Thomas Aquinas Commentary John 4

Having set forth the teaching of Christ on spiritual regeneration and shown that Christ had given this grace to the Jews, the Evangelist now shows how Christ gave this grace to the Gentiles. The saving grace of Christ was given to the Gentiles in two ways: through teaching and through miracles. Going forth, they preached everywhere is the teaching; the Lord cooperated with them, and confirmed the word with signs are the miracles (Mark 16:20).

First, he shows the future conversion of the Gentiles through teaching.

Second, he shows their future conversion through miracles, at the verse, now after two days, he departed from there (John 4:43).

Regarding the first point, he does two things.

First, he sets down certain matters preliminary to the teaching.

Second, he presents the teaching and its effect, at the verse, Jesus answered and said to her: if you knew the gift of God (John 4:10).

Regarding the first of these, he sets down three preliminary facts.

First, what relates to the one teaching.

Second, something about the matter taught, at the verse, now Jacob’s well was there.

Third, something about who received the instruction, at the verse, there came a woman of Samaria.

As to the person teaching, the preliminary remark is about His journey to the place where He taught; thus he says, when Jesus therefore understood.

Here he does three things.

First, he gives the place which He left: Judea.

Second, the place where He was going: Galilee.

Third, the place through which He passed: Samaria.

Regarding the first of these, he does three things.

First, he gives the reason for His leaving Judea.

Second, he explains certain facts included in this reason, at the verse, although Jesus himself did not baptize, but his disciples did.

Third, he describes Christ’s departure from Judea, at the verse, he left Judea.

The Evangelist says, when Jesus therefore understood that the Pharisees had heard that he makes more disciples and baptizes more than John, because he wished to show that after the Baptist had calmed the envy of his disciples, Jesus avoided the ill will of the Pharisees.

Since we read, all things were known to the Lord God before they were created , and all things are naked and open to his eyes (Hebrews 4:13), it seems we should ask why Jesus is said to acquire new knowledge.

We must answer that Jesus, by virtue of His divinity, knew all things from eternity—past, present, and future—as the scriptural passages above indicate. Nevertheless, as a man, He did begin to know certain things through experiential knowledge. It is this experiential knowledge that is indicated here when it says, when Jesus therefore understood, after the news was brought to Him, that the Pharisees had heard. Christ willed to acquire this knowledge as a concession to show the reality of His human nature, just as He willed to do and endure many other things characteristic of human nature.

Why does he say, the Pharisees had heard that he makes more disciples and baptizes more than John, when this would seem to be of no concern to them? They persecuted John and did not believe in him, for when the Lord questioned them about the source of John’s baptism, they said, if we say from heaven, he will say to us, why then did you not believe him? (Matthew 21:25). Thus they did not believe in John.

There are two answers to this. One is that those disciples of John who had spoken against Christ were either Pharisees or allies of the Pharisees. For we see that the Pharisees, along with the disciples of John, raised questions against the disciples of Christ (Matthew 9:11, 14). According to this explanation, then, the Evangelist says that when Jesus therefore learned that the Pharisees had heard—that is, after He learned that John’s disciples, who were Pharisees or allied with them, had raised questions and had been disturbed about His baptism and that of His disciples—he left Judea.

Alternatively, we might say that the Pharisees were disturbed by John’s preaching due to their envy, and for this reason they persuaded Herod to arrest him. This is clear where Christ, speaking of John, says, Elijah has already come... and they did with him whatever they wanted, and then adds, so also will the Son of man suffer from them (Matthew 17:12). The Gloss comments on this that it was the Pharisees who incited Herod to arrest John and put him to death. Thus it seems probable that they felt the same way toward Christ because of what He was preaching. This is what is meant: the envious Pharisees and persecutors of Christ had heard, with the intention of persecuting Him, that Jesus makes more disciples and baptizes more than John.

This kind of hearing is described: death and destruction have said: we have heard of his deeds (Job 28:22). The good, on the other hand, hear in order to obey: we have heard him in Ephrathah (Psalms 132:6), followed by, we will adore at his footstool.

The Pharisees heard two things. First, that Christ made more disciples than John. This was right and reasonable, for as we read, he must increase, but I must decrease (John 3:30). The second thing was that Christ baptized; and rightly so, because He cleanses: wash me from my injustice (Psalms 51:2), and again: rise up, O Lord, by baptizing, in the command you have given, concerning baptism, and a congregation of people, united through baptism, will surround you (Psalms 7:6–7).

Then when he says, although Jesus himself did not baptize, he explains what he has just said about Christ’s baptizing: when Jesus therefore understood that the Pharisees had heard that he makes more disciples and baptizes more than John.

Augustine says that there is an apparent inconsistency here, for the Evangelist had stated that Jesus baptizes, whereas now he says, as though correcting himself, Jesus himself did not baptize.

There are two ways to understand this. The first is that of Chrysostom. What the Evangelist now says is true: Christ did not baptize. When he said above that Jesus was baptizing, this was the report received by the Pharisees. For certain people came to the Pharisees and said: “You are envious of John because he has disciples and is baptizing. But Jesus is making more disciples than John and is also baptizing. Why do you put up with him?” So the Evangelist is not himself saying that Jesus was baptizing, but only that the Pharisees heard that He was. It is with the intention of correcting this false rumor that the Evangelist says: It is true that the Pharisees heard that Christ was baptizing, but this is not true. So he adds: although Jesus did not himself baptize, but his disciples did. For Chrysostom, Christ did not baptize because the Holy Spirit was not given at any time before the passion of Christ in the baptism of John and his disciples. The purpose of John’s baptism was to accustom people to the baptism of Christ and to gather them for instruction. Moreover, it would not have been fitting for Christ to baptize if the Holy Spirit were not given in His baptism; but the Spirit was not given until after the passion of Christ: for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified (John 7:39).

According to Augustine, however, one should say—and this is the preferable way—that the disciples did baptize with the baptism of Christ, that is, in water and the Spirit, and the Spirit was given in this baptism. It can also be said that Christ both did and did not baptize. Christ did baptize because He performed the interior cleansing, but He did not baptize because He did not wash them externally with water. It was the office of the disciples to wash the body, while Christ gave the Spirit who cleansed within. So in the proper sense, Christ did baptize, according to the verse: he upon whom you shall see the Spirit descending, and remaining upon him, it is he who baptizes with the Holy Spirit (John 1:33).

With respect to Chrysostom's opinion that the Holy Spirit was not yet given, we might say that the Spirit was not yet given in visible signs, as He was given to the disciples after the resurrection. Nevertheless, the Spirit had been given and was being given to believers through an interior sanctification.

The fact that Christ was not always baptizing provides an example to us that the senior leaders of the churches should not occupy themselves with things that can be performed by others, but should allow them to be done by those of lesser rank: Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the Gospel (1 Corinthians 1:17).

If someone should ask whether Christ’s disciples had been baptized, it could be said, as Augustine answered Stelentius, that they had been baptized with the baptism of John, because some of Christ’s disciples had been disciples of John. Or, which is more likely, they were baptized with the baptism of Christ, so that Christ might have baptized servants through whom He would baptize others. This is the meaning of what is said: he who has washed, needs not but to wash his feet, which is followed by, and you are clean, but not all (John 13:10).

He then mentions Christ’s departure: he left Judea. He left for three reasons. First, to get away from the envy of the Pharisees, who were disturbed by what they had heard about Christ and were preparing to harass Him. By this, He gives us the example that we should, with gentleness, yield to evil for a time: do not pile wood on his fire . Another reason was to show us that it is not sinful to flee from persecution: if they persecute you in one town, flee to another (Matthew 10:23). The third reason was that the time of His passion had not yet come: my hour has not yet come (John 2:4). There is also an additional, mystical reason: by His leaving, He indicated that because of persecution, the disciples were destined to abandon the Jews and go to the Gentiles.

Then when he says, and went again into Galilee, he shows where He was going. He says, again, because he had mentioned another time when Christ went to Galilee: after this he went down to Capernaum (John 2:12). Since the other three evangelists did not mention this first trip, the Evangelist John says again to let us know that the other evangelists had not mentioned any of the matters he discusses up to this point, and that he is now beginning to give his account contemporaneously with theirs.

According to one interpretation, Galilee is understood to signify the Gentile world, to which Christ passed from the Jews, for Galilee means “passage.” According to another interpretation, Galilee signifies the glory of heaven, for Galilee also means “revelation.”

Then, at and he had to pass through Samaria, he describes the intermediate place through which Christ passed, first in a general way, and then specifically, at he came therefore to a city of Samaria, which is called Sychar.

Halfway through His journey to Galilee, Christ passes through Samaria; hence he says, and he had to pass through Samaria. He says, had to pass, lest He seem to be acting contrary to His own teaching, for Christ says, do not go on the roads of the gentiles (Matthew 10:5). Now since Samaria was Gentile territory, he shows that He went there of necessity and not by choice. Thus he says, and he had to, the reason for this necessity being that Samaria was between Judea and Galilee.

It was Amri, the king of Israel, who bought the hill of Samaria from a certain Somer (1 Kings 16:24); and it was there he built the city which he called Samaria, after the name of the person from whom he bought the land. After that, the kings of Israel used it as their royal city, and the entire region surrounding this city was called Samaria. When we read here that he had to pass through Samaria, we should understand the region rather than the city.

Describing it in more detail, he adds, he came therefore to a city of Samaria, that is, of the region of Samaria, which is called Sychar. This Sychar is the same as Shechem, just by another name. It is said that Jacob camped by this city, and that two of his sons, enraged at the rape of their sister Dinah by the son of the king of Shechem, killed all the males in that city (Genesis 33:18). And so Jacob took possession of the city, and he lived there and dug many wells. Later, as he lay dying, he gave the land to his son Joseph: I am giving you a portion more than your brothers (Genesis 48:22). And this is what he says: near the land that Jacob gave to his son Joseph.

