John 13:14

13:14-15 Jesus’ acts of service, such as washing feet and dying on the cross, provided an example of personal sacrifice to follow. • wash each other’s feet: Foot washing was so commonplace that Jesus might have intended a literal repetition of his act, or he might have seen it as symbolic. Either way, Jesus wants similar servanthood and sacrifice to characterize his followers.

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Joh 13:14. Καὶ ὑμεῖς, ye also) The washing of their feet, which the Lord performed for His disciples, had as its object both the benefit of conferring on them complete purity, and the inculcation of the lesson of humble love, which they needed to be taught: Joh 13:34, with which comp. Joh 13:1, “A new commandment give I unto you, that ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.” “Having loved His own—He loved them to the end.” Thence it follows, that the disciples’ mutual washing of one another’s feet has this as its object, that one should assist the other in every possible way towards attaining purity of soul; and that one should wash the feet of the other, either literally, 1Ti 5:10, “well reported for good works;—if she have washed the saints’ feet,” and that in good earnest, if, namely, it should happen to be needed: for it is an affirmative [positive] precept, obligatory always [where needed], but not under all circumstances [i.e. not, where it is not needed], such as is also the character of that precept, 1Jn 3:16, “We ought to lay down our lives for the brethren;” or the precept is to be obeyed ‘synecdochically’ [i.e. the one particular of washing feet being put for the whole circle of offices of self-denying love], by means of all kinds of offices which one can render to another, even servile and mean offices, if only the occasion require them. Therefore the Lord, by the very act of washing their feet, purified the disciples; wherefore also He lovingly compelled Peter to submit to it: but it was not on this account [with a view to purification thereby] that He enjoined on the disciples mutual washing of one another’s feet; nor is there such great necessity of imitating up to the very letter the Lord’s act of feet washing, as some have decided there is: inasmuch as, for instance, John on no occasion washed the feet of Thomas: and yet there is a greater similarity between the cases of feet-washing by the Lord, and that by brethren mutually, than most persons recognise. In our day, popes and princes imitate the feet-washing to the letter; but a greater subject for admiration would be, for instance, a pope, in unaffected humility, washing the feet of one king [his own equal in rank, and so the exact analogue to the disciples’ mutual washing as brethren] than the feet of twelve paupers. Now that I have made these observations, let me recommend to the reader’s study the dissert. of Ittigius, “de Pedilavio.”—ὀφείλετε, ye ought) because of My example: with which comp. γάρ, for, Joh 13:15.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Joh_13:14-15. It is not the act itself, but its moral essence, which, after His example, He enjoins upon them to exercise. This moral essence, however, consists not in lowly and ministering love generally, in which Jesus, by washing the feet of His disciples, desired to give them an example, but, as Joh_13:10 proves, in the ministering love which, in all self-denial and humility, is active for the moral purification and cleansing of others. As Jesus had just set forth this ministering love by His own example, when He, although their Lord and Master, performed on the persons of His disciples the servile duty of washing their feet,as an emblem, however, of the efficacy of His love to purify them spiritually,so ought they to wash one anothers feet; i.e. with the same self-denying love to be reciprocally serviceable to one another with a view to moral purification. The interpretation of the prescription ὀφείλετε, κ.τ.λ., in the proper sense was not that of the apostolical age, but first arose at a later time, and was followed (first in the fourth century, comp. Ambrose, de sacram. Joh_3:1; Augustine, ad Januar. cp. 119) by the introduction of the washing of the feet of the baptized on Maundy Thursday, and other symbolical feet-washings (later also amongst the Mennonites and in the community of Brothers). 1Ti_5:10 contains the non-ritualistic reference to hospitality. The feet-washing by the Pope on Maundy Thursday is a result of the pretension to represent Christ, and as such, also, was strongly condemned by the Reformers. Justly, however, the church has not adopted the feet-washing into the number of the sacraments; for it is not the practice itself, but only the spiritual action, which it thoughtfully represents, that Jesus enjoined upon the disciples. And it is solely to this moral meaning that the promise in Joh_13:17 is attached; and hence the essential marks of the specific sacramental idea, corresponding to the essence of baptism and of the Suppersacramental institution, promise, and collative forceare wanting to it. This in answer to Böhmer, in the Stud. u. Krit. 1850, p. 829 ff., who designates it an offence against Holy Scripture, that the Protestant church has not recognised the feet-washing as a sacrament, which, outside the Greek church,[128] it was explained to be by Bernard of Clairvaux (Sacramentum remissionis peccatorum quotidianorwn), without any permanent result. Baeumlein also expresses himself in favour of the maintenance of the practice as a legacy of Christ. But its essence is preserved, where the love, from which the practice flowed, abides. Nonnus aptly designates the καθὼς ἐγὼ, κ.τ.λ. as ἸΣΟΦΥῈς ΜΊΜΗΜΑ. The practice itself, moreover, cannot in truth be carried out either everywhere, or at all times, or by all, or on all.

