John Calvin Commentary John 4

When, therefore, the Lord knew. The Evangelist, intending now to give an account of the conversation Christ had with a Samaritan woman, begins with explaining the cause of his journey. Knowing that the Pharisees were ill-disposed towards him, he did not wish to expose himself to their anger before the proper time. This was his motive for leaving Judea.

The Evangelist thus informs us that Christ did not come into Samaria with the intention of dwelling there, but because he had to pass through it on his way from Judea to Galilee. For until, by his resurrection, he should open up the way for the gospel, it was necessary for him to be employed in gathering the sheep of Israel to which he had been sent. That he now favored the Samaritans with his instruction was an extraordinary and almost accidental occurrence, if we may be allowed the expression.

But why does he seek the seclusion and retreats of Galilee, as if he were unwilling to be known, though his being known was highly desirable? I reply, he knew well the proper way to act, and made such use of opportunities for service that he did not allow a moment to be lost.

He wished, therefore, to pursue his course with regularity, and in the manner he judged proper. From this we also learn that our minds ought to be regulated so that, on the one hand, we are not deterred by any fear from carrying out our duty, and on the other hand, we do not too rashly throw ourselves into dangers.

All who earnestly desire to pursue their calling will be careful to maintain this moderation. By this, they will steadily follow the Lord even through the midst of deaths; they will not rush into them heedlessly, but will walk in His ways. Let us, therefore, remember that we must not go further than our calling demands.

That the Pharisees had heard. The Pharisees alone are mentioned by the Evangelist as having been hostile to Christ; not that the other scribes were friendly, but because this sect was dominant at that time, and because they were filled with rage under the pretense of godly zeal. It may be asked: Did they envy Christ because he had more disciples, because their stronger attachment to John led them to promote his honor and reputation?

The actual reason is different. For although they were formerly dissatisfied to find that John was gathering disciples, they became even more exasperated when they saw that a still greater number of disciples came to Christ. From the time that John avowed himself to be nothing more than the herald of the Son of God, people began to flock to Christ in greater crowds, and John had already almost completed his ministry. Thus John gradually resigned to Christ the office of teaching and baptizing.

Though Jesus himself baptized not. He gives the designation of Christ’s Baptism to that which he conferred by the hands of others, to inform us that Baptism should not be estimated by the person of the minister, but that its power depends entirely on its Author, in whose name, and by whose authority, it is conferred.

Therefore, we derive a remarkable consolation when we know that our baptism has no less efficacy to wash and renew us than if it had been given by the hand of the Son of God. Nor can it be doubted that, as long as he lived in the world, he abstained from the outward administration of the sign for the express purpose of testifying to all ages, that Baptism loses nothing of its value when it is administered by a mortal man.

In short, not only does Christ baptize inwardly by his Spirit, but the very symbol we receive from a mortal man should be viewed by us in the same light as if Christ himself displayed his hand from heaven and stretched it out to us. Now, if the Baptism administered by a man is Christ’s Baptism, it will not cease to be Christ’s Baptism whoever the minister is. And this is sufficient for refuting the Anabaptists, who maintain that when the minister is a wicked man, the baptism is also vitiated, and, through this absurdity, disturb the Church, just as Augustine very properly employed the same argument against the Donatists.

Which is called Sichar: Jerome, in his epitaph on Paula, thinks that this is an incorrect reading and that it should have been written Sichem. Indeed, the latter appears to have been the ancient and true name, but it is probable that, in the time of the Evangelist, the word Sichar was already in common use.

Regarding the place, it is generally agreed that it was a city situated close to Mount Gerizim. Its inhabitants were treacherously slain by Simeon and Levi (Genesis 34:25), and Abimelech, a native of the place, afterwards razed it to its foundations (Judges 9:45). However, the convenience of its situation was such that a city was built there a third time, which, in the age of Jerome, they called Neapolis.

By adding so many details, the Evangelist removes all doubt, for we are clearly informed by Moses where that field was which Jacob assigned to the children of Joseph (Genesis 48:22). It is also universally acknowledged that Mount Gerizim was near Shechem. We will later state that a temple was built there, and there can be no doubt that Jacob lived a long time in that place with his family.

And Jesus, fatigued by the journey. He did not pretend to be weary but was actually fatigued. For, so that he might be better prepared to exercise sympathy and compassion towards us, he took upon himself our weaknesses, as the Apostle shows that we have not a high priest who cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities (Hebrews 4:15).

The circumstance of the time agrees with this, for it is not surprising that, being thirsty and fatigued, he rested at the well about noon. Since the day, from sunrise to sunset, had twelve hours, the sixth hour was Noon. When the Evangelist says that he sat thus, he means that it was the posture of a man who was fatigued.

A woman came from Samaria. When He asks for water from the woman, He does so not merely with the intention of obtaining an opportunity to teach her; for thirst prompted Him to desire to drink.

But this physical need cannot prevent Him from making use of the opportunity for instruction that He has obtained, for He prefers the salvation of the woman to His own needs. Thus, forgetting His own thirst—as if He were satisfied with obtaining leisure and opportunity for conversation so that He might instruct her in true godliness—He draws a comparison between the visible water and the spiritual, and waters with heavenly doctrine the mind of the one who had refused Him water to drink.

How do you, who are a Jew? This is a reproach, by which she throws back at him the contempt generally held by his nation. The Samaritans are known to have been the scum of a people gathered from foreigners. Having corrupted the worship of God and introduced many spurious and wicked ceremonies, they were justly detested by the Jews.

Yet it cannot be doubted that the Jews, for the most part, used their zeal for the law as a cloak for their carnal hatred. Many were motivated more by ambition and envy, and by displeasure that the country allotted to them was occupied by the Samaritans, than by grief and unease that the worship of God had been corrupted.

There was just cause for the separation, if their feelings had been pure and well-regulated. For this reason Christ, when he first sent the Apostles to proclaim the Gospel, forbade them to turn aside to the Samaritans (Matthew 10:5).

But this woman does what is natural to almost all of us. Desiring to be held in esteem, we deeply resent being despised. This disease of human nature is so widespread that everyone wishes their vices would please others. If anyone disapproves of us, or of anything that we do or say, we are immediately offended without any good reason.

Let anyone examine themselves, and they will find this seed of pride in their mind until it has been eradicated by the Spirit of God. This woman, therefore, knowing that the superstitions of her nation were condemned by the Jews, now offers an insult to them in the person of Christ.

For the Jews hold no intercourse with the Samaritans. I consider these words to have been uttered by the woman. Others suppose that the Evangelist added them for the sake of explanation, and indeed, it is of little consequence which meaning you prefer. But I think it more natural to believe that the woman jeers at Christ in this manner: “What? Is it lawful for you to ask for a drink from me, when you consider us so profane?” If anyone prefers the other interpretation, I do not dispute the point.

Besides, it is possible that the Jews carried their abhorrence of the Samaritans beyond proper bounds. For, as we have said, they used a false pretense of zeal for an improper purpose, so it was natural for them to go to excess, as almost always happens with those who give way to wicked passions.