The Evangelist is so careful to record all these matters in order to show us that all the things which happened to the patriarchs were leading up to Christ, that they pointed to Christ, and that He descended from them according to the flesh.

Then when he says, now Jacob’s well was there, the Evangelist gives the material setting for the spiritual doctrine about to be taught. This was most fitting, for the doctrine about to be taught was about water and a spiritual font, and so he mentions the material well, thus giving rise to a discussion of the spiritual font, which is Christ: for with you is the fountain of life (Psalms 36:9), namely, the Holy Spirit, who is the spirit of life. Likewise, the well symbolizes baptism: on that day a fountain will be open to the house of David, to cleanse the sinner and the unclean (Zechariah 13:1).

He does three things here.

First, he describes the well.

Second, Christ’s rest at the well.

Third, the time.

He describes the water source, saying, Jacob’s well was there.

Here one might object that further on he says, the well is deep (John 4:11); thus it did not gush water like a fountain. I answer, as does Augustine, that it was both a well and gushed water like a fountain. For every well is a fountain, although the converse is not true. When water gushes from the earth, we have a fountain; and if this happens just on the surface, the source is only a fountain. But if the water gushes both on the surface and below, we have a well, although it is also still called a fountain. It is called Jacob’s well because he had dug this well there due to a shortage of water (Genesis 34).

Jesus therefore, being wearied from his journey, sat on the well. Jesus reveals His weakness, even though His power was unlimited, not because of a lack of power, but to show us the reality of the nature He assumed. According to Augustine, Jesus is strong, for in the beginning was the Word (John 1:1); but He is weak, for the Word was made flesh (John 1:14). And so Christ, wishing to show the truth of His human nature, allowed it to do and to endure things proper to humans; and to show the truth of His divine nature, He worked and performed things proper to God. Hence when He checked the inflow of divine power to His body, He became hungry and tired; but when He let His divine power influence His body, He did not become hungry despite a lack of food, and He did not become tired in His labors. He had fasted forty days and forty nights, and was hungry (Matthew 4:2).

From this, that Jesus is tired from the journey, an example is given to us not to shrink from our work for the salvation of others: I am poor, and have labored since my youth (Psalms 88:15). Similarly, an example of poverty is given, because Jesus sat on the bare earth.

In its mystical meaning, this sitting of Christ indicates the abasement of His passion: you know when I sit down (that is, the passion), and when I rise (Psalms 139:2). Also, it indicates the authority of His teaching, for He speaks as one having power; thus we read that Christ, sitting down, taught them (Matthew 5:1).

He indicates the time, saying, it was about the sixth hour. There are both literal and mystical reasons for fixing the time. The literal reason was to show the cause of His fatigue, for people are more weary from work in the heat and at the sixth hour. Again, it shows why Christ was resting, for people gladly rest near water in the boiling heat of the day.

There are three mystical reasons for mentioning the time. First, because Christ assumed flesh and came into the world in the sixth age of the world. Another is that man was made on the sixth day, and Christ was conceived in the sixth month. Third, at the sixth hour the sun is at its highest, and there is nothing left for it but to decline. In this context, the sun signifies temporal prosperity, as suggested: if I had looked at the sun when it shone (Job 31:26). Therefore Christ came when the prosperity of the world was at its highest—that is, it flourished through love in the hearts of men—but because of Him, natural love was bound to decline.

Next, at there came a woman of Samaria, we have a preliminary remark concerning the one who listens to Christ.

Concerning this, he does two things.

First, we are introduced to the person who is taught.

Second, we are given her preparation for his teaching, at then the Samaritan woman said to him.

The teaching is given to a Samaritan woman; so he says, there came a woman of Samaria to draw water. This woman signifies the Church of the Gentiles, not yet justified. It was then involved in idolatry but was destined to be justified by Christ. She came from foreigners—that is, from the Samaritans, who were foreigners, even though they lived in the neighboring territory. This is because the Church of the Gentiles, foreign to the Jewish race, would come to Christ: many will come from the East and the West, and will sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven (Matthew 8:11).

Christ prepares this woman for His teaching when He says, give me a drink.

First, we have the occasion for His asking her.

Second, the Evangelist suggests why it was opportune to make this request, at for his disciples were gone into the city.

The occasion and the preparation of the woman was the request of Christ; thus He says, give me a drink. He asks for a drink both because He was thirsty for water on account of the heat of the day, and because He thirsted for the salvation of humanity on account of His love. Accordingly, while hanging on the cross He cried out, I thirst (John 19:28).

Christ had the opportunity to ask this of the woman because His disciples, whom He would have asked for the water, were not there. Thus the Evangelist says, his disciples were gone into the city.

Here we might notice three things about Christ. First, His humility, because He was left alone. This is an example to His disciples that they should suppress all pride.

Someone might ask what need there was to train the disciples in humility, seeing that they had been but lowly fishermen and tentmakers. Those who say such things should remember that these very fishermen were suddenly made more deserving of respect than any king, more eloquent than philosophers and orators, and were the intimate companions of the Lord of creation. Persons of this kind, when they are suddenly promoted, ordinarily become proud, not being accustomed to such great honor.

Second, note Christ’s temperance, for He was so little concerned about food that He did not bring anything to eat.

Third, note that He was also left alone on the cross: I have trodden the wine press alone, and no one of the people was with me (Isaiah 63:3).

Our Lord prepared the woman to receive His spiritual teaching by giving her an occasion to question Him.

First, her question is given.

Second, her reason for asking it, at for the Jews do not communicate with the Samaritans.

Here we should point out that our Lord, when asking the woman for a drink, had in mind more a spiritual drink than a merely physical one. But the woman, not yet understanding about such a spiritual drink, had in mind only a physical drink. So she responds, how can you, being a Jew, ask me for a drink, who am a Samaritan woman? For Christ was a Jew, because it was promised that He would be from Judah: the scepter will not be taken away from Judah... until he who is to be sent comes (Genesis 49:10); and He was born from Judah: it is evident that our Lord came from Judah (Hebrews 7:14). The woman knew that Christ was Jewish from the way He dressed, for the Lord commanded the Jews to wear tassels on the corners of their garments and put a violet cord on each tassel, so that they could be distinguished from other people (Numbers 15:37–38).

Then the reason for this question is given, either by the Evangelist, as the Gloss says, or by the woman herself, as Chrysostom says: for the Jews do not communicate with the Samaritans.

Regarding this, we should note that, on account of their sins, the people of Israel—that is, of the ten tribes, who were worshipping idols—were captured by the king of the Assyrians and led as captives into Babylonia (2 Kings 17). Then, so that Samaria would not remain unpopulated, the king gathered people from various nations and forced them to live there. While they were there, the Lord sent lions and other wild beasts to trouble them. He did this to show that He let the Jews be captured because of their sins, and not because of any lack in His own power. When news of their trouble reached the Assyrian king and he was informed that this was happening because these people were not observing the rites of the God of that territory, he sent them a priest of the Jews who would teach them God’s law as found in the law of Moses.

This is why, although these people were not Jewish, they came to observe the Mosaic law. However, along with their worship of the true God, they also worshipped idols, paid no attention to the prophets, and referred to themselves as Samaritans, from the city of Samaria which was built on a hill called Somer (1 Kings 16:24). After the Jews returned to Jerusalem from their captivity, the Samaritans were a constant source of trouble and, as we read in Ezra, interfered with their building of the temple and the city. Although the Jews did not mix with other people, they especially avoided these Samaritans and would have nothing to do with them. This is what we read: for the Jews do not communicate with the Samaritans. He does not say that the Samaritans do not associate with Jews, for they would have gladly done so and cooperated with them. But the Jews rebuffed them, in keeping with what is said: do not make agreements with them (Deuteronomy 7:2).

If it was not lawful for the Jews to associate with Samaritans, why did God ask a Samaritan woman for a drink?

One might answer, as Chrysostom does, that the Lord asked her because He knew that she would not give Him the drink. But this is not an adequate answer, because one who asks what is not lawful is not free from sin—not to mention the scandal—even though what he asks for is not given to him.

So we should say, the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath (Matthew 12:8). Thus, as Lord of the law, He was able to use or not use the law and its observances as it seemed suitable to Him. And because the time was near when the nations would be called to the faith, He associated with those nations.

At Jesus answered and said to her, the Evangelist gives us Christ’s spiritual teaching.

First, he gives the teaching itself.

Second, he describes the effect it had, at and immediately his disciples came (John 4:27).

Regarding the first part, he does two things.

First, a summary of the entire instruction is given.

Second, he unfolds it part by part, starting at the woman said to him: Lord, you have nothing with which to draw, and the well is deep.

He said therefore: You are amazed that I, a Jew, should ask you, a Samaritan woman, for water. But you should not be amazed, because I have come to give a drink even to the Gentiles. Thus he says: if you knew the gift of God, and who it is who says to you, ‘Give me a drink,’ you perhaps would have asked him.

We may begin with the last part, and we should first understand what is meant by water. We should say that water signifies the grace of the Holy Spirit. Sometimes this grace is called fire, and at other times water, to show that it is neither of these in its nature, but is like them in the way it acts.

It is called fire because it lifts up our hearts by its ardor and heat: ardent in Spirit (Romans 12:11), and because it burns up sins: its light is fire and flame (Song of Solomon 8:6). Grace is called water because it cleanses: I will pour clean water upon you, and you will be cleansed from all your uncleanness (Ezekiel 36:25); because it brings a refreshing relief from the heat of temptations: water quenches a flaming fire ; and also because it satisfies our desires, in contrast to our thirst for earthly and all temporal things: come to the waters, all you who thirst (Isaiah 55:1).