ἘΓῺ … ΚΑῚ ὙΜΕῖς] Argumentum a majori ad minus. The majus implied in ἐγώ is further, by means of the subjoined Ὁ ΚΎΡΙΟς Κ. Ὁ ΔΙΔΙΆΣΚ., brought home with special force to the mind, and therefore, also, the principal moment, Ὁ ΚΎΡΙΟς (comp. Joh_13:16), is here moved forward.

ὑπόδειγμα] Later expression, instead of the old ΠΑΡΆΔΕΙΓΜΑ. Lobeck, ad Phryn. p. 12.

ἵνα, κ.τ.λ.] Design in setting the example: that, as I have done to you (in genere actus, Grotius), you also may do, namely, in ministering to one another in self-denying love for the removal of all sinful contamination, as I, for my part, have just figuratively fulfilled in your case, in the symbol of the feet-washing, this very ministering love directed to your moral purification.

[128] In which it has been preserved as a custom in monasteries.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Joh 13:14 . Hence the a fortiori argument: εἰ οὖν ἐγὼ ἔνιψα … πόδας , “if I then, Lord and Teacher, washed your feet, ye also ought ( ὀφείλετε denoting moral obligation) to wash one another’s feet”. “It is not the act itself, but its moral essence, which after His example He enjoins upon them to exercise.” Meyer. This has sometimes been considered a command enjoining the literal washing of the feet of poor saints: and was practised in England until 1731 by the Lord High Almoner, and is still practised by the Pope on Maundy Thursday ( Dies Mandati ), the day before Good Friday. See also Church’s Anselm , p. 49. The ancient practice is discussed in Augustine’s Letters , 55, to Januarius, c. 33. It at once took its place as symbolic of all kindly care of fellow-Christians, see 1Ti 5:10 .

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

If I then--the Lord.

have washed your feet--the servants'.

ye--but fellow servants.

ought to wash one another's feet--not in the narrow sense of a literal washing, profanely caricatured by popes and emperors, but by the very humblest real services one to another.

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 14. Ye also ought to wash one another feet.] That is, ye should be ready, after my example, to condescend to all the weakness of your brethren; to be willing to do the meanest offices for them, and to prefer the least of them in honour to yourselves.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

14. If then I, who am your Lord and Master. This is an argument from the greater to the less. Pride hinders us from maintaining that equality which ought to exist amongst us. But Christ, who is far exalted above all others, stoops down, that he may make the proud men ashamed, who, forgetting their station and rank, look upon themselves as not bound to hold intercourse with the brethren. For what does a mortal man imagine himself to be, when he refuses to bear the burdens of brethren, to accommodate himself to their customs, and, in short, to perform those offices by which the unity of the Church is maintained? In short, he means that the man who does not think of associating with weak brethren, on the condition of submitting mildly and gently even to offices which appear to be mean, claims more than he has a right to claim, and has too high an opinion of himself.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

