Rekha Chennattu, RA - Women in the Mission of the Church

Rekha Chennattu, RA
Women in the Mission of the Church - An Interpretation of John 4

There is a growing awareness among us today that women are not given their rightful place in Biblical exegesis and theology, and in the life and mission of the Church. This exclusion has been often justified by recourse to Scripture. It is generally accepted that reading Scripture is not neutral and interpreters are not free of presuppositions. Moreover some biblical texts themselves are indeed ideologically biased against women; and some texts are mistranslated and misinterpreted by the exegetes. Hence, the Bible has become an important source and legitimizer of excluding and alienating women from the mission of the Church.¹ This makes it imperative for us, both women and men, to identity attitudes that are discriminatory and dehumanizing to women, especially when these attitudes are legitimized by Scripture. There remains of course the difficult question of attitudes to women in cultures other than our own, attitudes which appear to be questionable from our viewpoint; the difficulty is further compounded when they are interlinked with socio-cultural values which are different from our own. Though the present essay does not explicitly enter into this complex question the hope is that it may contribute indirectly to an answer since our discussion centres on a dialogue of two rival cultures.

The Gospel of John presents women positively, and they play significant roles in the narrative.² It is beyond the scope of this paper to analyse all the pericopes in which women play important roles in John’s Gospel. We focus on the Samaritan episode in John 4. In this missionary episode the evangelist makes a woman the protagonist. This is also one of the few texts in the Gospels where the issue of women is explicitly raised by the characters and responded to by Jesus. It not only reflects the socio-cultural reality of the Johannine community but also pre-figures the modern ideals, aspirations and struggles of women in the mission of the Church. The example of the Samaritan woman, the critical and creative dialogue partner of Jesus, who actively participated in the apostolic ministry can be a model for the women of today. This is so because the episode challenges us to review our understanding of Church, so that our understanding that focuses on God’s presence that leads to a fuller and more authentic humanization of all women and men.

1. The Johannine Community

The Gospel of John reflects the history, theology and sociological concerns of the Johannine community. The evangelist reinterprets the "Jesus traditions" in the light of the life situation of the community. Even though the episode in Samaria is artistically and skillfully written with natural settings, the historical plausibility of the ministry of Jesus in Samaria is questioned by many exegetes.³Commentators generally agree that this episode has its real context in the history of the Johannine community rather than in the earthly ministry of Jesus.⁴ It was composed on the basis of the mission that was actually undertaken by the Johannine community in Samaria after the Pentecostal experience. The mission of the Johannine community in Samaria is projected back into the ministry of Jesus. This missionary activity created tension in the community as it primarily consisted of Jewish converts. Through the Samaritan story, John conveyed the message to the apostolic Church that it should break down the old barriers of Judaism, and that Christianity could not be confined within Judaism.⁵ This the evangelist does by attributing the conversion of Samaritans to Jesus himself and not to his disciples. Thus he legitimizes the Samaritan mission and tries to establish equality between the Jewish and Samaritan Christians in the Johannine community. The story is, thus, a polemic against those who object to the Samaritan Christian mission.⁶ In other words, the basic purpose of the story is both "etiological", for it interprets the origin of how the Samaritans came to be an integral part of the Christian community, and "evangelical", as it encourages other Samaritans to accept Christianity by following the example of the Samaritan people from Sychar.⁷

However the Samaritan story reveals something more than just the legitimization of the Samaritan mission. This is one of those rare passages in the Gospels, in which the issue of the female gender is raised explicitly (Jn 4:9,27). In fact, the Evangelist makes a woman the central character in this missionary episode. What experience or circumstance in the community prompted the author to choose a woman as the central character of this story? Why did the community preserve it and accept it as part of Scripture? Because of the Gospel’s normative authority, it is unlikely that the community would accept a fictitious account of a woman playing such a significant role in the apostleship as part of the Gospel. It seems more reasonable to suggest that there were Christian women who played important roles in the community, and that the author wanted to authenticate and legitimize their roles as initiated, approved and appreciated by Jesus.