Now, water is of two kinds: living and non-living. Non-living water is not connected or united with the source from which it springs, but is collected from rain or in other ways into ponds and cisterns, where it stands separated from its source. But living water is connected with its source and flows from it. According to this understanding, the grace of the Holy Spirit is correctly called living water, because the grace of the Holy Spirit is given to a person in such a way that the source of the grace itself is also given, that is, the Holy Spirit. Indeed, grace is given by the Holy Spirit: the love of God is poured out into our hearts by the Holy Spirit, who has been given to us (Romans 5:5). For the Holy Spirit is the unfailing fountain from whom all gifts of grace flow: one and the same Spirit does all these things (1 Corinthians 12:11). And so, if anyone has a gift of the Holy Spirit without having the Spirit, the water is not united with its source, and so is not living but dead: faith without works is dead (James 2:20).

Thus it is evident what is understood by water. Then we are shown that in the case of adults, living water—that is, grace—is obtained by desiring it, which means by asking for it. The LORD has heard the desire of the poor (Psalms 9:17), for grace is not given to anyone without their asking and desiring it. Thus we say that in the justification of a sinner, an act of free will is necessary to detest sin and to desire grace: ask and you will receive (Matthew 7:7). In fact, desire is so important that even the Son himself is told to ask: ask me, and I will give to you (Psalms 2:8). Therefore, no one who resists grace receives it, unless he first desires it. This is clear in the case of Paul who, before he received grace, desired it, saying: Lord, what do you want me to do? (Acts 9:6). Thus it is significant that he says, “you perhaps would have asked him.” He says perhaps on account of free will, with which a person sometimes desires and asks for grace, and sometimes does not.

There are two things which lead a person to desire and ask for grace: a knowledge of the good to be desired and a knowledge of the giver. So, Christ offers these two to her. First of all, a knowledge of the gift itself; hence he says, if you knew the gift of God, which is every desirable good that comes from the Holy Spirit: I know that I cannot control myself unless God grants it to me . And this is a gift of God. Second, he mentions the giver; and he says, and realized who it is who says to you, that is, if you knew the one who can give it, namely, that it is I: when the Paraclete comes whom I will send you from the Father, the Spirit of truth... he will give testimony of me (John 15:26); you have given gifts to men (Psalms 67:19).

Accordingly, this teaching concerns three things: the gift of living water, asking for this gift, and the giver himself.

When he says, the woman said to him, he treats these three things explicitly.

First, the gift;

Second, asking for the gift, at Lord, I perceive that you are a prophet; and

Third, the giver, at the woman said to him: I know that the Messiah is coming.

He does two things concerning the first point.

First, he explains the gift by showing its power.

Second, he considers the perfection of the gift, at the woman said to him: Lord, give me this water.

Concerning the first of these, he does two things.

First, he gives the woman’s request.

Second, Christ’s answer, at Jesus answered and said to her: whoever drinks of this water will thirst again.

We should note, with respect to the first point, that this Samaritan woman, because she was sensual, understood in a worldly sense what the Lord understood in a spiritual sense: the sensual man does not perceive those things that pertain to the Spirit of God (1 Corinthians 2:14). Consequently, she tried to reject what our Lord said as unreasonable and impossible with the following argument: You promise me living water, and it must come either from this well or from another one. But it cannot come from this well because you have nothing with which to draw, and the well is deep; from where do you have living water? And it does not seem probable that you can get it from some other well, because you are not greater than our father Jacob, who gave us the well.

Let us first examine what she says: you have nothing with which to draw, that is, no pail to use to draw water from the well, and the well is deep, so you cannot reach the water by hand without a bucket.

The depth or vastness of the well signifies the depth of Sacred Scripture and of divine wisdom: it is vast and deep. Who can find it out? (Ecclesiastes 7:24). The bucket with which the water of saving wisdom is drawn out is prayer: if any of you lacks wisdom, ask God (James 1:5).

The second point is given at, are you greater than our father Jacob, who gave us the well? As if to say: Have you better water to give us than Jacob? She calls Jacob her father not because the Samaritans were descendants of the Jews, as is clear from what was said before, but because the Samaritans had the Mosaic law, and because they occupied the land promised to the descendants of Jacob.

The woman praised this well on three counts. First, on the authority of the one who gave it; so she says: our father Jacob, who gave us the well. Second, on account of the freshness of its water, saying: Jacob drank from it himself, and his children. For they would not drink it if it were not fresh, but would only give it to their cattle. Third, she praises its abundance, saying, and his cattle. For since the water was fresh, they would not have given it to their flocks unless it were also abundant. So, too, Sacred Scripture has great authority, for it was given by the Holy Spirit. It is delightfully fresh: how sweet are your words to my palate (Psalms 118:103). Finally, it is exceedingly abundant, for it is given not only to the wise, but also to the unwise.

Then when he says, Jesus answered and said to her: whoever drinks of this water, he sets down the Lord’s response, in which he explains the power of his doctrine.

First, with respect to the fact that he had called it water.

Second, with respect to the fact that he called it living water, at but the water that I will give to him will become in him a fountain of water, springing up into eternal life.

He shows that his doctrine is the best water because it has the effect of water—that is, it takes away thirst much more than natural water does. He shows by this that he is greater than Jacob. So he says, Jesus answered and said to her, as if to say: You say that Jacob gave you a well, but I will give you better water, because whoever drinks of this water—that is, natural water, or the water of sensual desire and concupiscence—although it may satisfy his appetite for a while, will thirst again, because the desire for pleasure is insatiable: when will I wake up and find wine again? (Proverbs 23:35). But he who will drink of this water that I give to him will not thirst again. My servants will drink, and you will be thirsty (Isaiah 65:13).

Since we read that those who drink me will still thirst , how is it possible that we will never be thirsty if we drink this water of divine wisdom, when this wisdom itself says we will still thirst: those who drink me will still thirst ?

I answer that both are true: he who drinks the water that Christ gives both still thirsts and does not thirst. But whoever drinks natural water will become thirsty again for two reasons. First, because material and natural water is not eternal and does not have an eternal cause, but an impermanent one; therefore its effects must also cease: all these things have passed away like a shadow . But spiritual water has an eternal cause, that is, the Holy Spirit, who is the unfailing fountain of life. Accordingly, he who drinks of this will never thirst, just as someone who had within himself a fountain of living water would never thirst.

The other reason is that there is a difference between a spiritual and a temporal thing. For although each produces a thirst, they do so in different ways. When a temporal thing is possessed, it causes us to be thirsty, not for the thing itself, but for something else; a spiritual thing, when possessed, takes away the thirst for other things and causes us to thirst for it. The reason for this is that before temporal things are possessed, they are thought to be of great price and to be satisfying; but after they are possessed, they are found to be neither as great as thought nor sufficient to satisfy our desires, and so our desires are not satisfied but move on to something else. On the other hand, a spiritual thing is not known unless it is possessed: no one knows it except the one who receives it (Revelation 2:17). So, when it is not possessed, it does not produce a desire; but once it is possessed and known, then it brings pleasure and produces desire, but not to possess something else. Yet, because it is imperfectly known on account of the deficiency of the one receiving it, it produces a desire in us to possess it perfectly.

We read of this thirst: my soul thirsted for God, the living fountain (Psalms 41:2). This thirst is not completely taken away in this world because in this life we cannot fully understand spiritual things; consequently, one who drinks this water will still thirst for its completion. But he will not always be thirsty, as though the water will run out, for we read: they will be intoxicated from the richness of your house (Psalms 35:9). In the life of glory, where the blessed drink perfectly the water of divine grace, they will never be thirsty again: blessed are they who hunger and thirst for what is right, that is, in this world, for they will be satisfied, in the life of glory (Matthew 5:6).

Then when he says, but the water that I will give to him will become in him a fountain of water, springing up into eternal life, he shows from the movement of the water that his doctrine is living water; thus he says that it is a leaping fountain: the streams of the river bring joy to the city of God (Psalms 45:4).

The course of material water is downward, which is different from the course of spiritual water, which is upward. Thus he says: I say that material water is such that it does not slake your thirst; but the water that I give not only quenches your thirst, but it is a living water because it is united with its source. Hence he says that it will become in him a fountain: a fountain leading, through good works, into eternal life. So he says, springing up, that is, making us leap up, into eternal life, where there is no thirst: he who believes in me, as the Scripture says, ‘Out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water’ (John 7:38); with you is the fountain of life (Psalms 35:10).

Then when he says, the woman said to him, he states her request for the gift.

First, her understanding of the gift is noted.

Second, the woman is found guilty, at you have said well: I have no husband.

As was said, the way to obtain this gift is by prayer and request.

And so first, we have the woman’s request.

Second, Christ’s answer, at Jesus said to her: go, call your husband.

We should note with respect to the first point that at the beginning of this conversation the woman did not refer to Christ as Lord, but simply as a Jew, for she said: How is it that you, being a Jew, ask me for a drink, who am a Samaritan woman? (John 4:9). But now as soon as she hears that he can be of use to her and give her water, she calls him Lord: the woman said to him: Lord, give me this water. For she was thinking of natural water and was subject to the two natural necessities of thirst and labor—that is, of going to the well and of carrying the water. So she mentions these two things when asking for the water: saying in reference to the first, so that I may not thirst; and in reference to the second, nor come here to draw, for man naturally shrinks from labor: they do not labor as other men (Psalms 72:5).

Then, at Jesus said to her: go, call your husband, the answer of Jesus is given. Here we should note that our Lord answered her in a spiritual way, but she understood in a sensual way. Accordingly, this can be explained in two ways. One way is that of Chrysostom, who says that our Lord intended to give the water of spiritual instruction not only to her, but especially to her husband, for as is said, man is the head of woman (1 Corinthians 11:3). Christ wanted God’s precepts to reach women through men, so that if the wife wishes to learn anything, let her ask her husband at home (1 Corinthians 14:35). So he says, go, call your husband and then come back here; and then I will give it to you with him and through him.