(14) Ye ought also to wash one another’s feet.—The argument is à fortiori. If He had so humbled Himself as to do the work of a servant for them, much more ought they to humble themselves for each other. To make his words as striking as possible, they are prefaced by the emphatic I, and “Master and Lord” is repeated from the previous verse, but in the inverse order, to give special prominence to the word of greater dignity.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

14. your Lord and Master, have washed] Rather, the Lord and the Master, washed. For the construction comp. Joh_15:20 and Joh_18:23.

ye also ought to wash one another’s feet] The custom of ‘the feet washing’ on Maundy Thursday in literal fulfilment of this typical commandment is not older than the fourth century. The Lord High Almoner washed the feet of the recipients of the royal ‘maundy’ as late as 1731. James 2 was the last English sovereign who went through the ceremony. In 1Ti_5:10 ‘washing the saints’ feet’ is perhaps given rather as a type of devoted charity than as a definite act to be required.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

If I then your Lord and Master,.... Christ argues from these titles and characters, which his disciples rightly gave him, and from what he had done to them, though he stood in such a superior relation to them, to their duty one towards another; that since, says he, I

have washed your feet, ye also ought to wash one another's feet: by which he does not mean barely, that they should perform this single action; but as this was an instance of humility and condescension, and doing a good office to strangers and travellers, and was afterwards an expression of love to the saints, see Ti1 5:10, so he would teach them hereby, to behave in a spirit of humility and condescension to one another, to do every kind and good office, and by love to serve one another in all things.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

14 If I then, your Lord and Master, have washed your feet; ye also ought to wash one another’s feet.

Ver. 14. Ye ought also to wash one another’s feet] What so great matter is it then to salute others, to seek reconciliation with them, &c. Angels think not themselves too good to serve the saints; kings and queens shall bow down to them with their faces toward the earth, and lick up the dust of their feet, Isa 49:23.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Ye also ought to wash ... - Some have understood this literally as instituting a religious rite which we ought to observe; but this was evidently not the design; because:

There is no evidence that Jesus intended it as a religious observance, like the Lord’s Supper or the ordinance of baptism. It was not observed by the apostles or the primitive Christians as a religious rite. It was a rite of hospitality among the Jews, a common, well-known thing, and performed by servants. It is the manifest design of Jesus here to inculcate a lesson of humility; to teach them by his example that they ought to condescend to the most humble offices for the benefit of others. They ought not to be proud, and vain, and unwilling to occupy a low place, but to regard themselves as the servants of each other, and as willing to befriend each other in every way. And especially as they were to be founders of the church, and to be greatly honored, he took this occasion of warning them against the dangers of ambition, and of teaching them, by an example that they could not forget, the duty of humility.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

You also ought to wash one another’s feet. Not that he made this a standing precept according to the letter; but designed it as a lesson in humility. We find this custom literally observed in several churches, as it is now down every year by diverse prelates, and by Christian kings and princes. (Witham) --- He gives us an example of a more elevated act of virtue, that we may at least learn to practise the lower degrees of it. For he indeed was their Lord, but when we perform this office, we can but do it to our fellow-servants. (St. John Chrysostom, hom. lxx. in Joan.) --- That it is, blessed Peter, which you were ignorant of, but which he promises to explain afterwards. (St. Augustine, tract. 58. in Joan.)

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

I have by this my action taught you to love, and to be ready also to serve, one another, and not to think much to serve them even in the lowest and meanest offices by which you can do them good; for we must not think that these words lay a literal obligation upon Christians to wash the feet of others; washing the feet is mentioned but as species pro genere, a single act of service, put for all other acts by which we can be serviceable unto others: so it is also used, 1Sa 25:41; 1Ti 5:10. Some of the ancients seem to have judged this washing of feet to have been instituted as a sacrament, (though in an improper sense), and from hence, though Bellarmine, Maldonate, and others deny it to be a sacrament as well as we, yet probably is the practice in use amongst the papists, to wash certain persons’ feet every Thursday before Easter; a theatrical ceremony, rather than any thing of solid and profitable use. Our Saviour certainly intends no more by

ye ought to wash one another’s feet, than, ye ought to serve one another in all offices of love, and not to think yourselves too good, or too great, to do the meanest services to those who are my disciples: and this is that as to which he tells them he had set them an example that they should do as he had done, in other acts of the same kind, though not as to this specific act.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