The interlude of the return of the disciples from the town and their shock at Jesus’ conversation with a woman (Jn 4:27) gives us further insights into the reason why the author chose a woman as the central character and the reason why the community preserved this story. I say this because, in addition to the above significance of the pericope as a whole, this interlude reveals something more about the Johannine community, viz., the male resistance to women’s participation in ministry.⁸ R. Brown translates verse 27b, "the disciples were shocked" at Jesus’ conversation with a woman.⁹ In this verse the narrator gives us a piece of information which is in no way necessary to the story itself. Does it not indicate the male hesitations about women’s participation in apostleship? S. Schneiders observes that the sequence with the disciples is "aimed at those traditionalist male Christians in the Johannine community who found the independence and apostolic initiative of Christian women shocking".¹⁰ It seems to reflect the resistance to leadership roles played by women in the community.¹¹ The discourse of Jesus on his mission and its extension into Samaria refutes the male claim of having an exclusive role in the mission of Jesus. The response of Jesus in v. 38 is very significant because it reveals the mind of Jesus regarding the mission accomplished by the woman. "I sent you [the male disciples] to reap that for which you did not labour; others [the Samaritan woman] have laboured and you have entered into their labour". Therefore the male disciples are presented neither as the "originators", nor as the possessors, of the monopoly of the apostolic missionary activities of the Johannine community. They are asked by Jesus to participate and collaborate with the Samaritan woman in the apostolic ministry which she has already begun. After a lengthy analysis, Schneiders confirms that "whoever wrote the fourth Gospel had some experience of women Christians as theologians and as apostles, was aware of the tension this aroused in the community, and wanted to present Jesus as legitimizing female participation in male-appropriated roles".¹² Hence the hypothesis that women played significant roles and participated actively in the ministries of the Church in the Johannine community seems to be reasonable.¹³

2. The Samaritan Woman: A Representative Figure

John 4 follows the general scheme of a type-scene of an encounter at the well in the Old Testament.¹⁴ There are many OT stories in which a stranger meets a maiden at a well.¹⁵ In the OT the meeting of a man with a woman at a well and their subsequent marriage is considered as a type-scene of betrothal at the well.¹⁶ A striking difference between the Johannine account of the encounter at the well and that of the OT lies in the fact that the essential element, the marriage, is apparently missing in John 4. While the OT scenes end with a marriage, John 4 concludes with a confession of faith in Jesus.

Why did the narrator use this type-scene in our text? In the OT, the relationship between God and the people of Israel is seen as that of husband and wife.¹⁷The covenant between God and the people of Israel is seen as a marriage between God and Israel. Therefore, our narrative, by following the pattern of the OT betrothal scenes, relates the event with echoes and overtones of a divine courtship.¹⁸ In the confession of faith in John 4,42, the Samaritans express the re-discovery of their true and unique husband, Jesus, and the renewal of their old covenant.¹⁹ How do we understand this new covenant? In chapter 3 John the Baptist identified Jesus as the true bridegroom to whom God has given the new Israel as bride (Jn 3:27-30). Now the new bridegroom, Jesus, who assumes the role of Yahweh, the bridegroom of Israel, comes to claim Samaria as an integral part of the new Israel, namely, the Christian community, especially the Johannine community. The Samaritan woman, the ‘bride of Jesus’, symbolizes the Johannine community.²⁰ The Samaritan story reveals something about the theology and the historical situation of the community rather than the personal life of the woman.

Since the above analysis shows that the Samaritan woman is not a mere individual but has a representative character, it enables us to explore the possibility of considering her as a representative of women. As we move forward in the narrative, we perceive that the role of the woman develops from an individual level to a universal one. She is introduced first as a woman of Samaria (4,7), and then as the Samaritan woman (v. 9), but as the narrative progresses, she is portrayed as the woman or just woman (v. 21). Thus, the Samaritan woman gradually becomes a prototype of woman.²¹ Therefore she is a representative figure not only of the Johannine community in general but also of women theologians and apostles, who are leaders of the community.