Augustine explains it another way, mystically. For as Christ spoke symbolically of water, he did the same of her husband. Her husband, according to Augustine, is the intellect. For the will brings forth and conceives because of the cognitive power that moves it; thus the will is like a woman, while the reason, which moves the will, is like her husband. Here the woman, that is, the will, was ready to receive, but was not moved by the intellect and reason to a correct understanding; she was still detained on the level of sense. For this reason the Lord said to her, go, you who are still sensual, call your husband, call in the reasoning intellect so you can understand in a spiritual and intellectual way what you now perceive in a sensual way; and then come back here, by understanding under the guidance of reason.

Here, at the woman answered and said: I have no husband, the woman is found guilty by Christ.

First, her answer is set down.

Second, the encounter in which she is found guilty by Christ, at you have said well.

As to the first, we should note that the woman, desiring to hide her wrongdoing and regarding Christ as only a mere man, did answer Christ truthfully, although she kept silent about her sin, for as we read, a fornicating woman will be walked on like dung in the road . The woman answered and said: I have no husband. This was true; for although she previously had a number of husbands, five of them, she did not now have a lawful husband, but was just living with a man. It is for this that the Lord judges her.

Then the Evangelist reports that Jesus said to her: you have said well, ‘I have no husband,’ for you have had five husbands, and he whom you have now is not your husband. This you have said truly. What you said is true, because you do not have a husband. The reason our Lord spoke to her about these secret things, which he had not learned from her, was to bring her to a spiritual understanding so that she might believe there was something divine about Christ.

In the mystical sense, her five husbands are the five books of Moses, for, as was said, the Samaritans accepted these. And so Christ says, you have had five husbands, and then follows, and he whom you have now, that is, he to whom you are now listening, Christ, is not your husband, for you have not believed.

This explanation, as Augustine says, is not very good. For this woman, having left the other five, came to her present husband, but those who come to Christ do not put aside the five books of Moses. We should rather say, you have had five husbands, that is, the five senses, which you have used up to this time; but the man you have now, that is, an erring reason, with which you still understand spiritual things in a sensual way, is not your husband, but an adulterer who is corrupting you. Call your husband, that is, your intellect, so that you may really understand me.

Now the Evangelist treats the request by which the gift is obtained, which is prayer.

First there is the woman’s inquiry about prayer.

Second, Christ’s answer, at Jesus said to her: woman, believe me.

Concerning the first, the woman does two things.

First, she admits that Christ is qualified to answer her question.

Second, she asks the question, at our fathers worshipped on this mountain.

And so this woman, hearing what Christ had told her about things that were secret, admits that the one who until now she believed was a mere man, is a prophet, and is capable of settling her doubts. For it is characteristic of prophets to reveal what is not present and is hidden: he who is now called a prophet was formerly called a seer (1 Samuel 9:9). And so she says, Lord, I perceive that you are a prophet. As if to say: You show that you are a prophet by revealing hidden things to me. It is clear from this, as Augustine says, that her husband was beginning to return to her. But he did not return completely because she regarded Christ as a prophet. For although he was a prophet—a prophet is not without honor except in his own country (Matthew 13:57)—he was more than a prophet, because he produces prophets: wisdom produces friends of God and prophets .

Then she asks her question about prayer, saying: our fathers worshipped on this mountain, and you say that Jerusalem is the place where it is fitting for men to worship. Here we should admire the woman’s diligence and attention. For women are considered curious and unproductive, and not only unproductive, but also lovers of ease (1 Timothy 5), whereas she did not ask Christ about worldly affairs, or about the future, but about the things of God, in keeping with the advice, seek first the kingdom of God (Matthew 6:33). She first asks a question about a matter frequently discussed in her country, that is, about the place to pray; this was the subject of argument between Jews and Samaritans. She says, our fathers worshipped on this mountain, but you say that Jerusalem is the place where it is fitting for men to worship.

We should mention that the Samaritans, worshiping God according to the precepts of the law, built a temple in which to adore him; and they did not go to Jerusalem where the Jews interfered with them. They built their temple on Mount Gerizim, while the Jews built their temple on Mount Zion. The question they debated was which of these places was the more fitting place of prayer, and each presented reasons for its own side. The Samaritans said that Mount Gerizim was more fitting, because their ancestors worshiped the Lord there. So she says, our fathers worshipped on this mountain.

How can this woman say, our fathers, since the Samaritans were not descended from Israel?

The answer, according to Chrysostom, is that some claim that Abraham offered his son on that mountain; but others claim that it was on Mount Zion (Genesis 22). Or, we could say that our fathers means Jacob and his sons, who, as it is said, lived in Shechem, which is near Mount Gerizim, and who probably worshiped the Lord there on that mountain (Genesis 33). Or it could be said that the children of Israel worshiped on this mountain when Moses ordered them to ascend Mount Gerizim that he might bless those who observed God’s precepts (Deuteronomy 6).

She calls them her ancestors either because the Samaritans observed the law given to the children of Israel, or because the Samaritans were now living in the land of Israel, as said before. The Jews said that the place to worship was in Jerusalem, by command of the Lord, who had said: take care not to offer your burnt offerings in every place, but offer them in the place the Lord will choose (Deuteronomy 12:13). At first, this place of prayer was in Shiloh. Then later, on the authority of Solomon and the prophet Nathan, the ark was taken from Shiloh to Jerusalem, and it was there the temple was built. So we read: he left the tabernacle in Shiloh, and a few verses later, but he chose the tribe of Judah, Mount Zion, which he loved (Psalms 77:60, 67-68). Thus the Samaritans appealed to the authority of the patriarchs, and the Jews appealed to the authority of the prophets, whom the Samaritans did not accept.

This is the issue the woman raises. It is not surprising that she was taught about this, for it often happens in places where there are differences in beliefs that even the simple people are instructed about them. Because the Samaritans were continually arguing with the Jews over this, it came to the knowledge of the women and ordinary people.

Christ’s answer is now set down, at Jesus said to her: woman, believe me.

First he distinguishes three types of prayer.

Second, he compares them to each other, at you adore that which you do not know.

As to the first, he first of all gains the woman’s attention to indicate that he was about to say something important, saying, believe me, and have faith, for faith is always necessary: to come to God, one must believe (Hebrews 11:6); if you do not believe, you will not understand (Isaiah 7:9).

Second, he mentions the three kinds of worship: two of these were already being practiced, and the third was to come. Of the two that were current, one was practiced by the Samaritans, who worshiped on Mount Gerizim; he refers to this when he says, the hour is coming, when you shall adore the Father neither on this mountain, of Gerizim. The other way was that of the Jews, who prayed on Mount Zion; and he refers to this when he says, nor in Jerusalem. The third type of worship was to come, and it was different from the other two. Christ alludes to this by excluding the other two, for if the hour is coming when they will no longer worship on Mount Gerizim or in Jerusalem, then clearly the third type to which Christ refers will be a worship that does away with the other two. For if someone wishes to unite two people, it is necessary to eliminate that over which they disagree and give them something in common on which they will agree. And so Christ, wishing to unite the Jews and Gentiles, eliminated the observances of the Jews and the idolatry of the Gentiles, for these two were like a wall separating the peoples. And he made the two people one: he is our peace, he who has made the two of us one (Ephesians 2:14). Thus the ritual observances and the idolatry of the Gentiles were abolished, and the true worship of God was established by Christ.

As for the mystical sense, and according to Origen, the three types of worship are three kinds of participation in divine wisdom.

Some participate in it under a dark cloud of error, and these adore on the mountain, for every error springs from pride: I am against you, destroying mountain (Jeremiah 51:25). Others participate in divine wisdom without error, but in an imperfect way, because they see in a mirror and in an obscure way; and these worship in Jerusalem, which signifies the present Church: the Lord is building Jerusalem (Psalms 146:2). But the blessed and the saints participate in divine wisdom without error in a perfect way, for they see God as he is (1 John 3:2).

And so Christ says, the hour is coming, that is, is awaited, when you will participate in divine wisdom neither in error nor in a mirror in an obscure way, but as it is.

Then, at you adore that which you do not know, he compares the different kinds of worship to each other.

First, he compares the second to the first.

Second, the third to the first and second, at but the hour is coming.

As to the first he does three things.

First, he shows the shortcomings of the first type of worship.

Second, the truth of the second.

Third, the reason for each statement.

As to the first he says, you adore that which you do not know.

Some might think that the Lord should have explained the truth of the matter and solved the woman’s problem. But the Lord does not bother to do so because each of these kinds of worship was due to end.

As to his saying, you adore, and so on, it should be pointed out that, as the Philosopher says, knowledge of complex things is different than knowledge of simple things. For something can be known about complex things in such a way that something else about them remains unknown; thus there can be false knowledge about them. For example, if someone has true knowledge of an animal as to its substance, he might be in error regarding the knowledge of one of its accidents, such as whether it is black or white, or of a difference, such as whether it has wings or is four-footed. But there cannot be false knowledge of simple things, because they are either perfectly known inasmuch as their quiddity is known, or they are not known at all if one cannot attain a knowledge of them. Therefore, since God is absolutely simple, there cannot be false knowledge of him in the sense that something might be known about him and something remain unknown, but only in the sense that knowledge of him is not attained. Accordingly, anyone who believes that God is something that he is not—for example, a body, or something like that—does not adore God but something else, because he does not know him, but something else.

Now the Samaritans had a false idea of God in two ways. First of all, because they thought he was corporeal, so that they believed that he should be adored in only one definite corporeal place. Furthermore, because they did not believe that he transcended all things, but was equal to certain creatures, they adored certain idols along with him, as if they were equal to him. Consequently, they did not know him, because they did not attain a true knowledge of him. So the Lord says, you adore that which you do not know, that is, you do not adore God because you do not know him, but only an imaginary being you think is God, as the gentiles do, with their foolish ideas (Ephesians 4:17).

