SECTION I. THE WASHING
John 13:1-11.
Up to this point the fourth evangelist has said
very little indeed of the special relations of Jesus and the twelve. Now,
however, he abundantly makes up or any deficiency on this score. The third part
of his Gospel, which begins here, is, with the exception of two chapters
relating the history of the passion, entirely occupied with the tender,
intimate intercourse of the Lord Jesus with "His own," from the evening before
His death to the time when He departed out of the world, leaving them behind!
The thirteenth and four following chapters relate scenes and discourses from
the last hours spent by the Saviour with His disciples, previous to His
betrayal into the hands of His enemies. He has uttered His final word to the
outside world, and withdrawn Himself within the bosom of His own family; and we
are privileged here to see Him among His spiritual children, and to hear His
farewell Words to them in view of His decease. It becomes us to enter the
supper chamber with deep reverence. "Put off thy shoes from off thy feet, for
the place whereon thou standest is holy ground."
The first thing we see, on entering, is Jesus
washing His disciples' feet. Marvellous spectacle! and the evangelist has taken
care, in narrating the incident, to enhance its impressiveness by the manner in
which he introduces it. He has put the beautiful picture in the best light for
being seen to advantage. The preface to the story is indeed a little puzzling
to expositors, the sentences being involved, and the sense somewhat obscure.
Many thoughts and feelings crowd into the apostle's mind as he proceeds to
relate the memorabilia of that eventful night; and, so to speak, they jostle
one another in the struggle for utterance. Yet it is not very difficult to
disentangle the meaning of these opening sentences. In the first, John adverts
to the peculiar tenderness with which Jesus regarded His disciples on the eve
of His crucifixion, and in prospect of His departure from the earth to heaven.
"Before the feast of the Passover, when Jesus knew that His hour was come that
He should depart out of this world "--how at such an hour did He feel towards
those who had been His companions throughout the years of His public ministry,
and whom He was soon to leave behind Him? "He loved them unto the end." Not
selfishly engrossed with His own sorrows, or with the prospect of His
subsequent joys, He found room in His heart for His followers still; nay, His
love burned out towards them with extraordinary ardor, and His whole care was
by precept and example, by words of comfort, warning, and instruction, to
prepare them for future duty and trial, as the narrative here commencing would
abundantly demonstrate.
The second verse of the preface alludes
parenthetically to a fact which served as a foil to the constancy of Jesus:
"The devil having already put it into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon's son,
to betray Him." John would say: "Jesus loved His disciples to the end, though
they did not all so love Him. One of them at this very moment entertained the
diabolic purpose of betraying his Lord. Yet that Lord loved even him,
condescending to wash even his feet; so endeavoring, if possible, to overcome
his evil with good."
The aim of the evangelist, in the last sentence
of his preface, is to show by contrast what a wondrous condescension it was in
the Saviour to wash the feet of any of the disciples. Jesus knowing these
things,--these things being true of Him: that "the Father had given all things
into His hands"--sovereign power over all flesh; "that He was come from God"--a
divine being by nature, and entitled to divine honors; "and that He was about
to return to God," to enter on the enjoyment of such honors,--did as is here
recorded. He, the August Being who had such intrinsic dignity, such a
consciousness, such prospects--even "He riseth from supper and lath aside His
garments, and took a towel and girded Himself. After that He poureth water into
a basin, and began to wash the disciples' feet, and to wipe them with the towel
wherewith He was girded."
The time when all this took place was, it would
seem, about the commencement of the evening meal. The words of the evangelist
rendered in the English version "supper being ended," may be translated supper
being begun, or better, supper-time having arrived;[21.1] and from the sequel
of the narrative, it is evident that in this sense they must be understood
here. The supper was still going on when Jesus introduced the subject of the
traitor, which He did not only after He had washed the feet of His disciples,
but after He had resumed His seat at the table, and given an explanation of
what He had just done.[21.2]
That explanation will fall to be more
particularly considered afterwards; but meantime it bears on its face that the
occasion of the feet-washing was some misbehavior on the part of the disciples.