3. The Samaritan Woman: A Creative Dialogue Partner

The Samaritan woman openly questioned Jesus at every significant moment of the narrative. First of all, the request of Jesus in v. 7b: "give me a drink", is questioned by the woman in v. 9: "How is it that you, a Jew, ask a drink of me, a woman of Samaria?". She challenges the religious association between Jews and Samaritans and the social association between men and women. Secondly, Jesus’ offer of giving living water to the woman in v. 10 was also challenged by her. In this context, the woman’s question to Jesus, "Are you greater than our father Jacob?" recalls Jacob’s rolling the stone from the well’s mouth and watering Rachel’s flock (Gn 29:1-12).²² The text seems to presuppose allusions to Jacob’s miraculous raising of water. ²³ Since the well is so deep and there is no bucket, the only possible way to get water is to perform a miracle as Jacob did. The woman resorts to her own religious traditions to understand Jesus. Thirdly, the woman challenges Jesus’ prophetic character by bringing up the issue of the right place of worship in vv. 19-20. In the words of Schneiders, "in this extraordinary scene the woman is not simply a ‘foil’ feeding Jesus cue lines. She is a genuine theological dialogue partner gradually experiencing Jesus’ self-revelation even as she reveals herself to him".²⁴

3.1. A Social Critic

The response of the woman in v. 9, "How is it that you, a Jew, ask a drink of me, a woman of Samaria?", establishes a clear division between herself and Jesus.²⁵ She has the ability to give water to Jesus, but she raises an objection because of the social and religious prohibitions. The woman brings up the issue of the national antagonism between Jews and Samaritans. The reader who knows the Jewish traditions is aware that the request of Jesus is improper and undesirable. This aspect is reinforced by the comment of the narrator in v. 9.²⁶ The question still remains: how do we interpret the "surprise" of the woman in v. 9? Is she in agreement with the twofold prohibition? In v. 9, her own statement and the comment of the narrator indicate that this prohibition is a view of the Jews, perhaps more concretely the view of male Jews.²⁷ Does she abide by this prohibition? In the words of D. Patte, "She is surprised because she discovers that, in this regard, Jesus is like her".²⁸ By responding to Jesus and so agreeing to enter into dialogue with Jesus, she shows that she does not care about this prohibition. She had looked upon Jesus as a Jew like any other Jew. However, by dealing with her and talking to her, Jesus presents himself as someone who does not follow the religious and social prohibitions regarding interaction between Jews and Samaritans, and between men and women. It is very striking that instead of debating the issue of separation, Jesus changes the topic of the discussion.²⁹ By entering into a dialogue with Jesus, like him, she has also shown an openness which transcends social traditions. Her courage and freedom are great as she is completely unaware of the identity of Jesus. She moves from alienation to communion, from the socio-religious context of reciprocal contempt (v. 9) to the sphere of encounters and dealings between human beings.

3.2. A Contextualized Theologian

In the history of the interpretation of John 4, the standard approach considers it as a story of a whore who is saved from her sexual sin by the progressive and dynamic revelation of Jesus. Some exegetes mainly focused on the Samaritan woman’s immoral marital life. John 4:18 was interpreted as Jesus confronting the woman with her sinful life.³⁰ On the other hand, other exegetes assert that there is no indication in the text that the evangelist wants to present Jesus as confronting the woman by revealing the secrets of her sinful life.³¹If we look at the story from the narrator’s point of view, the details of the private life of the woman do not constitute the major thrust of the story. In fact, in his response to the woman, Jesus does not condemn the woman, rather he appreciates her truthfulness, by focusing on how ‘well’ (kalos) and how ‘truly’ (alethes) the woman has spoken.³²Hence it is reasonable to conclude that the private life of the woman is not the point of discussion in verses 18-20.³³ Why did the author, then, bring up the issue of her marital situation in the dialogue? The reader perceives an irony as the apparent ignorance of Jesus is in opposition with his detailed knowledge of her marital situation. Her response to Jesus’ query furnishes a good opportunity for him to manifest the ‘divine knowledge’ which is the nature of the Messiah. This manifestation of his nature functions as the pivot, the turning point of the dialogue. Jesus’ extraordinary knowledge of her situation makes her realize that he is a prophet (v. 19).³⁴ Jesus is someone who has the special ability to know what is hidden (cf. Jn 1:48-49).

