’ DB ii. 831).]} in Asher (Jos 19:28). This could not be Kefr Kennâ, which is not in Asher, but might be Khirbet Kâna (Eneyc. Bibl. i. 638). Other recent writers contend for Kefr Kennâ, among whom are Guérin, de Saulcy, Porter, Tristram, etc. The balance of evidence is perhaps on the side of the northern site (Hasting’s Dictionary of the Bible i. 346 ^b). Conder (PE^{F [Note: EF Palestine Exploration Fund.]} Mem. i. 288) suggests as a possible site a spot nearer to Nazareth than Kefr Kennâ, called ‘Ain Kânâ, and not far from Reineh. Dr. Sanday appears to support this, and claims Guthe as agreeing (Sacred Sites, 24 n^{. [Note: note.]} ).

Literature.—Hasting’s Dictionary of the Bible i. 346; Encyc. Bibl. i. 637; Robinson, BR^{P [Note: RP Biblical Researches in Palestine.] 2 [Note: designates the particular edition of the work referred]} ii. 348f., iii. 108; Conder, PE^{F [Note: EF Palestine Exploration Fund.]} Mem. i. 288; Stanley, S^{P [Note: P Sinai and Palestine.]} 368; Guérin, Galilée, i. 175 ff.; Thomson, Land and Book, 425 f.; Tristram, Land of Israel, 455; Socin, Pal^{. [Note: Palestine, Palestinian.]} 358. 367; Murray, Pal^{. [Note: Palestine, Palestinian.]} 366; Buhl, GA^{P [Note: AP Geographic des alten Palästina.]} 219 f.; Ewald, Gesch. vi. 180 n^{. [Note: note.]} ; Keim, Jesus of Nazara, iv. 116 n^{. [Note: note.]} ; Ritter, Comp. Geogr. iv. 378f.

A. W. Cooke.

CANA.—A Galilæan village, where Christ turned water into wine (Joh 2:1) and healed with a word a nohleman’s son who lay sick at Capernaum (Joh 4:46). Nathanael was a native of this place (Joh 21:2). Three sites have been suggested as identifications, any one of which would satisfy the meagre indications. These are Kanat el-Jelil, perhaps the most probable, north of Sephurieh; ‘Ain Kana, east of Nazareth; and Kefr Kenna, north-east of, and a little farther from, the same town. The last is the site fixed upon by ecclesiastical tradition.

R. A. S. Macalister.

City of Galilee, Palestine, near Nazareth, the scene of Our Lord’s first miracle (John 2) and His cure of the ruler’s son (John 4) and the birthplace of Nathaniel or Saint Bartholomew (John 21). The miracle of the marriage feast of Cana which has made the city forever famous, when Christ turned water into wine, was performed before His public life had fully begun, and is one of the best-authenticated of Our Lord’s miracles. His attendance at the marriage feast has always been taken as setting His seal on the sanctity of marriage.