14. Ought to wash one another’s feet—The pious Moravians, even at the present day, practice the ceremony of washing each other’s feet. But there is little reason to suppose that this slight language of our Lord is used to institute a perpetual sacrament of this kind. The words bear no comparison with the full and solemn precision with which the Lord’s Supper is instituted as a modified continuation of the ancient Passover. Nor is there any indication in the New Testament writings, nor in the earliest primitive documents, that such a sacrament was either established by the apostles or practised by the primitive Christians. Our Lord here performed the humblest of menial services as a lesson that they, renouncing strife for superiority, should condescend to the lowest offices for each other’s good.

In every act of humble love toward a fellow-Christian or a fellow-being, we perform the reality of which this feet washing is the symbol, and we really obey the command to wash one another’s feet.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Vers. 14, 15. If I then, the Lord and the Teacher, have washed your feet; ye ought also to wash one another"s feet: for I have given you an example, that ye should do as I have done to you. Kaywv , "as," "like as," was used by our Lord rather than o , "that which." The upodeigma shows that he had set before his disciples a parallel, an example, a symbolic type of the service they were to render to one another, and was not establishing a custom or exact ordinance. The washing of the feet was an Oriental custom of great antiquity as a mark of hospitality. (Gen_18:4 Gen_19:2; Abigail, 1Sa_25:41; see also Luk_7:38, Luk_7:44) In 1Ti_5:10 there is trace of such a custom of Christian hospitality. Considering the ease with which the Church has established a ceremonial from an isolated text, it is remarkable that no more literal use has been made of this injunction. However, Maundy Thursday, a name derived from Dies mandati, was celebrated as the day on which this great command, or that contained in ver. 34, was given Mandatum novum do vobis and the feet of the newly baptized were washed. The endeavor to make Augustine the authority for this religious practice is doubtful; but the Council of Toledo (A.D. 694) mentions this particular day as that on which it was appropriate. In the early Gallican Church there was such a ritual, and the forms of pedilavium observed are to be read in early Gothic and Galliean missals. Bernard of Clairvaux tried to convert the ceremony into a sacrament, but without success. And it would seem that some effort was made to introduce it into Spain. "In 1530, Wolsey washed, wiped, and kissed the feet of fifty-nine poor men at Peterborough. The practice was continued by English sovereigns till the reign of James II" (Westcott). No traces of it are to be found in the Ambrosian ritual, but the preservation of the custom is found now in the Russian imperial palace, in the ceremonies of the holy week at Rome, and in the palaces of Vienna, Madrid,munich. The practice was for a time retained by the United Brethren and Mennonites, and the Tunkers of Philadelphia (see "Dictionary of Christian Antiquities," vol. 1. arts. "Baptism," 67, and "Maundy Thursday;" Herzog., "Encyc.," art. "Fusswaschung," by H. Merz; and Schaff"s "Herzog.," art. "Tunkers"). The Church has for the most part looked below the mere form to the real substance of the Lord"s teaching, and only thus can we appreciate it adequately. The very injunction would be an inadequate, burdensome one where the feet are covered, and would become impossible and valueless in the Northern and Western world. The service demanded is the self-forgetting ministry of love, which places the interests of self behind and below those of others. Nothing is more theoretically easy and acceptable than this principle, but nothing more difficult of accomplishment. This sentence of our Lord is a noble illustration of the method in which a great principle is made by him the basis of a small duly (cf. Paul"s vindication of his own truthfulness and freedom from elafria , 2Co_1:17-20; he based it on God"s own faithfulness to promise).

Humility and mutual service.