The dialogue between Jesus and the woman in verses 19-20 confirms our hypothesis that her sinful nature is not the centre of the story. It is the first time that the woman takes the initiative in bringing forward a new topic. Her initiative is an indication of her growing openness, freedom and confidence in Jesus. If her personal life were the central theme of the story, then, like the disciples of John the Baptist, very probably she would have asked a personal question: "what then shall I do?" (cf. Lk 3:10-14). On the contrary, what she brings forward is a national and religious issue pertinent to her people. According to the Scripture of the Samaritans, the Pentateuch, there is only one place of worship (Dt 12:2-12). They consider Mount Gerizim as the mount of grace and blessing, because Noah and Abraham offered sacrifice on this mountain.³⁵ In Dt 27:4 the Samaritan Pentateuch reads ‘Mount Gerizim’ instead of the ‘Mount Ebal’ of the Masoretic Text, thus Gerizim is considered as a sacred mountain, the place of worship and God’s revelation. Hence, for the Samaritans Mount Gerizim is as holy for the worship of God as Jerusalem for the Jews.³⁶This disagreement regarding the right place of worship was the most important and pertinent religious dispute that separated the Samaritans from the Jews. The Samaritans believed that the Messiah would settle this dispute regarding the right place of worship. In the words of T. Okure, "the woman thus proves to be remarkably in touch with the current disputes between the two nations. As for finding a topic worthy of a Jewish prophet she could do no better than raise this long standing issue of Gerizim versus Jerusalem".³⁷ Thus, these verses reveal the identity of the woman as a person who is well-versed in her religious tradition. She articulates the dispute from the perspective of the Samaritans: "Our fathers worshipped on this mountain, but you say that Jerusalem is the place where one ought to worship"(Jn 4:20). Notice that instead of saying "we worship" she says "Our fathers worshipped". By thus appealing to her ancestors, she seeks to strengthen the Samaritan practice in contrast to the Jewish one. She juxtaposes the tradition of the ancestors with the current practice and dogma of Judaism. From the perspective of history, the practices of the Fathers take precedence over the contemporary Jewish dogma of worship in Jerusalem which began only from the Davidic era (2 Sm 6). The Samaritan tradition rests on the authority of the patriarchs. The woman questions Jesus by holding on to the authority of the ancestors.³⁸ The Samaritan woman is depicted in our story as a ‘theologian’ who dares to confront a prophet and to discuss theological issues with him. And she does both these in the context of her own religious traditions. She is rooted in her traditions yet open to receive the revelation from Jesus. When she proclaims Jesus as the Messiah, she does it in terms of the expectation of the Samaritan, not Jewish, belief. She is portrayed as someone who initiates and encourages the need for dialogue and contextualization in mission.

3.3. A Committed Apostle

The journey that the woman makes from unbelief to belief in Jesus reflects the characteristics of a committed believer. At the beginning, she encounters Jesus with puzzlement because of her ignorance. However, she is open to participate more and more actively as the dialogue progresses. When we look at John 4 within the literary context of the section Cana to Cana (chs. 2-4), the Samaritan woman is clearly contrasted with Nicodemus (3:1-15), who is confused by Jesus’ self-revelation and disappears into the shadows. On the other hand, the Samaritan woman accepts the revelation of Jesus and brings others to him by her witness. She becomes a model of "mature discipleship".³⁹ Her response, when she recognizes Jesus as the Messiah, is very significant. She abandons the water jar and goes into the city to spread the good news of her encounter with Jesus, the Messiah.⁴⁰ She fulfills the "standard characteristics" of an apostle by giving testimony to the people in the city, and inviting them to ‘come and see’ Jesus.⁴¹ The statement of the Samaritans in v. 42 that "it is no longer because of your words that we believe, for we have heard for ourselves, and we know that this is indeed the Saviour of the world", does not denigrate the apostolic activity of the woman. The role of the woman, like John the Baptist or any other faithful witness, is relativized only in relation to Jesus.⁴² Therefore the acknowledgment of the Samaritans in v. 42 does not belittle the witness of the woman, but rather confirms it. ⁴³The transforming effect of her apostleship is marked by the whole-hearted response of the people from Sychar.

4. The Role of Women in the Church

The Samaritan woman is remarkable for her openness, conviction, initiative and decisive action. She is not afraid of confronting a Jewish man, even though Jews looked down upon Samaritans. She is not depicted as a passive receiver, accepting unquestioningly all that is said by Jesus. Her theological background, personal interests and spontaneous appropriation of the role of an apostle to bear witness to Jesus in the city are very outstanding and significant. The Samaritan woman takes the initiative in the mission of proclaiming Jesus without looking for approval from anyone and without seeking the permission of anyone. Patriarchal cultures regard women as psychologically sentimental, intellectually inferior, socially marginal, religiously impure and culturally insignificant, and thus incapable of leadership. The qualities of the Samaritan woman, as presented in our pericope, refute this claim of the patriarchal culture. If we understand leadership as an animating role characterized by a critical attitude, creative initiative and committed action, the Samaritan woman is presented here as an excellent leader of her community.⁴⁴The Samaritan woman actively engaged in theological discussion, freely witnessed to her faith in public, efficiently proclaimed the Gospel (good news of salvation) using the Samaritan categories (inculturated proclamation), and courageously assumed the role of the "originator" or the leader of the Samaritan mission in Sychar.