As to the second, that is, the truth of the worship of the Jews, he says, we adore that which we do know. He includes himself among the Jews, because he was a Jew by race, and because the woman thought he was a prophet and a Jew. We adore that which we do know, because through the law and the prophets the Jews acquired a true knowledge or opinion of God, in that they did not believe that he was corporeal nor in one definite place, as though his greatness could be enclosed in a place: if the heavens, and the heavens of the heavens cannot contain you, how much less this house that I have built? (1 Kings 8:27). And neither did they worship idols: God is known in Judah (Psalms 75:2).

He gives the reason for this when he says, for salvation is of the Jews. As if to say: The true knowledge of God was possessed exclusively by the Jews, for it had been determined that salvation would come from them. And as the source of health should itself be healthy, so the source of salvation, which is acquired by the true knowledge and the true worship of God, should possess the true knowledge of God. Thus, since the source of salvation and its cause, that is, Christ, was to come from them, according to the promise: all the nations will be blessed in your descendents (Genesis 22:18), it was fitting that God be known in Judah.

Salvation comes from the Jews in three ways. First in their teaching of the truth, for all other peoples were in error, while the Jews held fast to the truth: what advantage do Jews have? First, they were entrusted with the words of God (Romans 3:1–2).

Second, in their spiritual gifts: for prophecy and the other gifts of the Spirit were given to them first, and from them they reached others: you, a wild olive branch, are ingrafted on them, that is, on the Jews (Romans 11:17); if the gentiles have become sharers in their spiritual goods, they ought to help the Jews as to earthly goods (Romans 15:27).

Third, since the very author of salvation is from the Jews according to the flesh, since Christ came from them in the flesh (Romans 9:5).

Now, at but the hour is coming, he compares the third kind of worship to the first two.

First, he mentions its superiority to the others.

Second, how appropriate this kind of worship is, at for the Father also seeks such to adore him.

As to the first point, we should note, as Origen says, that when speaking above of the third kind of worship, the Lord said, the hour is coming, when you shall adore the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem; but he did not then add: “and is now here.” But now, in speaking of it, he does say, the hour is coming, and now is. The reason is because the first time he was speaking of the worship found in heaven, when we will participate in the perfect knowledge of God, which is not possessed by those still living in this mortal life. But now he is speaking of the worship of this life, which has now come through Christ.

So he says, but the hour is coming, and now is, when the true adorers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth. We can understand this, as Chrysostom does, as showing the superiority of this worship to that of the Jews. The sense is this: just as the worship of the Jews is superior to that of the Samaritans, so the worship of the Christians is superior to that of the Jews. It is superior in two respects. First, because the worship of the Jews is in bodily rites: rites for the body, imposed only until the time they are reformed (Hebrews 9:10); while the worship of the Christians is in spirit.

Second, because the worship of the Jews is in symbols. For the Lord was not pleased with their sacrificial victims insofar as they were things; so we read, shall I eat the flesh of bulls, or drink the blood of goats? (Psalms 49:13). And again, you would not be pleased with a burnt offering (Psalms 50:18), that is, as a particular thing; but such a sacrificial victim would be pleasing to the Lord as a symbol of the true victim and of the true sacrifice: the law has only a shadow of the good things to come (Hebrews 10:1). But the worship of the Christians is in truth, because it is pleasing to God in itself: grace and truth came through Jesus Christ (John 1:17).

And thus, as to the first, he says that true adorers shall worship in spirit, not in bodily rites; as to the second he says and in truth, not in symbols.

This passage can be interpreted in a second way, by saying that when our Lord says, in spirit and in truth, he wants to show the difference between the third kind of worship and not just that of the Jews, but also that of the Samaritans. In this case, in truth refers to the Jews, for the Samaritans, as was said, were in error, because they worshiped what they did not understand. But the Jews worshiped with a true knowledge of God.

In spirit and in truth can be understood in a third way, as indicating the characteristics of true worship.

For two things are necessary for a true worship. One is that the worship be spiritual; so he says, in spirit, that is, with fervor of spirit: I will pray with spirit, and I will pray with my mind (1 Corinthians 14:15); singing to the Lord in your hearts (Ephesians 5:19). Second, the worship should be in truth. First, in the truth of faith, because no fervent spiritual desire is meritorious unless united to the truth of faith: ask with faith, without any doubting (James 1:6). Second, in truth, that is, without pretense or hypocrisy; against such attitudes we read: they like to pray at street corners, so people can see them (Matthew 6:5). This prayer, then, requires three things: first, the fervor of love; second, the truth of faith; and third, a correct intention.

He says, the Father, because under the law, worship was not given to the Father, but to the Lord. We worship in love, as sons, whereas they worshiped in fear, as slaves.

He says true adorers, in opposition to three things mentioned in the above interpretations. First, in opposition to the false worship of the Samaritans: put aside what is not true, and speak the truth (Ephesians 4:25). Second, in opposition to the fruitless and transitory character of bodily rites: why do you love what is without profit, and seek after lies (Psalms 4:3). Third, it is opposed to what is symbolic: grace and truth came through Jesus Christ (John 1:17).

Then when he says, for the Father also seeks such to adore him, he shows that this third kind of worship is appropriate for two reasons.

First, because the one worshiped wills and accepts this worship.

Second, because of the nature of the one worshiped, at God is spirit.

Concerning the first, we should note that for a man to be worthy of receiving what he asks, he should ask for things which are not in opposition to the will of the giver, and also ask for them in a way which is acceptable to the giver. And so when we pray to God, we ought to be such as God seeks. But God seeks those who will worship him in spirit and in truth, in the fervor of love and in the truth of faith: and now, Israel, what does the Lord your God want from you, but that you fear the Lord your God, and walk in his ways, and love him, and serve the Lord your God with all your heart? (Deuteronomy 10:12); I will show you, man, what is good, and what the Lord requires of you: to do what is right, and to love mercy, and to walk attentively with your God (Micah 6:8).

Then he shows that the third type of worship is appropriate from the very nature of God, saying, God is spirit. As is said, every animal loves its like ; and so God loves us insofar as we are like him. But we are not like him by our body, because he is incorporeal, but in what is spiritual in us, for God is spirit: be renewed in the spirit of your mind (Ephesians 4:23).

In saying, God is spirit, he means that God is incorporeal: a spirit does not have flesh and bones (Luke 24:39); and also that he is a life-giver, because our entire life is from God, as its creative source. God is also truth: I am the way, and the truth, and the life (John 14:6). Therefore, we should worship him in spirit and in truth.

When he says, the woman said to him, he mentions the one who gives the gift. This corresponds to what our Lord said before: if you knew the gift of God, and who it is who says to you, ‘Give me a drink,’ you perhaps would have asked him.

First, we have the woman’s profession.

Second, the teaching of Christ, at I am he, who is speaking with you.

As to the first, he does two things.

First, the woman professes her faith in the Christ to come.

Second, in the fullness of his teaching, at therefore, when he has come, he will tell us all things.

The woman, wearied by the profound nature of what Christ was saying, was confused and unable to understand all this. She says: I know that the Messiah is coming, who is called the Christ. As if to say: I do not understand what you are saying, but a time will come when the Messiah will arrive, and then we will understand all these things. For Messiah in Hebrew means the same as “anointed one” in Latin, and Christ in Greek. She knew that the Messiah was coming because she had been taught by the books of Moses, which foretell the coming of Christ: the scepter will not be taken away from Judah... until he who is to be sent comes (Genesis 49:10). As Augustine says, this is the first time the woman mentions the name Christ, and we see by this that she is now beginning to return to her lawful husband.

When this Messiah comes, he will give us a complete teaching. Hence she says, when he has come, he will tell us all things. This was foretold by Moses: I will raise up a prophet for them, from among their own brothers, like them; and I will put my words in his mouth, and he will tell them all I command him (Deuteronomy 18:18).

Because this woman had now called her husband—that is, her intellect and reason—the Lord now offers her the water of spiritual teaching by revealing himself to her in a most excellent way.

And so Jesus says: I am he, who is speaking with you, that is, I am the Christ. Wisdom goes to meet those who desire her, so she may first reveal herself to them , and: I will love him, and will manifest myself to him (John 14:21).

Our Lord did not reveal himself to this woman at once because it might have seemed to her that he was speaking out of self-glorification. But now, having brought her step by step to a knowledge of himself, Christ revealed himself at the appropriate time: words appropriately spoken are like apples of gold on beds of silver (Proverbs 25:11). In contrast, when he was asked by the Pharisees whether he was the Christ, if you are the Christ, tell us plainly (John 10:24), he did not reveal himself to them clearly, because they did not ask to learn but to test him. But this woman is speaking in all simplicity.

After presenting the teaching on spiritual water, the Evangelist now deals with its effect.

First, he presents the effect itself.

Second, he elaborates on it, beginning with the words, in the meantime, the disciples pleaded with him.

The effect of this teaching is its fruit for those who believe.

First, we have its fruit for the disciples, who were surprised at Christ’s conduct.

Second, we see its fruit in the woman, who proclaimed Christ’s power, beginning with the words, the woman therefore left her waterpot.

We are told three things about the disciples. First, their return to Christ. The Evangelist says, and immediately his disciples came, returning at this point. As Chrysostom reminds us, it was very fitting that the disciples returned after Christ had revealed himself to the woman, since this shows us that all events are regulated by divine providence: he made the small and the great, and takes care for all alike ; there is a time and a plan for everything (Ecclesiastes 8:6).

Second, we see their surprise at what Christ was doing; he says, they wondered that he talked with the woman. They were amazed at what was good; and as Augustine says, they did not suspect any evil.

They were amazed at two things. First, at the extraordinary gentleness and humility of Christ, for the Lord of the world stooped to speak for a long time with a poor woman, giving us an example of humility: be friendly to the poor .