There are certain virtues which are distinctively Christian. Amongst these must certainly be reckoned humility. Christianity has done not a little to elevate this grace of character to a higher position than it occupied in the esteem of the ancients. The Old Testament, in some passages, extols lowliness of heart as acceptable to the High and Lofty One. Yet this can hardly be deemed a characteristic of even pious Hebrews. But by his example and by his precepts our Savior has done much to encourage and develop among his followers in every position of life this admirable grace. And in proportion to the prevalence of humility is the disposition to render mutual services. As men forget themselves, they remember others; as they relinquish claims upon their fellow-men, they recognize claims upon themselves for services to be rendered.

I THE HINDRANCES TO HUMILITY. Christ would not have been at such pains to inculcate this lesson unless there was danger of its remaining unlearned. The fact, that he upon a solemn occasion, a crisis in his ministry, deigned to wash his disciples" feet, with no end in view except the inculcation of lowliness and self-forgetting helpfulness, proves that in his view there was urgent need for such instruction. No one who knows human nature can doubt that the lesson is hard to learn. There are dispositions deeply rooted in man"s sinful character which are altogether opposed to that humility which our Lord enjoins upon his disciples. Especially is pride, or a high opinion of self, an obstacle to be dealt with. There is also selfishness, or the disposition to concentrate all interest and all effort upon personal enjoyment and enrichment. On the other hand, there is a tendency in human nature to disregard others in proper-lion as self is magnified. The proud and selfish man is likely to be indifferent to the welfare of his neighbors, to be indisposed to undertake any labor, or submit to any self-denial, with a view to their good. This spirit may degenerate into a positive hatred especially of any who may have been injurious. Such basenesses as malice, envy, and jealousy may thus enter into and defile the soul.

II THE NATURE OF HUMILITY. What is the disposition and habit of mind which our Lord thought it so needful to impress upon his disciples as essential to true discipleship? What is the example which he set them for their imitation? As we examine the narrative in connection with our Lord"s conversation, we find that the character and conduct here commended have two aspects.

1. With regard to self, the Christian is called upon to cherish meekness and lowliness. If our Divine Lord did not disdain to minister to his friends, if he did not deem it derogatory to act as a servant, his followers may well lay aside those sentiments of vanity and self-importance which are so ruinous to a noble character. If men would but think of their own infirmities and imperfections, of their dependence upon their fellow-men, and above all of their obligations to their Creator and Redeemer, it would not be so hard to abase self.

2. With regard to others, the Christian should cultivate the habit of consideration and sympathy. What beauty and force is there in the apostolic admonition to look upon the things of others! Some are "all eyes" for their own interest, but very blind to the concerns of their neighbors. Christianity is not unreasonable. Comte bids men "live for others," as if regard to self were sinful. But Christ bids us "love our neighbor as ourself;" and the welfare of mankind will be best secured by compliance with this twofold admonition.

III THE PRACTICAL MANIFESTATIONS OF HUMILITY. Looking at these in the light of the context, we may say that true Christ-like lowliness will be displayed in:

1. Services of social courtesy. There may, indeed, be superficial politeness without Christian humility. But the danger with many is lest there should be a foolish and proud bluntness of manner in intercourse with others. There have been those who have deemed it a duty literally to copy the Lord"s example by washing the feet of the poor; sovereigns, ministers of state, and popes have endeavored by such acts to atone for much pride and haughtiness. The form of Christian courtesy will be determined by the manners and customs of the age. Acts which are natural and beautiful in one country and one state of society may become forced and grotesque in another. It is the spirit which is all-important; this will reveal itself in forms suitable and appropriate to circumstances.

2. Services of mutual help. The washing of the feet was regarded as necessary to comfort and propriety; it was, therefore, a real service, life doubt there is a difference of magnitude in the benefits conferred by members of human society upon one another. And there is a difference of kind. But every day brings some opportunity of rendering service of some kind or other to those with whom we associate; the Christian, so far as he follows his Master, will take advantage of such opportunities. Pride, indeed, will counsel thus: "Let others serve you; it is beneath your dignity to minister to them." Humility will offer very different advice: "Bear ye one another"s burdens, and so fulfill the Law of Christ.