The story of the Samaritan woman could empower Indian women to awaken their dormant spiritual energy, the life-giving force. The rebirth of this spiritual energy will enable them to embrace a "hermeneutics of suspicion" of traditional spiritualities, interpretations of the Scriptures and understandings of the Church and her mission in society.⁴⁵This awakening is needed for women to look at their presence and mission in the Church from a new perspective.

The Samaritan woman invites women in the Church to be confident and rooted in their religious traditions. She challenges them to be in touch with the current issues and problems of their people. She empowers them to break the barrier of the ‘male stereotype’, viz., that women are dependent on their male counterparts and require their permission and approval to embark on any undertaking. She encourages them to take initiatives and participate actively in all the ministries of the Church, including leadership and decision making. Like the Samaritan woman all women are called to be both creative and critical dialogue partners and brdige-builders in the difficult and demanding task of dialoguing with ‘others’, ‘strangers’ and those of other persuasions.

5. A Challenge to the Church

After many centuries of invisibility, silence and alienation in many forms and guises, women are gaining confidence and rediscovering their strength. Our understanding of the Church needs to take into account this changing and challenging social reality more seriously. We cannot think of mission in the third millennium, without awakening our soul to the alienated experience of half of the human family. In this context, the mission of the Church from the perspective of women is "one of reconciliation, the overcoming of the fundamental sin of alienation between female and male".⁴⁶

The Samaritan story envisages a community guided by the Spirit and characterized by radical egalitarianism, in which equality is presupposed, universality is assumed, unity is maintained, communion is understood and commitment is implied. This radical egalitarianism rejects all the distinctions based on gender, race and class. The mission of the Church needs to be a response and a radical commitment of persons inspired and infused by the Spirit to foster human dignity, equality, and freedom for all, both women and men. The breaking down of all gender and racial barriers will bring about a radical egalitarian understanding of the presence of the Church in the world.

In the Johannine model of the Christian community, all members are branches, the authority of the Twelve consists in the primacy of witness and not in the primacy of power and domination.⁴⁷As Vatican II clearly states, in Baptism, all are called to participate in the mission of the Church and its ministries (Lumen Gentium, n. 33). Therefore, the appropriation of ministerial roles must be governed by gifts, abilities and aptitudes rather than by any static classification based on gender. We are called to rethink the structure of the Chruch in the light of the "signs of the times". The celebrative, group-oriented, enduring and hope-filled qualities, which are typically feminine characteristics, can transform the Church which is facing the serious problems of brokenness, despair and disintegration. Hence an inclusive leadership and animation can be a renewing force in the life and mission of the Church.

The bridge-building, constructive, dialogical approach of the story of the Samaritan woman can be a model for the Church in dialogue. In this dialogical process, there is no elimination of differences between the dialogue partners. It allows a growth-promoting and enriching interchange, which is in no way detrimental to their identity, whether, male or female, Christian or Non-Christian. The Samaritan episode projects also a world in the process of a dynamic movement from personal alienation, social discrimination and religious exclusion to human solidarity, liberative communion and transformative integration.⁴⁸ Our understanding of the Church must be such that difference is perceived not as a cause of division but as a source of enrichment. If the Church has to fulfil her prophetic and liberative mission in the third millennium, that is, in a world marked by increasing pluralism, then it will be imperative that she discovers a new identity, that is to say, a new way of being, that is inclusive and a new way of functioning which is dialogical.

Notes

*Paper presented at the Conference on "Mission in Asia in the Third Millennium: Models for Integral Human Liberation", Sanata Dharma University, Yogyakarta, Indonesia, 14th- 17th April, 1999. The author mailto:rekhara@hotmail.com teaches Scripture at the Pontifical Institute (Jnana Deepa Vidyapeeth), Pune 411014 and is at present doing doctoral studies at the Catholic University of America, Washington, D. C.