Second, they were amazed that he was speaking with a Samaritan and a foreigner, for they did not know the mystery by which this woman was a symbol of the Church of the Gentiles. Christ sought the Gentiles, for he came to seek and to save what was lost (Luke 19:10).

Third, we see the disciples’ reverence for Christ, shown by their silence. For we show our reverence for God when we do not presume to discuss his affairs: it is the glory of God to conceal things, but the glory of kings is to search things out (Proverbs 25:2). So the Evangelist says that although his disciples were surprised, yet no man said: what do you seek? or, why do you talk with her? As Scripture says, Hear in silence, and for your reverence good grace will come to you .

Yet the disciples had been so trained to observe order, because of their reverence and filial fear toward Christ, that they would occasionally question him about matters that concerned them. That is, they would ask when Christ said things relating to them that were beyond their understanding: young men, speak if you have to . At other times, in matters that were not their business, as in this case, they did not question him.

Then, with the words the woman therefore left her waterpot and went into the city, we see the fruit of Christ's teaching in the woman. By what she said to her people, she was taking on the role of an apostle. From what she says and does, we can learn three things:

• Her affective devotion.
• Her way of preaching, shown in the words, come, and see a man who has told me all things whatsoever that I have done.
• The effect her preaching had, seen when they went out of the city and came to him.

Her affection is revealed in two ways. First, her devotion was so great that she forgot why she had come to the well, leaving without the water and her water jar. So he says, the woman therefore left her waterpot and went into the city to announce all the wonders Christ had done. She was no longer concerned for her own bodily comfort but for the welfare of others. In this respect she was like the apostles, who, leaving their nets, followed the Lord (Matthew 4:20).

The water jar is a symbol of worldly desires, by which people draw pleasures from the depths of darkness—symbolized by the well—that is, from a worldly way of life. Accordingly, those who abandon worldly desires for the sake of God leave their water jars: no soldier of God becomes entangled in the business of this world (2 Timothy 2:4).

Second, we see her affection from the great number of those to whom she brings the news: not to just one or two, but to the entire town. We read that she went into the city. This signifies the duty Christ gave to the apostles: go, teach all nations (Matthew 28:19); and, I have appointed you, that you should go, and should bear fruit (John 15:16).

Next we see her manner of preaching, beginning with the words and said to the men there. She first invites them to see Christ, saying, come, and see a man. Although she had heard Christ say that he was the Christ, she did not immediately tell the people that they should come to the Christ, or believe, so as not to give them a reason for scoffing. So at first she mentions things that were believable and evident about Christ, such as that he was a man: made in the likeness of men (Philippians 2:7). Neither did she say, "believe," but come, and see. She was convinced that if they were to taste from that well by seeing him, they would be affected in the same way she was: come, and I will tell you the great things he has done for me (Psalms 66:16). In this she imitates the example of a true preacher, not calling people to himself, but to Christ: what we preach is not ourselves, but Jesus Christ (2 Corinthians 4:5).

Second, she mentions a clue to Christ’s divinity, saying, who has told me all things whatsoever that I have done, that is, how many husbands she had had. For it is the function and sign of divinity to disclose hidden things and the secrets of hearts. Although the things she had done would cause her shame, she is still not ashamed to mention them. For as Chrysostom says, when the soul is on fire with the divine fire, it no longer pays attention to earthly things, neither to glory nor to shame, but only to that flame that holds it fast.

Third, she infers the greatness of Christ, saying, is it possible that he is the Christ? She did not dare to say that he was the Christ, lest she seem to be trying to teach them; they could have become angry at this and refused to go with her. Yet she was not entirely silent on this point. Submitting it to their judgment, she presented it in the form of a question, saying, is it possible that he is the Christ? For this is an easier way to persuade someone.

This woman, who is of the humblest condition, signifies the manner of the apostles' preaching, because as it is said: not many of you are learned in the worldly sense, not many powerful... but God chose the simple ones of the world to embarrass the wise (1 Corinthians 1:26). Thus the apostles are called handmaids: she, divine wisdom, i.e., the Son of God, sent out her handmaids, the apostles, to summon to the tower (Proverbs 9:3).

The fruit of her preaching is given when the Evangelist says, therefore they went out of the city and came to meet Christ. We see by this that if we desire to come to Christ, we must set out from the city, that is, leave behind our carnal desires: let us go out to him outside the camp, bearing the abuse he took (Hebrews 13:13).

Now, beginning with the words in the meantime, the disciples pleaded with him, the effect of this spiritual teaching is elaborated.

• First, by what Christ said to his disciples.
• Second, by the effect of all this on the Samaritans, as seen in the verse, now many of the Samaritans of that city believed in him (John 4:39).

Concerning the first point, he does two things.

• First, we have the situation in which Christ speaks to his disciples.
• Second, what he said, beginning with but he said to them: I have food to eat, which you do not know.

The occasion for this teaching arose from the apostles' insistence that Christ eat. He says, meanwhile, that is, between the time that Christ and the woman spoke and the Samaritans came, his disciples pleaded with him, that is, with Christ, saying: Rabbi, eat. They thought that then was a good time to eat, before the crowds came from the city. For the disciples did not usually offer Christ food in the presence of strangers; so we read that so many people came to him that he did not even have time to eat (Mark 6:31).

After presenting the situation, he gives its fruit, starting with the words, but he said to them: I have food to eat, which you do not know.

• First, it is given in figurative language.
• Second, we see the disciples are slow in understanding this, as shown when the disciples therefore said to one another.
• Third, the Lord explains what he meant, saying, Jesus said to them: my food is to do the will of him who sent me (John 4:34).

The fruit of his spiritual teaching is presented under the symbols of food and nourishment, so the Lord says, I have food to eat. We should note that just as bodily nourishment is incomplete unless there is both food and drink, so also both should be found in spiritual nourishment: the Lord fed him with the bread of life and understanding—this is the food—and gave him a drink of the water of saving wisdom—and this is the drink . So it was appropriate for Christ to speak of food after having given drink to the Samaritan woman. And just as water is a symbol for saving wisdom, so food is a symbol of good works.

The food that Christ had to eat is the salvation of humanity; this was what he desired. When he says that he has food to eat, he shows how great a desire he has for our salvation. For just as we desire to eat when we are hungry, so he desires to save us: my delight is to be with the children of men (Proverbs 8:31). So he says, I have food to eat, i.e., the conversion of the nations, which you do not know, for they had no way of knowing beforehand about this conversion of the nations.

Origen explains this in a different way. It follows from the connection between spiritual food and bodily food. The same amount of bodily food is not enough for everyone; some need more, others less. Again, what is good for one is harmful to another.

The same thing happens in spiritual nourishment, for the same kind and amount should not be given to everyone, but should be adjusted to what is appropriate for the disposition and capacity of each. Like newborn babes, desire spiritual milk (1 Peter 2:2).

Solid food is for the perfect. Thus Origen says that the person who understands the loftier doctrine, and who has charge of others in spiritual matters, can teach this doctrine to those who are weaker and have less understanding. Accordingly, the Apostle says: being little ones in Christ, I gave you milk, not solid food (1 Corinthians 3:2). And Jesus could say this with much more truth: "I have food to eat," and, I have yet many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now (John 16:12).

The slowness of the disciples to understand these matters is implied by the fact that what our Lord said about spiritual food, they understood as referring to bodily food. For even they were still without understanding (Matthew 15:16).

The disciples therefore said to one another: has anyone brought him something to eat? It is not surprising that this Samaritan woman did not understand about spiritual water, for even the Jewish disciples did not understand about spiritual food.

In their saying to each other, has anyone brought him something to eat? we should note that it was customary for Christ to accept food from others. This was not because he needs our goods—he does not need our goods (Psalms 16:2)—nor our food, because it is he who gives food to every living thing.

Then why did he desire and accept goods from others?

He did so for two reasons. First, so that those who give him these things might acquire merit. Second, in order to give us the example that those engrossed in spiritual matters should not be ashamed of their poverty, nor regard it as burdensome to be supported by others.

For it is fitting that teachers have others provide their food so that, being free from such concerns, they may carefully pay attention to the ministry of the word, as Chrysostom says, and as we find in the Gloss. Let the elders who rule well be regarded as worthy of a double compensation, especially those concerned with preaching and teaching (1 Timothy 5:17).

Since the disciples were slow to understand the Lord’s figure of speech, the Lord now explains it.

First, we have its explanation, and second, its application, which begins with the words, “Do you not say, ‘There are yet four months, and then comes the harvest’?”

As to the first point, we should note that just as Christ explained to the Samaritan woman what he had told her in figurative language about water, so he explains to his apostles what he told them in figurative language about food. But he does not do so in the same way in both cases. Since the apostles were able to understand these matters more easily, he explains them at once and in few words; but to the Samaritan woman, since she could not understand as well, our Lord leads her to the truth with a longer explanation.

There is a perfectly reasonable cause for Christ to say, “My food is to do the will of him who sent me, so that I may accomplish his work.” For just as bodily food sustains a person and brings them to full development, the spiritual food of the soul and of the rational creature is that by which it is sustained and perfected. This consists in being joined to its end and following a higher rule. David, understanding this, said, “For me, to adhere to God is good” (Psalms 72:28). Accordingly, Christ, as man, appropriately says that his food is to do the will of God and to accomplish his work.

These two expressions can be understood as meaning the same thing, or they can be understood in different ways.

If we understand them as meaning the same, the sense is this: “My food is,” that is, in this is my strength and nourishment, “to do the will of him who sent me,” in accord with “My God, I desired to do your will, and your law is in my heart” (Psalms 39:9), and, “I came down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me” (John 6:38). But because doing the will of another can be understood in two ways—first, by causing him to will it, and second, by fulfilling what I know he wills—the Lord explains what it means to do the will of him who sent him by adding, “so that I may accomplish his work.” This means that he might complete the work he knows the Father wants: “I must do the works of him who sent me while it is day” (John 9:4).

