Newspaper Page Text
52
Eeet Washing*.
Opelika, Alh., Match 26, 1860.
Brethren Beebe & Purinoton —ln all that I
have heretofore written for the Messenger, I nevei
have felt inclined to write specially on the subject
*f Feet Washing, but now, since reading the letters
of my highly esteemed and beloved brethren Trotl
and Weston that subject, I feel a little disposed to
rrite, and leave it entirely at your discretion wheth
er you publish it or not.
I have a very high regard for the brethren who
have wiitten in opposition to the observance of
Feet Washing literally as a religious duty; I es
teem them as brethren and would not designedly
say one woid to wound their feelings, but while 1
esteem them highly and know that I am infeiiorto
them in point of understanding and ability, yet I
am told “not to think of men above that which is
wiitten.”
I have somewhat carefully noticed the writings
of our more northern brethren in opposition to Feet
Washing tor a number of years past, but instead ol
their writings shaking my faith in regard to it as
a Christian duty, they have rather mote strongly
confirmed me in it. This has caused me to think
somewhat seriously upon the sul j.-ct, to know how
far tradition, or long established custom may lead
us iu religious things. It is regularly practiced by
the brethten and sisters of the Old Baptist order in
this country to “wash one another’* feet,” as they
believe in obedience to the example and command
of Christ. John xiii. 14. While at the North the
old order ol Baptists, holding as we do, that the
“ Scriptures are the only rule of faith and practice,’’
do not practice Feet Washing, because they say
they do not believe that it was designed to be liter
ally observed. Custom ceruiinly has much influ
ence in directing our course über in one instance
or the ether. I can hardly think that the Lord
has given hischildreu in one locality a clearer un
derstanding on this subject than he has in another.
The word of God is the same, and if that word has
been opened to our understanding it is understood
alike by all, hence one thing is certain, some of us
are wrong and are either doing too much, or else
like some of old, we “ have not ail obeyed the gos
pel” in attending to certain gospel duiies.
- It must be admitted that Christ Jesus did liter
ally wash his disciples’ feet. This he did., not
merely in the manner ol ancient Jewish custom, to
get water for traveling strangers to wash their own
feet, to remove contracted filth, for had the washing
been in that sense, Peter as a Jew, certainly wuu and
have undeistood it and not have ol j-cted to it.—
Christ told him, “What I do iliou knowest noi
now, buttbou shall know hereafter.” Such a thing
as this was before not known to “wash one auoth
ei s feet. Tile Jewislf disciples doubtless were ac
quain ed with the practice of procuring necessaiv
accommodations for traveling stiangers to wasn
their own teet, but they did not wash the traveler’?-
feet and then the traveler in return wash their feel,
and besides this act of Jesus war confined to hi>
disciples, “wash one another’s feet.” lam aware
that something more is signified by it beyond the
literal act of washing. It is a lesson of deep hu-
SOUTHERN BAPTIST MESSENGER.
mdity and love, placing all upon a level. It it is
simply as an act of hospitality to traveling breth
ren to lender them more comfortable when they
lodge w.kh us, why should ihe traveling brother be
required .in return to wash our feet ? This would
not look so much like hospitably to a weary trav
eler to impose on him the duty to wash our feet
af:er we bad been trudging about our domestic
duiies all the day. And besides, I would ask broth
er West, who says he has “ conclusive evidence ’ that
it was intended as an act of hospitality to t raveling
brethren, if you and the northern brethren who
ojip<>e feet washing af>ei the manner we practice
it in the south. I a.*k, do you wash the traveling
brethren’s feet ? If you do not, do you not neg
lect to do even what you understand is intended by
the example and command of Christ! *• If you
know these things, says Christ, happy a-re ye if
you do them.” The happiness doe* not consist
simply in knowing, but in knowing and doing. I
think if ever I have enjoyed myself religiously and
my soul been truly humbled within me in the ob
servance of any religious duty it lias been in wash
ing my brother’s feet as I have considered in obe
dience to the example and command of Christ, and
in seeing the brethren wash one another’s feet.—
If what I have realized in this is merely “animal
excitement,” as brother Trott seems to imply might
be, then 1 fear that much of my religious enjoy
ments have onlv been animal excitement. I
1 ei j >yed the answer of a good conscience in being
baptized, and when I was led into the water my
: mind was caught away to Jesus who gave the ex
j ample of baptism, and I felt willing to be cut loose
from all the world if I could fallow him. When
the time came with the Church for feet washing, I
felt too unworthy for any of God’s children to wash
my feet, and thought surely none of them would
stoop so low. One of the brethren addressed me
very tenderly, and said, “Bro. Mitchell, may I wash
your feet.” I began to prepare for it, he poured
walei into a bason, gilded himself with a towel,
droj ped upon his knees before me, and began to
wash my unworthy feet. In a moment my mind
was caught awav to the blessed and lovely J esU s
“washing his poor disciples’ feet,” and I then saw
and felt something in regard to it that I never bad
known anything about before. I have often real
ized the same since that time. [ think I have seen
chtisiians in observing this duty as humble as lit
tle children. I have seen the master wash the ser
vant’s feet, and thank God that he vv a * counted
wort hy to wash the feet of one of the humblest ami
poorest of God’s children. I know of no religion
denomination in this country that -wash one anolb
er’s feel” except the old order of Baptist*. W„t
tend to it as we consider in obedience to ChrUi
though we have to bear the scoff, and sneers, aim
•eptoaoh of many with whom w are surrounded.