New Catholic Dictionary

A city of Galilee, Palestine, famous throughout all ages as the scene of Our Lord’s first miracle, when He turned water into wine at the Marriage Feast (John 2). It is mentioned by the same Evangelist in two other passages, once (iv, 46) in connection with another miracle, when He cured the ruler’s son at a distance, and once (xxi, 2) as the birthplace of Nathaniel, or St. Bartholomew. No direct indication can be gathered of its locality, except that it was not far from either Nazareth or Capharnaum, and higher than the latter city, as indeed all the land west of the Plain of Genesareth is; and that an ordinary traveler from Jerusalem to Nazareth would pass through or near it. It is not mentioned by either of the Synoptists, nor indeed anywhere else in the Scriptures. An old tradition identifies the site of Cana with modern Kefr’ Kenna, a village of about 600 inhabitants. This lies some four or five miles northeast of Nazareth, on the road from thence to Tiberias, at the foot of a short, steep hill. The tradition dates back at least to the eighth century, and probably a good deal earlier, while the site fulfills all the requisite conditions mentioned above. At the time of the Crusades, or before, there was a church which was believed to be on the spot where the miracle of Our Lord was worked. This site is now in the hands of the Franciscans, who have built a large new church. In recent years some interesting excavations have been carried out within its walls, discovering parts of the old church beneath. The Greeks also have a church close by, inside which are two large jars, said to be the original "water pots of stone" in which the water was turned into wine; but the probability of their being genuine is not great. The fountain still existing in the village, however, must have been the actual source from which the water was drawn. The inhabitants of the village are very rough and uncivilized. About one-third of them are Christians, the majority belonging to the Greek Church.Towards the far end of the town, there is a church dedicated to St. Bartholomew, said to be on the site of his house, though this tradition cannot be traced back very far. A curious light is thrown on the ease with which such traditions used to originate by the existence of a similar church on the supposed site of the house of Simon the Cananean. The name Cananean must have deceived some, who consequently sought for the site of his house, and the demand created the supply. In reality, however, the Chanaanites were a strict national sect among the Jews, and the name is wholly unconnected with Cana. The site of Kefr’ Kenna held almost undisputed possession for many centuries. It is only in recent years that its authenticity has been seriously questioned. There are now two other claimants for the site. One of these, Kenet-el-Jalil, is some six miles further north, on the slope of a hill. There is nothing there now but ruins. Some remains of cisterns have been discovered but there is no fount or spring. It se ems to have been known in quite early times as possibly the site of Cana, and has in its favor that the name is said to be a closer equivalent than that of Kefr’ Kenna. Recently as third site has been put forward by Dr. Robinson, Ain Kana, which is somewhat nearer to Nazareth. The site is accepted by Dr. Condor; although the name is said to be still closer etymologically than either of the other two, there is no tradition whatever to support this hypothesis.The miracle which has made Cana forever famous was worked by Christ before His public life had fully commenced. This is usually taken to be the meaning of the words "My hour is not yet come". He had however, already five disciples -- Sts. Peter, Andrew, John, Phillip, and Bartholomew (Nathaniel). They had followed Him from the banks of the Jordan, but had received as yet no permanent call, such as is recorded later on in the other Gospels. Our Lord was on His way back to Nazareth when He passed by Cana. From the language of the Gospel we should infer that the marriage which was taking place was that of a close relative of the Blessed Virgin, for it is said without comment that she was there; and it was no doubt in her honor that Christ was invited. Again, the cause of the shortage of wine is not explained by St. John; but it has been inferred that it may have been due to the presence of Our Lord and the five Disciples that accompanied Him, who would have made a substantial increase in a small and modest party. If this was so, it would explain the confidence with which Our Lady appealed to Him when she noticed it. The answer of Christ, which has been variously rendered, has given rise to long discussion, and cannot be said to be even yet properly understood. The Greek ti emoi kai soi, gynai; is translated in the Vulgate, "Quid mihi et tibi est mulier?" In most English Catholic Bibles this is rendered "Woman, what is it to me and to thee?" The translation adopted in the Authorized and Revised Versions, "Woman, what have I to do with thee?", even if better idiomatically conveys a wrong impression, for it gives the idea of a rebuke which is totally against the context. Father Rickaby, S.J., in his short commentary on St. John suggests as a fair English equivalent, "Leave me alone, Lady". At any rate, she at once told the waiters to take orders from Our Lord. They filled the jars with water, which Jesus converted into wine. Taking the narrative as it stands, we have one of the best authenticated of Our Lord’s miracles; for, unlike the case of the cure of bodily ailments, the waiters were comparatively disinterested parties, and yet they bore witness that the water had become wine and was even the best wine of the feast. Not only the miracle but also the whole incident of Christ’s attendance at the marriage feast has always been taken as setting His seal on the sanctity of marriage, and on the propriety of humble rejoicing on such occasions. And if the bride or bridegroom was, as is believed, a relative of Our Lady, we may take it as an example of the sympathy which family ties should bring in the ordinary joys, no less than in the sorrows of life.-----------------------------------Ewing in Hast., Dict. of the Bible, s.v.; Thompson, The Land and the Book (1876), 425; Stanley, Sinai and Palestine; Sanday, Sacred Sites of the Gospel.BERNARD WARD Transcribed by Tom Crossett The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume IIICopyright © 1908 by Robert Appleton CompanyOnline Edition Copyright © 2003 by K. KnightNihil Obstat, November 1, 1908. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., CensorImprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York