If these two expressions are understood as different, then we should point out that Christ did two things in this world. First, he taught the truth by inviting and calling us to the faith, and by this he fulfilled the will of the Father: “This is the will of my Father who sent me: that everyone who sees the Son and believes in him may have eternal life” (John 6:40). Second, he accomplished the truth by his passion, opening for us the gate of life and giving us the power to arrive at complete truth: “I have finished the work that you gave me to do” (John 17:4). Thus he is saying: “My food is to do the will of him who sent me” (by calling people to the faith), “so that I may accomplish his work” (by leading them to what is perfect).

Another interpretation, given by Origen, is that every person who does good works should direct their intention to two things: the honor of God and the good of their neighbor. For as it is said, “The end of the commandment is love” (1 Timothy 1:5), and this love embraces both God and our neighbor. And so, when we do something for God’s sake, the end of the commandment is God; but when it is for our neighbor’s good, the end of the commandment is our neighbor.

With this in mind, Christ is saying, “My food is to do the will of him who sent me”—that is, God—meaning to direct and regulate my intention toward matters concerning the honor of God; “so that I may accomplish his work”—that is, to do things for the benefit and perfection of humanity.

On the other hand, since the works of God are perfect, it does not seem proper to speak of accomplishing or completing them.

I answer that among lower creatures, humanity is the special work of God, who made us in his own image and likeness (Genesis 1:26). In the beginning, God made this a perfect work, because as we read, “God made man upright” (Ecclesiastes 7:30). But later, humanity lost this perfection through sin and abandoned what was right. And so, this work of the Lord needed to be repaired to become right again. This was accomplished by Christ, for “just as by the disobedience of one man, many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one man, many will be made just” (Romans 5:19). Thus Christ says, “so that I may accomplish his work,” that is, to bring humanity back to what is perfect.

When he says, “Do you not say, ‘There are yet four months, and then comes the harvest’? Behold, I say to you, lift up your eyes and see the fields, which are already white for harvest,” he makes use of a simile.

Note that when Christ asked the Samaritan woman for a drink—“Give me a drink” (John 4:7)—he used a simile concerning water. Here, however, the disciples are urging the Lord to eat, and now he uses a simile concerning spiritual food. There are some people whom God asks for a drink, like this Samaritan woman, and there are some who offer a drink to God. But no one offers food to God unless God first asks for it. We offer spiritual food to God when we ask him for our salvation, that is, when we pray, “Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven” (Matthew 6:10). We cannot obtain salvation by ourselves unless we are first moved by prevenient grace, according to the statement, “Make us come back to you, O Lord, and we will come back” (Lamentations 5:21). The Lord himself, therefore, first asks for that which, through prevenient grace, causes us to ask.

In this simile, we will consider:

• First, the harvest.
• Second, those who reap the harvest, beginning with the words, “And he who reaps receives wages.”

Concerning the first point, he does two things:

• First, he states the simile concerning the natural harvest.
• Second, he discusses the spiritual harvest, beginning with, “Behold, I say to you, lift up your eyes, and see the fields, which are already white for harvest.”

From his words, “Do you not say, ‘There are four months and then the harvest comes’?” we can see that, as stated, Christ left Judea and traveled through Samaria right after John was arrested, and that all this happened during the winter (Matthew 4:12). Since the harvests there ripen according to the season, there were four months from that time until the harvest. Thus he says, regarding the natural harvest, “Do you not say... ‘There are yet four months and then the harvest comes’?”—that is, the time for gathering the harvest. But speaking of the spiritual harvest, he says, “Behold, I say to you, lift up your eyes, and see the fields, which are already white for harvest.”

Here we should point out that harvest time is when fruit is gathered, and so any time fruit is gathered can be regarded as a harvest. Now, fruit is gathered at two times. In both temporal and spiritual matters, there is nothing to prevent what is fruit in relation to an earlier state from being seed in relation to a later one. For example, good works are the fruit of spiritual instruction, as are faith and similar things. These, in turn, are seeds of eternal life, because eternal life is acquired through them. So it is said, “My blossoms” (in relation to the fruit to follow) “bear the fruit of honor and riches” (in relation to what preceded) .

With this in mind, there is a gathering of a spiritual harvest that concerns an eternal fruit: the gathering of the faithful into eternal life, of which we read, “The harvest is the end of the world” (Matthew 13:39). We are not concerned with this harvest here. Another spiritual harvest is gathered in the present, and this is understood in two ways. First, the gathering of fruit is the conversion of the faithful to be assembled in the Church. Second, the gathering is the very knowledge of the truth, by which a person gathers the fruit of truth into their soul. We are concerned with these two types of harvest, which correspond to different interpretations.

Augustine and Chrysostom understand the gathering of the harvest in the first way, as follows. “You say” that it is not yet time for the natural harvest, but this is not true of the spiritual harvest. Indeed, “Behold, lift up your eyes”—that is, the eyes of your mind, by thinking, or even your physical eyes—and “look at the fields, which are already white for the harvest,” because the entire countryside was full of Samaritans coming to Christ.

The statement that the fields “are already white” is metaphorical, for when sown fields are white, it is a sign that they are ready for harvest. By this, he simply means that the people were ready for salvation and to hear the word. He says, “See the fields,” because not only the Jews but the Gentiles as well were ready for the faith: “The harvest is great, but the workers are few” (Matthew 9:37). And just as harvests are made white by the burning heat of the summer sun, so by the coming of the Sun of Justice—that is, Christ—and by his preaching and power, people are made ready for salvation. It is said, “The sun of justice will rise on you who fear my name” (Malachi 4:2). Thus, the time of Christ’s coming is called the time of fullness: “When the fullness of time had come, God sent his Son” (Galatians 4:4).

Origen deals with the second type of harvest: the gathering of truth in the soul. He says that one gathers as much fruit of truth in the harvest as the truths one knows. He says that everything stated here—“Do you not say, ‘There are yet four months, and then the harvest comes’? Behold, I say to you, lift up your eyes, and see the fields, which are already white for harvest”—should be understood figuratively. In this passage, the Lord does two things: first, he presents a false opinion, and second, he refutes it with the words, “I say to you.”

Some thought that a person could not acquire any truth about anything. This opinion gave rise to the heresy of the Academics, who maintained that nothing can be known for certain in this life. Concerning this, we read, “I tested all things by wisdom. I said: ‘I will acquire wisdom,’ and it became further from me” (Ecclesiastes 7:24). Our Lord refers to this opinion when he says, “Do you not say, ‘There are yet four months and then the harvest comes’?” This means that this whole present life, in which a person serves under the four elements, must end before truth can be gathered in another life.

Our Lord rejects this opinion when he says that this is not true: “Behold, I say to you, lift up your eyes.” Sacred Scripture usually uses this expression when presenting something subtle and profound, as in, “Lift up your eyes on high, and see who has created these things” (Isaiah 40:26). For when our eyes are not lifted away from earthly things or from the desires of the flesh, they are not fit to know spiritual fruit. When they are lowered to the earth, they are prevented from considering divine things: “They have fixed their eyes on the earth” (Psalms 16:11). Sometimes they are blinded by concupiscence: “They have averted their eyes so as not to look at heaven or remember the judgments of God” (Daniel 13:9).

So he says, “Lift up your eyes and see the fields, for they are already white for the harvest,” meaning they are such that truth can be learned from them. By the “fields” we specifically understand all those things from which truth can be acquired, especially the Scriptures: “Search the Scriptures... they give testimony about me” (John 5:39).

Indeed, these fields existed in the Old Testament, but they were not white for the harvest because people were not able to pick spiritual fruit from them until Christ came. He made them white by opening their understanding: “He opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures” (Luke 24:45). Again, created things are harvests from which the fruit of truth is gathered: “The invisible things of God are clearly known by the things that have been made” (Romans 1:20). Nevertheless, the Gentiles who pursued knowledge of these things gathered the fruits of error rather than truth from them, because as we read, “They served the creature rather than the Creator” (Romans 1:25). So the harvests were not yet white, but they were made white for the harvest when Christ came.

Next, when he says, “He who reaps receives wages,” he deals with the reapers.

He does three things:

• First, he gives their reward.
• Second, he mentions a proverb, beginning with, “For in this the saying is true.”
• Third, he explains and applies it, beginning with, “I have sent you to reap.”

Concerning the first point, we should note that when the Lord was explaining spiritual water earlier, he mentioned how it differs from natural water: a person who drinks natural water will become thirsty again, but one who drinks spiritual water will never be thirsty again. Here, too, in explaining the harvest, he points out the difference between a natural and a spiritual harvest. Three things are mentioned.

First is the similarity between the two harvests: the person who reaps either one receives a wage. The one who reaps spiritually is the one who gathers the faithful into the Church or who gathers the fruit of truth into their soul. Each of these will receive a wage, according to the verse, “Each one will receive his own wage according to his work” (1 Corinthians 3:8).

The other two points concern the differences between the harvests. First, the fruit from a natural harvest sustains the life of the body, but the fruit gathered by a spiritual reaper concerns eternal life. So he says, “He who reaps”—that is, who reaps spiritually—“gathers fruit for eternal life.” This fruit is the faithful, who will obtain eternal life: “Your fruit is sanctification, your end is eternal life” (Romans 6:22). Or, this fruit is the very knowledge and explanation of the truth by which a person acquires eternal life: “Those who explain me will have eternal life” .

Second, the two harvests are different because in a natural harvest, it is considered a misfortune for one to sow and another to reap; the one who sows is saddened when another reaps. But it is not this way with spiritual seed, “so that both he who sows, and he who reaps, may rejoice together.” According to Chrysostom and Augustine, the ones who sowed spiritual seed are the fathers and prophets of the Old Testament, for “the seed is the word of God” (Luke 8:11), which Moses and the prophets sowed in the land of Judah. The apostles, however, were the reapers, because the prophets were not able to accomplish what they wanted to do—that is, to bring people to Christ. This was done by the apostles. And so both the apostles and the prophets rejoice together in one mansion of glory over the conversion of the faithful: “Joy and gladness will be found there, thanksgiving and the voice of praise” (Isaiah 51:3).