Jesus had to condescend, we judge, because His disciples would not condescend.
This impression is confirmed by a statement in Luke's Gospel, that on the same
evening a strife arose among the twelve which of them should be accounted the
greatest. Whence that new strife arose we know not, but it is possible that the
old quarrel about place was revived by the words uttered by Jesus as they were
about to sit down to meat: "With desire I have desired to eat this Passover
with you before I suffer. For I say unto you, I will not any more eat thereof
until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God."[21.3] The allusion to the kingdom
was quite sufficient to set their imaginations on fire and re-awaken old dreams
about thrones, and from old dreams to old feuds and jealousies the transition
was natural and easy; and so we can conceive how, even before the supper began,
the talk of the brethren had waxed noisy and warm. Or the point in dispute may
have been in what order they should sit at table, or who should be the servant
for the occasion, and wash the feet of the company. Any one of these
suppositions might account for the fact recorded by Luke; for it does not
require much to make children quarrel.
The expedient employed by Jesus to divert the
minds of His disciples from unedifying themes of conversation, and to exorcise
ambitious passions from their breasts, was a most effectual one. The very
preliminaries of the feet-washing scene must have gone far to change the
current of feeling. How the spectators must have stared and wondered as the
Master of the feast rose from His seat, laid aside His upper garment, girt
Himself with a towel, and poured out water into a basin, doing all with the
utmost self-possession, composure, and deliberation!
With which of the twelve Jesus made a beginning
we are not informed; but we know, as we might have guessed without being told,
who was the first to speak his mind about the singular transaction. When
Peter's turn came, he had so far recovered from the amazement, under whose
influence the first washed may have yielded passively to their Lord's will, as
to be capable of reflecting on the indecency of such an inversion of the right
relation between master and servants. Therefore, when Jesus came to him, that
outspoken disciple asked, in astonishment, "Lord, washest Thou my feet?" His
spirit rose in rebellion against the proposal, as one injurious to the dignity
of his beloved Lord, and as an outrage upon his own sense of reverence. This
impulse of instinctive aversion was by no means discreditable to Peter, and it
was evidently not regarded with disapprobation by his Master. The reply of
Jesus to his objection is markedly respectful in tone: "What I do," He said,
"thou knowest not now, but thou shalt know hereafter," virtually admitting that
the proceeding in question needed explanation, and that Peter's opposition was,
in the first place, perfectly natural. "I acknowledge," He meant to say, "that
my present action is an offence to the feelings of reverence which you rightly
cherish towards me. Nevertheless, suffer it. I do this for reasons which you do
not comprehend now, but which you shall understand ere long."
Had Peter been satisfied with this apologetic
reply, his conduct would have been entirely free from blame. But He was not
content, but persisted in opposition after Jesus had distinctly intimated His
will, and vehemently and stubbornly exclaimed: "Thou shalt never wash my feet!"
The tune here changes utterly. Peter's first word was the expression of sincere
reverence; his second is simply the language of unmitigated irreverence and
downright disobedience. He rudely contradicts his Master, and at the same time,
we may add, flatly contradicts himself. His whole behavior on this occasion
presents an odd mixture of moral opposites: self-abasement and self-will,
humility and pride, respect and disrespect for Jesus, to whom he speaks now as
one whose shoe-latchet he is not worthy to unloose, and anon as one to whom he
might dictate orders. What a strange man! But, indeed, how strange are we
all!
Peter having so changed his tone, Jesus found it
needful to alter His tone too, from the apologetic mildness of the first reply
to that of magisterial sternness. "If I wash thee not," He said gravely, "thou
hast no part with me;" meaning, "Thou hast taken up a most serious position,
Simon Peter, the question at issue being simply, Are you, or are you not, to be
admitted into my kingdom--to be a true disciple, and to have a true disciple's
reward?"
