Patristic homilies on John 4.1-42

[Karen Hammer]

Hello--

I'm looking for early Church Fathers interpretations of this text. I have St. Ephraim the Syrian's, St. John Chrysostom's, St. Augustine. I'm looking for St. Maximos the Confessor and St. Gregory Palamas and others to make a comparison.

What I am particularly want to find is the reason why this passage is important to Christian history and the interpretation as to what the many husbands of the Samaritan woman signify. This passage was always a puzzling one to me because this woman (who is usually depicted as a sinful woman) does not speak or act towards Jesus as a disgraced woman (either cynical or ashamed).

St. Ephraim's ("On Virginity" Hymn 22-23) interpreted the identity of the husbands based on a similar situation in the Book of Tobit (the marriage of Tobias and Sarah). There Sarah was married 7 times, but before each marriage was comsummated, the husband died because a demon killed him. Because of this text in Tobit and a careful reading of the woman's dialogue in John 4, St. Ephraim does not see the Samaritan woman as a "fallen woman". I think he has a very good point. Other interpretations do see her as a fallen woman, but also have interpreted these husbands as being the Penteteuch or the 5 senses.

Can anyone help by supplying homilies or other resources on this passage from other Early Church fathers?

Thanks!

[Herman Blaydoe]

The best source would probably be to study the life of St. Photini, who was the woman at the well.

Some information is available here: The Life of St. Photini (http://www.antiochian.org/1110771455)

[Karen Hammer]

Your link to the life of St. Photini doesn't give me what I want. Thanks anyway.

I want to find the patristic homilies about John 4:1-42, not a hagiography about Photini.

[Matthew Panchisin]

Dear K Hammer,

I don't think the Samaritan woman is seen as a sinful woman, but rather as one who is quick to
embrace her engagement with Christ and indeed many others as she spread the good news of her encounter with Christ. She is seen as receptive to lofty thoughts and keenly aware (intelligent) and eager to accept the living water that Christ offers, hence her name Photini, enlightened.


Blessed Theophylact mentions;

"To the One asking for drink, the woman speaks with words which show her eagerness to learn. What should He have done? Shun this woman so eager to learn, who thirsted to learn the answer to her perplexity? Of course not! That is not the way of God, the Lover of man. We also see here the utter simplicity of the Lord."


Here is the complete context written by the Blessed Theophylact, it is a very good read and should be of much help.

http://www.chrysostompress.org/explanation/pascha_5?CPSESSION=897fc5e35f613


Interestingly enough she is seen in Orthodox iconography sometimes wearing a head covering and other times not, after reading the complete context written by the Blessed Theophylact would anyone have any ideas relative to why that tradition is in place?

Much thanks to Father Christopher Stade for his work at Chrysostompress in translating and publishing much for us. For all those that might be interested there will be a symposium and hierarchical services on Sept. 28-30 at Father Christophers parish as it is the 1600th anniversary of the repose of St. John Chrysostom. I would be remiss to thank Matthew Steenberg for the tremendous amount of work that he done on this site. Out of his very busy schedule teaching, lecturing and his responsibilities in the Church (he will be crossing the pond and speaking at the symposium) he somehow finds time to put forth so much effort into this site.

In Christ,

Matthew Panchisin

[Karen Hammer]

Thanks for the link to Blessed Theophlact's homily. It may be of some help.

Here again is what I'm looking for: I'm looking for early Church Fathers interpretations of the John 4:1-42 text. I have St. Ephraim the Syrian's, St. John Chrysostom's, St. Augustine. I'm looking for St. Maximos the Confessor and St. Gregory Palamas and others of early Church history (say before 800 A.D.) to make a comparison.


Some do see the Samaritan woman as a sinful woman. Some do not. The most common interpretation of the many husbands the Samaritan woman had was that she was sinful. St. Ephraim pointedly refuted this view and cites a woman in the Book of Tobit with many husbands whose circumstance may be similar to the Samaritan woman.

I'm not looking for a hagiography on Photini, but the early Church father's homilies about this text. Thanks!

[John Charmley]

Dear K Hammer,

The following might, I hope, be of use to you:

Tatian, The Diatessaron section 21 (quite a long section)
Irenaeus, Against Heresies Book 3, chapter 17
Tertullian, On Modesty Chapter 8
St. Jerome, letter 48 (not quite a homily, but makes some points others don't).

I shall do a little more digging in my notes, but these are the main ones - apart from the ones you already know.