1. For this view, see S. M. Schneiders, The Revelatory Text, New York, 1991, pp. 180-182.

2. Cf. the Mother of Jesus in ch. 2; the Samaritan woman in ch. 4; an unnamed woman in chs. 7-8; Mary and Martha in ch. 11 and Mary Magdalene in ch. 20. Some may consider John 7:53-8,11 as an exception. However, this passage is regarded as a later interpolation. Even if we consider it as part of the Gospel, it is indeed a story about men who are challenged by Jesus rather than about ‘a woman caught in adultery’.

3. Jesus’ ministry in Samaria is mentioned only in John. According to Acts 8:1-8, Samaria is one of the first missions undertaken by the disciples, including John, after the Pentecost. The confession made by the Samaritans in Jn 4:42, viz., that Jesus is ‘the Saviour of the world’ confirms this conclusion, since it uses a post-resurrection confessional title for Jesus. For a detailed discussion of this issue, see R.E. Brown, The Gospel according to John, New York, 1966, pp. 175-176 and O. Cullmann, "Samaria and the Origins of the Christian Mission", in The Early Church, ed. A. J. B. Higgins, London, 1956, p. 192.

4. For discussions of this setting for the Samaritan story in John 4, see O. Cullmann, The Johannine Circle: Its Place in Judaism, among the Disciple of Judaism and in Early Christianity: A Study in the Origin of the Gospel of John, London, 1976, pp. 39-56; B. Lindars, The Gospel of John, London, 1972, p. 192; F. J. Moloney, Belief in the Word: Reading John 1-4 , Minneapolis, 1993, p. 164; S.M. Schneiders, "Women in the Fourth Gospel and the Role of Women in the Contemporary Church", in The Gospel of John as Literature, ed. M.W.G. Stibbe, New York, 1993, p. 132. For a detailed discussion on the presence of the Samaritans in the Johannine community and their influence on the theology of John, see R.E. Brown, The Community of the Beloved Disciple, New York, 1979, pp. 36-40 and 76-78.

5. J. Bligh, "Jesus in Samaria" Heythrop Journal 3 (1962), 329-346, esp. 346. There are also other opinions, e.g., "in the final form of the Gospel it functions to allow the earthly Jesus to give a warrant for the suppression of Temple worship, whether on Gerazim or in Jerusalem". See C.H. Talbert, Reading John, New York, 1992, p. 120.

6. Lindars suggests that this resistance is on the basis of the prohibition in Mt 10:5 and Lk 9:51-56. See The Gospel of John, p. 175-176.

7. For this opinion, see Talbert, Reading John, p. 111.

8. Many exegetes consider the interlude on the disciples as a later interpolation into an already existing story of Jesus’ encounter with the Samaritan woman. This section is considered as a later addition to the text for the following reasons: 1) in the Sinaitic Syriac version, verse 8 is placed after verse 5; 2) in the introduction, vv. 4-6, and the conclusion, vv. 40-42, Jesus is alone with the Samaritans; 3) the disciples do not contribute to the story of Jesus and the Samaritans, in other words, the story of the Samaritans is complete without the involvement of the disciples; 4) the discussion with the disciples actually interrupts the sequence with the Samaritans. See, Boers, Neither on This Mountain Nor in Jerusalem, Atlanta, 1988, pp. 2-6. Bultmann considered the dialogue between Jesus and the Woman as the original core of the chapter, which had been taken from the Semeia Source. See his The Gospel of John, Oxford, 1971, pp. 178-80; Fortna’s view is identical with that of Bultmann: see R. Fortna, The Gospel of Signs: A Reconstruction of the Narrative Source Underlying the Fourth Gospel, Cambridge, 1970, pp. 193-194.

9. Brown, The Gospel according to John, p. 167.

10. Schneiders, "Women in the Fourth Gospel and the Role of Women in the Contemporary Church", p. 134.

11. For a general discussion on women and the Evangelists, see Ben Witherington III, Women and Genesis of Christianity, Cambridge, 1995, pp. 225-236.

12. Schneiders, The Revelatory Text, p. 192.

13. Schneiders, "Women in the Fourth Gospel and the Role of Women in the Contemporary Church", pp. 123-143. See also Brown, "Role of Women in the Fourth Gospel", in The Community of the Beloved Disciple, pp. 183-198.