On a surface view, it is difficult to see how
this could be the state of the question. One is tempted to think that Jesus was
indulging in exaggeration, for the purpose of intimidating a refractory
disciple into compliance with His will. If we reject this method of
interpretation as incompatible with the character of the speaker and the
seriousness of the occasion, we are thrown back on the inquiry, What does
washing in this statement mean? Evidently it signifies more than meets the ear,
more than the mere literal washing of the feet, and is to be regarded as a
symbol of the washing of the soul from sin, or still more comprehensively, and
in our opinion more correctly, as representing all in Christ s teaching and
work which would be compromised by the consistent carrying out of the principle
on which Peter's opposition to the washing of his feet by Jesus was based. On
either supposition the statement of Jesus was true: in the former case
obviously; in the latter not so obviously, but not less really, as we proceed
to show.
Observe, then, what was involved in the attitude
assumed by Peter. He virtually took his stand on these two positions: that he
would admit of nothing which seemed inconsistent with the personal dignity of
his Lord, and that he would adopt as his rule of conduct his own judgment in
preference to Christ's will; the one position being involved in the question,
Dost Thou wash my feet? the other in the resolution, Thou shalt never wash my
feet. In other words, the ground taken up by this disciple compromised the
whole sum and substance of Christianity, the former principle sweeping away
Christ's whole state and experience of humiliation, and the latter not less
certainly sapping the foundation of Christ's lordship.
That this is no exaggeration on our part, a
moment's reflection will show. Look first at the objection to the feet washing
on the score of reverence. If Jesus might not wash the feet of His disciples
because it was beneath His dignity, then with equal reason objection might be
taken to any act involving self-humiliation. One who said, Thou shalt not wash
my feet, because the doing of it is unworthy of Thee, might as well say, Thou
shalt not wash my soul, or do aught towards that end, because it involves
humiliating experiences. Why, indeed, make a difficulty about a trifling matter
of detail? Go to the heart of the business at once, and ask, "Shall the Eternal
Son of God become flesh, and dwell among us? shall He who was in the form of
God lay aside His robes of state, and gird Himself with the towel of humanity,
to perform menial offices for His own creatures? shall the ever-blessed One
become a curse by enduring crucifixion? shall the Holy One degrade Himself by
coming into close companionship with the depraved sons of Adam? shall the
Righteous One pour His life-blood into a basin, that there may be a fountain
wherein the unrighteous may be cleansed from their guilt and iniquity?" In
short, incarnation, atonement, and Christ's whole earthly experience of
temptation, hardship, indignity, and sorrow, must go if Jesus may not wash a
disciple's feet.
Not less clearly is Christ's lordship at an end
if a disciple may give Him orders, and say, "Thou shalt never wash my feet." If
Peter meant any thing more by these words than a display of temper and caprice,
he meant this: that he would not submit to the proposed operation, because his
moral feelings and his judgment told him it was wrong. He made his own reason
and conscience the supreme rule of conduct. Now, in the first place, by this
position the principle of obedience was compromised, which requires that the
will of the Lord, once known, whether we understand its reason or perceive its
goodness or not, shall be supreme. Then there are other things much more
important than the washing of the feet, to which objection might be taken on
the score of reason or conscience with equal plausibility. For example, Christ
tells us that those who would be His disciples, and obtain entrance into His
kingdom, must be willing to part with earthly goods, and even with nearest and
dearest friends. To many men this seems unreasonable; and on Peter's principle
they should forthwith say, "I will never do any such thing." Or again, Christ
tells us that we must be born again, and that we must eat His flesh and drink
His blood. To me these doctrines may seem incomprehensible, and even absurd;
and therefore, on Peter's principle, I may turn my back on the great Teacher,
and say, "I will not have this speaker of dark, mystic sayings for my master."
Once more, Christ tells us that we must give the kingdom of God the first place
in our thoughts, and dismiss from our hearts carking care for to-morrow. To me
this may appear in my present mood simply impossible; and therefore, on Peter's
principle, I may set aside this moral requirement as utopian, however
beautiful, without even seriously attempting to comply with it.