In Christ,

John

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

Hello Karen,

The only other text in English I have besides those you already mention is The Gospel Commentary published by the ROCOR Old Rite parish in Erie, Pa. This is a collection of homilies for every Sunday of the year (and the Great plus some lesser Feasts) including the Sunday of the Samaritan Woman.

As the introduction to this collection states these homilies come from a 14th c Byzantine collection of homilies which were translated into Slavonic shortly afterwards. This collection was regularly re-published in Russia through the 17th c.

Unfortunately, even though they are clearly Patristic in origin, there is no indication given in the collection (this seems to originate from the original collections since the translator brings up the question without being able to give a clear answer) of which Fathers besides St John Chrysostom were sources. In some homilies however by comparing this to other collections I have I found clear evidence of besides St John Chrysostom, of St Cyril of Alexandria and perhaps St Ambrose. There also seems to be a later Byzantine hand that adds material at times. So these homilies are clearly Patristic in origin.

I took only a quick look at the homily about the Samaritan Woman but there is only a passing reference to the question of her being sinful. The beginning of the homily has a long three page spiritual interpretation of the exile of Israel to Assyria and Babylon. This suddenly breaks into a beautiful one page prayer that God deliver us from our enemies before returning to a vs by vs interpretation of John 4:5-42.

This is a really wonderful collection for any who look for homilies of the Fathers in English. As with most of the Old Rite publications they sell at very reasonable price for what you get (this collection is 850 pgs). Last I saw it was available on the Old Rite parish website in Erie, Pa . I got mine from the San Francisco cathedral bookstore a bit over a year ago.

A last note of interest. When you go through this whole collection it becomes clear that the Pericopes have changed over the centuries. For example our reading last week for All Sts was Mt 10: 32-33, 37-38 with a sudden jump to Mt 19: 27-30. In previous times the reading was Mt 10: 32, 28a, 16-18, 33-42. This is what the homily is based on.

In Christ- Fr Raphael


Thanks for the link to Blessed Theophlact's homily. It may be of some help.

Here again is what I'm looking for: I'm looking for early Church Fathers interpretations of the John 4:1-42 text. I have St. Ephraim the Syrian's, St. John Chrysostom's, St. Augustine. I'm looking for St. Maximos the Confessor and St. Gregory Palamas and others of early Church history (say before 800 A.D.) to make a comparison.


Some do see the Samaritan woman as a sinful woman. Some do not. The most common interpretation of the many husbands the Samaritan woman had was that she was sinful. St. Ephraim pointedly refuted this view and cites a woman in the Book of Tobit with many husbands whose circumstance may be similar to the Samaritan woman.

I'm not looking for a hagiography on Photini, but the early Church father's homilies about this text. Thanks!

[Andrew]

My spiritual father says that the woman at the well (St. Photini) is an icon for people living in this age... we live in sin and have attempted many times to "get it right," just as she was lawfully wedded multiple times, but in the end we give up hope for salvation and fall to despondency and accidie, just as she gave up on marriage and lived in sin with another man. But Christ has come to us at our lowest point of hopelessness. Our minds have fallen to Hell, but Our Lord Jesus Christ has lifted us from despair to partake of Living Water.

[Father David Moser]

Hello Karen,

The only other text in English I have besides those you already mention is The Gospel Commentary ...
As the introduction to this collection states these homilies come from a 14th c Byzantine collection of homilies which were translated into Slavonic shortly afterwards.

Thank you father for calling my attention to the introduction. I have this volume, but did not use it heavily as I thought (after reading the title page) that it was simply a restatement of the commentaries of St John Chrysostom. But reading the introduction I find that the commentary is in fact a wide sampling of the fathers, all attributed to St John simply for convenience and out of honor for his position as a father of the Church.

You have reopened this book to me - many thanks.

Fr David Moser

[Matthew Panchisin]

Dear K Hammer,




Some do see the Samaritan woman as a sinful woman. Some do not.

I'm rather curious about which Church Fathers see her as a sinful. I say this because the Orthodox Church does not see her as sinful or certainly that is not the focal point for a balanced view of her encounter.

The Blessed Theophylacts' conveyance of patristic thought and the 'mind of the Church' is often heralded by people like Bishop Ignaty Brianchaniov as indispensable since they are based entirely upon the early Fathers of the Church, most notably St. John Chrysostom. Usually within his text if there are other views from some Fathers that are seemingly different from other Fathers, he will say "some say" not to dismiss other understandings but rather to get to the heart of the matter or text.