14. A Type-scene is a narrative that follows a recognized biblical pattern. See R. Alter, The Art of Biblical Narrative, New York, 1981, pp. 51-62. The connections between the OT betrothal scenes and Jn 4 have long been noticed. There is sufficient evidence in the text for such an understanding. For a detailed analysis, coming to this conclusion, see D.F. Strauss, The Life of Jesus Critically Examined, Philadelphia, 1972, p. 308; P.J. Cahill, "Narrative Art in Jn IV", Religious Studies Bulletin 2 (1982), pp. 41-48; J. L. Ska, "Dal Nuovo all’Antico Testamento," La Civiltà Cattolica 1996 II, pp. 14-23; T. Okure, Johannine Approach to Mission, pp. 87-88; and J. Bligh, "Jesus in Samaria," p. 336. For a comparison between the OT type-scene stories and John 4 , See P. D. Duke, Irony in the Fourth Gospel (Atlanda, 1985), pp. 101-103 and C.M. Carmichael, "Marriage and the Samaritan Woman", NTS 26 (1979-80), pp. 332-346, esp. pp. 336-338.

15. Cf. Isaac’s servant and Rebekah in Gen 24,10-19; Jacob and Rachel in Gn 29:1-14; and Moses and Zipporah in Ex 2:15b-21.

16. A detailed analysis is offered by Alter, The Art of Biblical Narrative, pp. 51-62.

17. It is well known that ba‘al in the Canannite language can mean both husband and lord or god. Cf. Hos 2, 16-17. See also Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius, Hebrew and English Lexicon, Peabody, 1979, p. 127.

18. Duke, Irony in the Fourth Gospel, p. 103.

19. Ska, "Dal Nuovo all’Antico Testamento", p. 19.

20. The inclusive and universal dimension is one of the characteristics of the renewed covenant in Jesus. It is open for all and transcends all the boundaries of sectarianism and casteism. The Samaritans are welcomed by Jesus as an integral part of the new community.

21. Cahill claims that the use of a woman in v. 21, reflects not only the same word in 2, 4 but also foreshadows the woman in Revelation 12; see his "Narrative Art in John IV," pp. 47-48.

22. Cf. B. Barnhart, The Good Wine: Reading John from the Center, New York, 1993, p. 203.

23. J. H. Neyrey, "Jacob Traditions and the Interpretation of John 4:10-26," CBQ 41 (1979), pp. 423-424 and J. R. Dias, "Palestinian Targum and the New Testament," NovT 6 (1963), pp. 76-77.

24. The italics is mine. See Schneiders, The Revelatory Text, p. 191.

25. B. Olsson claims that the symmetrical use of participial construction, in the Greek text, in reference to Jesus on the one hand and the woman on the other hand emphasizes this separation. See his Structure and Meaning in the Fourth Gospel: A Text-Linguistic Analysis of John 2:1-11 and John 4:1-42, Lund, 1974, p. 177.

26. For two contrasting views on the comment of the narrator in v. 9b, see D. Daube, "Jesus and the Samaritan Woman: The Meaning of sugchraomai", JBL 69 (1950), pp. 137-47; and D.R. Hall, "The Meaning of sugchraomai in John 4:9", ExpTim 83 (1971-72), pp. 56-57.

27. Brown, The Gospel of John, p. 170. also D. Patte, Structural Exegesis for New Testament Critics, Minneapolis, 1990, p. 80.

28. Patte, Structural Exegesis for New Testament Critics, p. 80.

29. So the reader could ask: Why did not Jesus explain to her that he was not bound by this social or religious custom? Why did she not give water to Jesus? This lack of interest on the part of Jesus gives us an indication that the point of the story is not the drinking of water, but something else. If she had given water to Jesus, then the narrative would have probably been different. Jesus’ thirst could be interpreted as his desire to do and accomplish the will of his Father, like the hunger implied in vv. 31-34. Here, it is the will of God that Jesus reveals himself as the Messiah to the Samaritans. The expression, "he had to (edei) pass through Samaria", is not a geographical necessity, for , if Jesus was in the Jordan valley (3:22) he could easily have gone through the valley, and then through the Bethshean gap to Galilee. See Brown, The Gospel of John, p. 169. See also Okure, The Johannine Approach to Mission. p. 85 and Gail R. O’ Day, Revelation in the Fourth Gospel, p. 55. John almost always uses edei with the sense of theological necessity (cf. 3:14. 30; 9,4). For the use of edei in the NT, see W. Grundmann, "dei", Theological Dictionary of the New Testament 2, pp. 21-25.

