The Rejected Ordinance by WM. A. WESTWORTH

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Takoma Park Station, Washington, D. C. · Apr 2, 1908

The Rejected Ordinance

By WM. A. WESTWORTH

WM. A. WESTWORTH

How many times ignorance of God's plans for us, and of the lessons that he would teach us, robs us of the greatest blessings, and causes us to lay aside or to esteem lightly the plans that he has, in his love, marked out for us.

The ordinance of feet washing as established by the Master, and recorded in the thirteenth chapter of John, is a forceful illustration of the above. Rejected by the large majority of professed believers in the Christ life and teachings, and misunderstood by almost all, it is, nevertheless, one of the most blessed of all the rites of the Christian church, and to him who knows “these things” it is indeed a means to make him “happy.” John 13:17.

Many who are anxious to follow their Lord in all the way that he has marked out for his children, take part in this ceremony, solely because they desire to follow the admonition given by the Master when he said, “Ye also ought to wash one another’s feet,” but without understanding why he thus spoke; others see in it but little more than an act of humility; and how many times do we hear it said that the Master has given this as a rite whereby his children may show their humility. Continually it is represented as an example set by the Lord to evidence the Christian grace of self-abasement.

But methinks it far from the intent of the Saviour to institute any rite which would give his children merely a chance to parade whatever graces they might, through his goodness, develop, or to sound abroad their goodness. While he did say that he left us “an example” that we “should do” as he did, it was not to flaunt our graces, but to accomplish that same purpose which he accomplished when he girded himself and washed his disciples’ feet. The reason why so many miss the real depth of the lesson, is simply because they fail to consider just what he says. Let us briefly examine the text.

John 13:3: “Jesus knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands, and that he was come from God, and went to God; he riseth from supper, and laid aside his garments; and took a towel, and girded himself. After that he poureth water into a bason, and began to wash the disciples’ feet,” etc.

Notice that because he called to mind, or “knew,” a certain thing, he began to do another certain thing. The knowledge prompted the action. “He was come from God, and went to God;” but for what purpose? Luke 19:10 tells us that “the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost”—not in their sins, but from their sins. “Thou shalt call his name Jesus: for he shall save his people from their sins.” He came for the distinct purpose of cleansing men from sin; and ere he could return to the Father, he desired to leave with his children an evidence which they could themselves perpetuate, which would show that they appreciated for just what purpose he did come from the Father. Bear in mind the cause, which the Word gives, why he rose from supper and began to wash the disciples’ feet. It is vital. Then, in due time, he came to Peter. The question is asked, “Lord, dost thou wash my feet?” What means this? Could not Peter see his Master doing this very thing? Was there really a question as to the nature of the act to be performed? Did Peter want to know if his feet were to be washed, or is the real intent of his query rather, “Lord, why do you wash my feet?” Surely the latter. This is evidenced by the reply vouchsafed by the Lord: “What I do thou knowest not now, but thou shalt know hereafter.” Certainly Peter could see that outward act, but that there was an inner meaning is plain from the Saviour’s response. Again, Peter saw humility in the act, for he exclaimed, “Thou shalt never wash my feet.” He to whom it had shortly before been revealed of heaven that this was indeed the Christ, the Son of the living God, could not see the Master in the position of the servant, doing that which should have been done by any of the disciples who was lowly enough of heart to serve his fellows. He would not brook such debasing of his Lord. But the Lord had said that Peter did not know what was in the ordinance, and inasmuch as it is plainly evident that he did see humility therein, it is also positive that there is more, far more, for us to learn in this rite than the lesson of our Lord’s humility.

Then comes the explanation, showing what is really in the rite. “If I wash thee not, thou hast no part with me”—a double negative, and therefore with the power and meaning of an affirmative. If I wash thee, thou hast a part with me.

Peter understands, and exclaims, “Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and my head.” The washing of any physical defilement can not give a man part with the Lord; and realizing this, the forward disciple grasps at the light held out to him—this washing was O, so much more! it was that cleansing which gives men communion with the Redeemer—the washing from sin—the very thing the Saviour came from the Father to accomplish. In his joy at the new light, he cries out for full washing, and with quick perception seems to recall the ceremony recorded in Leviticus 8, where the blood of the lamb of consecration was to touch the

head and hands and feet, a full work.

The Lord replies, “He that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit.” Plain it is to the dullest that a physical washing of the feet will not cleanse the rest of the body and make a man clean every whit, and therefore we can come to no other conclusion than that this washing signifies a higher cleansing, that same cleansing which unites us again with our Lord after our “sins have separated” us from our God.

And how forcefully the Master emphasizes the real intent of the ordinance in its true inwardness: “For he knew who should betray him; therefore said he, ye are not all clean.” Verily there is no other conclusion than that this rite symbolizes a washing from sin. “If ye know these things, happy are ye if ye do them,” and why? Will the mere following of the outer ceremony because we simply desire to do something that Jesus did, make us really happy? But if we realize that this washing is a heaven-given rite to tell us that we are “clean every whit,” washed by the blood of the Lamb; if it ever recalls to us that he came from God to cleanse his children, and that the Master himself washed away the sins, truly then we have a reason to be “happy.” And while there is without question a blessing in following the Master and serving in his stead, we remember that the primary blessing is to him who is washed and cleansed, and not first in importance to him who does the washing.

But the objection comes that if this is really the intent of the rite, it overlaps the ceremony of immersion. Not at all! Baptism is indeed for the remission of sins; it is for the washing away of the old life of sin; it is indeed the burial of the old man; but it is also a symbol of the washing away of that accumulation of sin committed prior to our taking on the vows of the Christ-life. But how many have not sinned since they took upon themselves the service of the Master? How many can look back quarter by quarter and see no fault, no waywardness, no stain of self? Shall we then go on thus stained and unwashed, or shall we be rebaptized, whenever the Spirit reveals to us a stain of iniquity? No, it is not necessary thus ever to be washed in the waters of baptism, for “he that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit.” As the first immersion was for the remission of the sins that were past, the life of waywardness, so now, quarter by quarter, or whenever the opportunity is given, we can be cleansed of all the impurities that are upon us since last we were washed.

Then to us the rite of feet washing becomes, not as it is to many, a mere formalism, but a real joy; not merely the acquiescence to a rule of the church, but an evidence of the love of our Lord in keeping his children clean. Each time the opportunity is afforded, the same sense of relief that came when, through the waters of baptism, we were conscious of that inner spiritual work of saving from sin, so now we see, in the service of the brother who ministers in place of the Master, a ridding of those weaknesses and sins which so often worry us, and which are ever used by the arch-enemy to discourage the believer in his struggle for supremacy over sin.

And now we are washed,—clean, the Master says,—fit, through his love, to partake of the new life—his body and his blood. Passing strange how men can eat of that bread and drink of that cup with bodies all polluted with sin! But here is an ordinance established for all the church to follow, which brings us into a condition fit to receive the precious emblems. How entirely out of harmony with the divine plan then for men to celebrate the Lord’s supper without first enjoying the way that God marked out as a fit preparation for that solemn act. It seems almost sacrilege to eat and drink, with lives all polluted by contact with the elements of sin.

“Ye also ought to wash one another’s feet”—not to parade our righteousness, but that every child of heaven may be clean, pure, spotless, ready for the reception of the life divine. Christ’s humility is all the humility there is in it. The sacrifice he made, the self-abnegation he practised, the love he manifested,—these are what we should endeavor to show as we kneel before our brother. By these things we are made clean. “If ye know these things, happy are ye if ye do them.”

Hartford, Conn.