Hence his commentary is also a significantly wide sampling of the fathers as the Orthodox Church understands them. Those understandings are not understood on an individual basis, but rather correctly entirely within the Church which is not an isolated situation of create your own understandings. Not that you are doing that now, it is something that I have found myself doing on occasion as such I'm familiar with the process.


In Christ,

Matthew Panchisin

[Karen Hammer]

Matthew--

St. John Chrysostom's homily refers to Jesus saying to her "Go, call thy husband" as a rebuke and a reproof of her having many husbands (homily #32, section 2), using the words rebuke and reproof. He said also in this same section: "And what kind of connection," said some one, "is there in the saying, 'Go, call thy husband'? The discourse was concerning a gift and grace surpassing mortal nature: the woman was urgent in seeking to receive it. Christ said, "Call thy husband, " showing that he also must share in these things; but she, eager to receive (the gift) , and concealing the shamefulness of the circumstances, and supposing that she was conversing with a man, said, "I have no husband." Christ, having heard this, now seasonably introduces His reproof, mentioning accurately both points; for He enumerated all her former husbands, and reproved her for him whom she now would hide."

St. Augustine in his Tractate 15, section 20 said: "You (the reader) may understand that woman really to have had at that time no husband; she was livng with some man, not a lawful husband, rather a paramour than a husband." Having alluded to this possible common interpretation of her circumstance, Augustine takes a more spiritualized view of these past husbands, and the lack of a current husband--interpreting the "Call thy husband" as an injunction to "Be here, be present: for you are as absent, while you understand not the voice of Truth here present; be present here, but not alone, be here with your husband." In a later passage, the sixth "husband" Augustine supposes to be a paramour (in a spiritual sense that may be deduced from the physical circumstance). He identifies the former husbands that had the rule over her as the 5 senses, or fleshly rule.

From these two interpretations of the woman's situation, the woman's character has been long assumed to be that of living in some state of sin, enough so that St. Ephrem the Syrian wrote two hymns that pointedly refuted this disparagement of her character. His interpretation is based more on similar multiple husband incidents in Genesis 38:-6-30 and in the Book of Tobit, where it was the husbands that died (before consummation) because of their sin. If the Samaritan woman had shame over her circumstance, St. Ephrem maintains this was more likely NOT because of adulteries on her part. In Hymn 22, section 14, he says: It is written "Seven women will take a single man" out of their shame but they seek nothing more than his name "to make their reproach pass away" from their ears. (ref. Is:4:1) For among Samaritans and Hebrews it is a curse to be a widow or a barren or a divorced woman." He then proceeds to list various women of the Bible who suffered such fates and what spiritual outcomes came from this. In the case of Tamar in Genesis, the ancestral line of Christ can be traced to her son Pharez, who was produced by a deceptive union with Judah, who had sinned in not marrying her (a widow) to his last surviving son, as was her right.

If St. Ephrem's interpretation is correct, this gives the Samaritan woman a much deeper dimension. It is interesting that the whole dialogue between Jesus and this woman really has to do with true worship in the history of Samaritans and Jews (and not her reputation). This issue about the husbands is a pivotal part of it--who are they? Why are they no longer a part of her life and the sixth one not her husband? But the husbands, I think, represent something more than what has been generally assumed about them and that they are tied to other similar incidents that both the Samaritans and Hebrews of that time would have been familiar with. I think St. Ephrem had hit upon something that has been generally ignored and that may have great mystical significance than what we are led to believe by other homilies/commentaries on the John 4 passage. I'm still trying to understand this.

Any thoughts--anyone?

[Karen Hammer]

In reference to my last posting above, I think what St. Ephrem's interpretation signifies is that he is taking a much less Hellenistic view of the dialogue between the Samaritan woman and Jesus, than did the other early Christian Fathers. Instead, St. Ephrem appears to be drawing much more from canonical and non-canonical Old Testament writings for his interpretation. His other Hymns on Virginity, of which Hymn 22-23 are a part, are very much tied to locale--this is, around Jacob's well and Shechem. Somehow, marriage and virginity and true worship revolve around Shechem and Jacob's well in this series of hymns.

Remember that Jacob sent his servant to find a bride for Isaac and he found Rebecca (a distant relative) by a well. This servant let "prophesy" guide him in his search by asking a woman for a drink (much like Christ did) and if the woman gave him a drink, then she would be the bride. "Give me a drink" was the test. It seems this same scenario was playing itself out in the case of the Samaritan woman. If so, this story has some very deep things in it.