30. Jesus aims at laying bare to the woman "la conscience morale au contact d’un homme de Dieu". See M.J. Lagrange, Evangile selon Saint Jean, Paris, 1936, p. 110. Jesus exposed the sins of the Samaritans and of the world through the sins of the woman, E. Hoskyns, The Fourth Gospel, London, 1940, p. 243.

31. For this opinion, see Okure, The Johannine Approach to Mission, pp. 110-111 and E. Haenchen, Johannesevangelium: Ein Kommentar, Tübingen, 1980, p. 242.

32. Okure, The Johannine Approach to Mission, pp. 109-110. G.D. Kilpatrick translates the v. 18b as follows, "This which you have said is true". He takes alethes as the main predicative. See "Some Notes on Johannine Usage", The Bible Translator 11 (1960), pp. 173-77, esp. p. 174. For the same opinion, see Moloney, Belief in the word, p. 148. But there are others who consider this statement of Jesus as an ironic one, see F. Godet, Commentaire sur L’Evangile de Saint Jean (Paris 1864) p. 486; and Julius Graf, "Jesus und (sic) die Samariterin", BK 6 (1951), p. 107, quoted by O’Day, Revelation in the Fourth Gospel, p. 131 n. 48. O’Day herself considers it as a "biting sarcasm", p. 67.

33. There are some who consider the whole question of the marriage and the five husbands of the woman as symbolic, Josephus, Antiquities, 9:288. They are seen also as the five foreign cities who brought their gods to Samaria; see 2 Kgs 17:27-31. For more extended discussion, see C.R. Koester, "The Saviour of the World (Jn 4:42)", JBL 109 (1990), pp. 665-680. The symbolic reading of our text is also widespread among scholars who consider the Samaritan woman as the representative figure of the Samaritans. See O. Cullmann, "Samaria and the Origins of the Christian Mission", pp. 187-188.

34. Okure, The Johannine Approach to Mission, pp. 110-111.

35. J. MacDonald, The Theology of the Samaritans, London, 1964, p. 406.

36. The belief in Mount Gerizim was one of the articles of the Samaritan creed; see J. Bowman, Samaritanische Probleme, Stuttgart, 1969, p. 30.

37. Okure, The Johannine Approach to Mission, p. 115.

38. See ibid., pp. 114-115.

39. For a comparative study of Nicodemus and the Samaritan woman, see M. Pazdan, "Nicodemus and the Samaritan Woman: Contrasting Models of Discipleship", BTB 17 (1987), pp. 145-48, who considers the Samaritan woman as a model of "mature discipleship" while Nicodemus represents "initial discipleship" (p. 148). See also D.A. Lee, The Symbolic Narratives of the Fourth Gospel, Sheffield, 1994, pp. 65-66 and Moloney, Belief in the Word: Reading John 1-4, p. 144.

40. This resembles the standard way of responding to the call of discipleship in the synoptic Gospels. Cf. leaving the boats in Mk 1:16-20 and leaving the tax stall in Mt 9:9.

41. Cf. John 1:35-51.

42. Cf. John 3:25-30.

43. Lee, The Symbolic Narratives of the Fourth Gospel, p.91.

44. Schneiders, The Revelatory Text, pp. 188-197.

45. Some of the characteristics of the emergence of this spiritual energy (Sakti) in women are articulated by A. Gnanadason: see "Women and Spirituality in Asia", in Feminist Theology from the Third World, ed. Ursula King, New York, 1994, p. 355.

46. S. S. Maimela, "Seeking to be Christian in Patriarchal Society", Voices from the Third World, 19 (June, 1996), p. 176.

47. John speaks of the Christian community in terms of a flock (10) and a vine (15): a community attached to Jesus, and abiding in Jesus.

48. At the beginning of the story there existed no dealings between the Jews and the Samaritans (v. 9). The confession of faith in Jesus as the Saviour of the world (v. 42), and not just of the Samaritans alone, confirms the movement to communion which transcends all secretarian boundaries.

Ref.: Text from the Author. February 2002.