Now that we know whither Peter's refusal tends,
we can see that Jesus spake the simple truth when He said: "If I wash thee not,
thou host no part with me." Look at that refusal as an objection to Christ
humbling Himself. If Christ may not humble Himself, then, in the first place,
He can have no part with us. The Holy Son of God is forbidden by a regard to
His dignity to become in any thing like unto His brethren, or even to
acknowledge them as His brethren. The grand paternal law, by which the
Sanctifier is identified with them that are to be sanctified, is disannulled,
and all its consequences made void. A great impassable gulf separates the
Divine Being from His creatures. He may stand on the far-off shore, and
wistfully contemplate their forlorn estate; but He cannot, He dare not--His
majesty forbids it--come near them, and reach forth a helping hand.
But if the Son of God may have no part with us,
then, in the second place, we can have no part with Him. We cannot share His
fellowship with the Father, if He come not forth to declare Him. We can receive
no acts of brotherly kindness from Him. He cannot deliver us from the curse of
the law, or from the fear of death; He cannot succor us when we are tempted; He
cannot wash our feet; nay, what is a far more serious matter, He cannot wash
our souls. If there is to be no fountain opened for sin in the human nature of
Emmanuel sinners must remain impure. For a God afar off is not able, even if He
were willing, to purify the human soul. A God whose majesty, like an iron fate,
kept Him aloof from sinners, could not even effectively forgive them. Still
less could He sanctify them. Love alone has sanctifying virtue, and what room
is there for love in a Being who cannot humble Himself to be a servant?
Look now at Peter's refusal as resistance to
Christ's will. In this view also it justified the saying, "Thou hast no part
with me." It excluded from salvation; for if Jesus is not to be Lord, He will
not be Savior.[21.4] It excluded from fellowship; for Jesus will have no
communion with self-will. His own attitude towards His Father was, "not my
will, but Thine;" and He demands this attitude towards Himself in turn from all
His disciples. He will be the Author of eternal salvation, only to them that
obey Him. Not that He would have us be always servants, blindly obeying a Lord
whose will we do not understand. His aim is to advance us ultimately to the
status of friends,[21.5] doing His will intelligently and freely--not as
complying mechanically with an outward commandment, but as being a law to
ourselves. But we can attain that high position only by beginning with a
servant's obedience. We must do, and suffer to be done to us, what we know not
now, in order that we may know hereafter the philosophy of our duty to our
Lord, and of our Lord's dealings with us. And the perfection of obedience lies
in doing that which reverence unenlightened finds peculiarly hard, viz. in
letting the Lord change places with us, and if it seem good to Him, humble
Himself to be our servant.
It was a serious thing, therefore, to say, "Thou
shalt never wash my feet." But Peter was not aware how serious it was. He knew
not what he said, or what he did. He had hastily taken up a position whose
ground and consequences he had not considered. And his heart was right, though
his temper was wrong. Therefore the stern declaration of Jesus at once brought
him to reason, or rather to unreason in an opposite direction. The idea of
being cut off from his dear Master's sympathy or favor through his waywardness
drove him in sheer fright to the opposite extreme of overdone compliance; and
he said in effect, "If my interest in Thee depends on my feet being washed,
then, Lord, wash my whole body--hands, head, feet, and all." How
characteristic! how like a child, in whose heart is much foolishness, but also
much affection, and who can always be managed by the bands of love! There is as
yet a sad want of balance in this disciple's character: he goes, swinging like
a pendulum, from one extreme to another; and it will take some time ere he
settle down into a harmonious equipoise of all parts of his being--intellect,
will, heart, and conscience. But the root of the matter is in him: he is sound
at the core; and after the due amount of mistakes, he will become a wise man by
and by. He is clean, and needs not more than to have his feet washed. Jesus
Himself admits it of him, and of all his brother-disciples--save one, who is
unclean all over.
This document (last modifiedSeptember 17, 1997) from Believerscafe.com
Home | Bible versions | Bible Dictionary | Christian Classics | Christian Articles | Daily Devotions
Sister Projects: Wikichristian | WikiMD
BelieversCafe is a large collection of christian articles with over 40,000 pages
Our sponsors: 