A Deacon of the Missionary Baptist Church or.
reading brother Troll’s letter on feet washing, as I
am in formed, greatly exulted in i, and said it’ w H
precisely what lie believed,and doubtless he thou,r|,
he had a weapon furnished from our own tanks'.
ppose our practice Ido not blame brother Trot;
however, or bo. West, for writing what they be
‘ieve to be truth, and 1 still have, as [ ever hr
had, Christian fellowship for them, and if they will
come south I will give them a hearty welcome *
and if they will attend our meetings in time of Feet
Washing, and would suffer one so unworthy as I
am to wash their feet in token of love and fellow
ship for them, I certainly feel willing to do it. It
is, however, humiliating to mv proud nature, but
thank God, I hope be lias sufficiently humbled me
by his grace that I desire no higher honor in thi*
world, nor in His church, than to be kept by his
love and mercy so that I may have a name and a
place among his poor and afflicted people, and b
counted worthy to wash their feet, especially tbs
feet of hi* ministering servants.
Here perhaps I ought to stop, but l wish to no
lice the principal argument and objection of breth
ren against the subject. I notice that it is very
common from brethren of late to quote Matt, xix
28 e shall sit upon twelve thrones judging th*
twelve tribes of Israel.” Tnis is applied to the
Apostles as the “ enthroned judges” to judge and
•decide bn reference to all matteis of doctrine and
order in the gospel church or spiritual Israel. I
do not object to this application of the text. lam
willing to abide their decision, though they art
four or five Apostles from whom we have no letters
in the New Testament; what they taught th*
churches by word was doubtless in harmony with
what is written.
After the resurrection of Christ he appeared
again according to promise to his Apostles. ll*
lets them know that there is no power in heaven
or earth but what is vested in himself, and for that
reason he could speak with authority, “ Go ye,
theiefoie and teach all nations, baptiz ng them in
the name ol the Fathei, and of tlieS >n, and of th*
Holy Ghost, teaching them to observe ail thing!
whatsoever I here commanded you,” &<•. This com
mand did not rest upon the beloved Apostle John
alone, but alike upon all of them. What had J
u> commanded them ? Did he not command them,
the Apostles, to wash one anothei’s feet ? Did b
not Bay to them if I then, your Lord and Master,
have washed your feet, ye ought to wash one anoth
er s feet ? Is not this strong argument ? Is it not
plain, unambiguous reasoning? that is easily un
derstood and could not require that the Apostle*
should write much to establish the churches in th*
practice. “For I, says Christ, have given you an
example that ye shoul i do as I have done to you.”
11.. w could the Apostles “uo as” their Lord had
done to them unless they followed the verv ideiHl
cal example that they saw with their eyes ? How
could they do as he did if they did not literally
wash one another’s feet as they saw him do to
• hem ? Our northern brethren as well as others at
’he south sometimes quote John xvii. 23, 24.
“Inou hast loved them as ihou hast loved me. —
fhou lovedftL me before the foundation of the world.”
Ttiey therefore contend (and so do 1) that God
oved his people as he looid his only S<u, in the
veiy same manner, and with the very same love.
•>o in rtleterice to feet washing, the Apostles must
do as he had done to them. Must doit in the same
manner.