This refutes the heresy of the Manicheans who condemn the fathers of the Old Testament, for as the Lord says here, they will rejoice with the apostles.

According to Origen, however, the sowers in any field of knowledge are those who establish its first principles, while the reapers are those who proceed from these principles to further truths. This is all the more true of the science of all sciences. The prophets are sowers because they handed down many things concerning divine matters, but the apostles are the reapers because in their preaching and teaching they revealed many things the prophets did not make known: “Which was not made known to the sons of men in other generations as it has now been revealed to his holy apostles” (Ephesians 3:5).

Then he says, “For in this the saying is true: that it is one man who sows, and it is another who reaps.” It is as if to say: “For in this”—that is, in this situation—“the saying is true,” meaning the proverb in common use among the Jews is fulfilled: One person sows, another reaps. This proverb seems to have grown out of the statement, “You will sow your seed in vain for it will be devoured by your enemies” (Leviticus 26:16). As a result, the Jews used this proverb when one person labored on something, but another received the benefit from it. This, then, is what our Lord is saying: the proverb is fulfilled here because it was the prophets who sowed and labored, while you are the ones to reap and rejoice.

Another interpretation is this: “For in this the saying is true”—that is, what I am saying to you is true—“that it is one man who sows, and it is another who reaps,” because you will reap the fruits of the prophets’ labor. Now, the prophets and the apostles are different, but not in faith, for they both had faith: “But now the justice of God has been manifested outside the law; the law and the prophets bore witness to it” (Romans 3:21). They are different in their manner of life, for the prophets lived under the ceremonies of the law, from which the apostles and Christians have been freed: “When we were children, we were slaves under the elements of this world. But when the fullness of time came, God sent his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, so that we could receive adoption as sons” (Galatians 4:3).

And although the apostles and prophets labor at different times, they will nevertheless rejoice equally and receive wages “for eternal life, so that both he who sows, and he who reaps, may rejoice together.” This was prefigured in the transfiguration of Christ, where all had their own glory: both the fathers of the Old Testament (Moses and Elijah) and the fathers of the New Testament (Peter, John, and James). From this, we see that the righteous of the New and Old Testaments will rejoice together in the glory to come.

Then, with the words, “I have sent you to reap that in which you did not labor,” he applies the proverb.

He does two things:

• First, he calls the apostles reapers.
• Second, he says they have entered into the labor of others, with the words, “Others have done the work, and you have entered into their labors.”

Concerning the first point, he says that “it is one who reaps” (because you are reapers) “and another who sows,” for “I have sent you to reap that in which you did not labor.” He does not say, “I will send you,” but “I have sent you.” He says this because he sent them twice.

One time was before his passion, when he sent them to the Jews, saying, “Do not go on the roads of the gentiles... but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel” (Matthew 10:5). In this case, they were sent to reap what they did not work for—that is, to convert the Jews, among whom the prophets had worked.

After the resurrection, Christ sent them to the Gentiles, saying, “Go to the whole world, and preach the good news to every creature” (Mark 16:15). This time they were sent to sow for the first time. As the Apostle says, “I have preached the good news, but not where Christ was already known, so as not to build on another’s foundation. But as it is written: ‘They to whom he was not proclaimed will see, and they who have not heard will understand’” (Romans 15:20). And so Christ says, “I have sent you,” referring to the first time they were sent.

This, then, is how the apostles are reapers, and others—the prophets—are the sowers.

Accordingly, he says, “Others have done the work” (by sowing the beginnings of the doctrine of Christ), “and you have entered into their labors” (to collect the fruit): “The fruit of good labors is glorious” . The prophets labored, I say, to bring people to Christ: “If you believed Moses, you would perhaps believe me also, for he wrote of me. But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe my words?” (John 5:46–47). But the prophets did not reap the fruit, so Isaiah said with this in mind, “I have labored for nothing and without reason; in vain I have exhausted my strength” (Isaiah 49:4).

Above, the Lord foretold to the apostles the fruit that would be produced among the Samaritans by the woman’s testimony. Now the Evangelist deals with this fruit.

First, the fruit of the woman’s testimony is given.

Second, an argument is given concerning the growth of this fruit, which was produced by Christ, in the phrase and many more believed in him because of his own word.

The fruit produced from the woman’s testimony is shown in three ways.

First, by the faith of the Samaritans, for they believed in Christ. Thus, he says, many of the Samaritans of that city, to which the woman had returned, believed in him. This was because of the word of the woman from whom Christ asked for a drink of water, who said, he told me all things whatsoever that I have done. This testimony was a sufficient reason to believe in Christ. Since what Christ had said revealed her failings, she would not have mentioned them unless she had been brought to believe. And so the Samaritans believed as soon as they heard her. This indicates that faith comes by hearing.

Second, the fruit of her testimony is shown in their coming to Christ, for faith gives rise to a desire for the thing believed. Accordingly, after they believed, they came to Christ to be perfected by him. So he says, so when the Samaritans came to him. Come to him, and be enlightened (Psalms 34:5); come to me, all you who labor and are burdened, and I will refresh you (Matthew 11:28).

Third, the fruit of her testimony is shown in their desire, for a believer must not only come to Christ but also desire that Christ remain with him. So he says, they begged him to stay there. And he remained there two days.

The Lord remains with us through love: if anyone loves me, he will keep my word (John 14:23), and further on he adds, and we will make our abode with him. The Lord remains for two days because there are two precepts of love: the love of God and the love of our neighbor. On these two commandments all the law and the prophets depend (Matthew 22:40). But the third day is the day of glory: he will revive us after two days; on the third day he will raise us up (Hosea 6:2). Christ did not remain there for that day because the Samaritans were not yet capable of glory.

Then, concerning the phrase and many more believed in him because of his own word, the Evangelist says that the fruit resulting from the woman’s testimony was increased by the presence of Christ. This happened in three ways:

1. in the number of those who believed,
2. in their reason for believing,
3. and in the truth they believed.

The fruit was increased in the number of those who believed because while many believed in Christ on account of the woman, many more believed in him because of his own word—that is, Christ’s own words. This signifies that although many believed because of the prophets, many more were converted to the faith after Christ came: rise up, O Lord, in the command you have given, and a congregation of people will surround you (Psalms 7:6–7).

Second, this fruit was increased because of the way in which they believed, for they say to the woman, now we believe, not just because of your story.

Here we should note that three things are necessary for the perfection of faith, and they are given here in order. First, faith should be right; second, it should be prompt; and third, it should be certain.

Now, faith is right when it obeys the truth not for some external reason, but for the sake of the truth itself. Regarding this, they said to the woman, now we believe the truth, not just because of your story, but because of the truth itself.

Three things lead us to believe in Christ:

1. Natural reason: since the creation of the world the invisible things of God are clearly known by the things that have been made (Romans 1:20).
2. The testimony of the law and the prophets: but now justification from God has been manifested outside the law; the law and the prophets bore witness to it (Romans 3:21).
3. The preaching of the apostles and others: how will they believe without someone to preach to them? (Romans 10:14).

Yet when a person, after being instructed in this way, believes, he can then say that he does not believe for any of these reasons—neither because of natural reason, nor the testimony of the law, nor the preaching of others—but solely because of the truth itself: Abram believed God, who regarded this as his justification (Genesis 15:6).

Faith is prompt if it believes quickly, and this was demonstrated in these Samaritans because they were converted to God by merely hearing him. So they say, for we ourselves have heard him and know that this indeed is the savior of the world, without seeing miracles, as the Jews saw. And although believing people quickly is a sign of thoughtlessness—he who believes easily is frivolous ()—yet, to believe God quickly is all the more praiseworthy: when they heard me, they obeyed me (Psalms 18:44).

Faith should be certain, for one who doubts in faith is an unbeliever: ask with faith, without any doubting (James 1:6). And so their faith was certain; thus they say, and we know. Sometimes, one who believes is said to know, as here, because knowledge and faith agree in that they are both certain.

For just as knowledge is certain, so is faith. Indeed, faith is much more certain, because the certainty of knowledge rests on human reason, which can be deceived, while the certainty of faith rests on divine reason, which cannot be contradicted. However, they differ in their mode, because faith possesses its certainty from a divinely infused light, while knowledge possesses its certainty from a natural light.

For just as the certainty of knowledge rests on first principles that are naturally known, so the principles of faith are known from a divinely infused light: you are saved by grace, through faith; and this is not due to yourselves, for it is the gift of God (Ephesians 2:8).

Third, the fruit was increased in the truth they believed, so they say, this indeed is the savior of the world. Here they are affirming that Christ is the unique, true, and universal Savior.

He is the unique Savior, for they assert that he is different from others when they say, this indeed. This means that he alone is the one who has come to save: truly, you are a hidden God, the God of Israel, the savior (Isaiah 45:15); there is no other name under heaven given to men, by which we are saved (Acts 4:12).

They affirm that Christ is the true Savior when they say, indeed. For since salvation, as Dionysius says, is deliverance from evil and preservation in good, there are two kinds of salvation: one is true, and the other is not. Salvation is true when we are freed from true evils and preserved in true goods. In the Old Testament, however, although certain saviors had been sent, they did not truly bring salvation, for they set people free from temporal evils, which are not truly evils, nor are they true goods, because they do not last. But Christ is truly the Savior, because he frees people from true evils (that is, sins)—he will save his people from their sins (Matthew 1:21)—and he preserves them in true goods (that is, spiritual goods).

They affirm that he is the universal Savior because he is not just for some (that is, for the Jews alone) but is the savior of the world. For God did not send his Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through him (John 3:17).