IV THE MOTIVE TO HUMILITY. There are doubtless many motives; but one is so supreme as to leave scarcely any room for any other, i.e. in the Christian"s heart. The example of the Lord Jesus is to him all-powerful, all-persuasive. This is so when we think:

1. Of Christ"s native greatness, and of his voluntary humiliation in his incarnation and advent.

2. Of Christ"s whole conduct during his earthly ministry, which, as recorded, affords so many instances of condescension, compassion, and loving-kindness. He took the form of a servant, and he lived the life of a servant.

3. Of Christ"s obedience unto the death of the cross, in which he" tasted death for every man." If the Lord of glory deigned to die for men, it is scarcely possible for any disciple of Christ to render service to his fellowmen which shall fairly express the devotion to the Master and the consecration to his service which he has a right to expect. It is in Christ that the Christian finds the motive and the model of unselfishness, humility, and benevolent service.

V THE REWARD OF HUMILITY.

1. Peace of conscience is one happy consequence of this disposition and habit. Pride is the cause of restlessness and of wretchedness. But the meek and lowly spirit finds true and lasting rest.

2. Honor and exaltation by God himself. He abases the proud; he exalts the lowly and meek. He that humbleth himself shall be exalted. Before honor is humility. T.

The supreme example.

Imitation is a principle of human nature. It is natural, and therefore the means by which a great part of our knowledge and many of our habits are acquired. It is universal, prevailing in all ranks and conditions of society. It is powerful, molding character, and controlling and directing life. It is ultimate, not to be explained, but to be accepted upon its own authority. Upon this principle human life develops itself; upon this principle education for the most part proceeds. This principle is manifested in religion; Christianity makes special use of it, and Christ is the Model and Exemplar of all his people.

I THE CHARACTERISTICS IN VIRTUE OF WHICH CHRIST IS AN EXAMPLE TO MEN.

1. He was faultlessly perfect. Although the Bible gives us many examples of virtue and piety, it has often been noticed that both in Old and New Testament Scripture human character is represented as imperfect. In Christ alone no sin was found. His friends can find no words warm enough to praise him; his enemies can find no faults with which to charge him. How fitted, then, is Jesus, our Redeemer, to be also our Model! If we are to have a model and a master, let us choose the highest and the best. Christ always towers above us, and above all his rivals and all his followers.

2. His example is singularly comprehensive. It must have occurred to the student of Scripture biography that human exemplars are usually quoted as illustrating one or a few excellences; Abraham of faith, Job of patience, Jacob of earnestness in prayer, Moses of wisdom and meekness, Joshua of courage, David of devotion, Daniel of fearlessness, Peter of fervor, Paul of zeal, John of love. In Christ, and in Christ alone, all goodness is conjoined. It is sometimes supposed that our Savior exemplified only the softer and milder virtues; but this was not so, although for wise reasons this aspect of his character is dwelt upon most fondly by the evangelists. There was in him Divine harmony and symmetry of character, such as can be found in none beside.

3. His example was divinely authoritative. We base this statement upon his own language: "Learn of me," "Follow me," etc. And upon apostolic teaching: "Walk even as Christ walked," "Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example," etc.

II THE RESPECTS IN WHICH CHRIST IS AN EXAMPLE TO MEN. There are respects in which we cannot imitate him. For example, in his superhuman knowledge and power, and consequently in his voluntary humiliation.

1. But we may imitate the Lord Christ in his consecration to his Father"s will. He came to do the will of him who sent him, and he pleased not himself. This same principle and law it is open for us to adopt; life may be to us high and holy, being devoted unto God.

2. In his personal purity. Jesus lived in a sinful world, and mixed freely with sinful men; yet he was unspotted by the contact. His goodness was not negative only, but positive; every virtue was perfected in his life. Can ordinary men, in the busy life of this workaday world, be imitators of Christ? There are abundant illustrations of the possibility; the example of Jesus is one which it is practicable to follow.

3. Especially in his humility and condescension. This is the virtue to which in this passage express allusion is made. The lesson which the Lord wished to convey was a hard one; accordingly he taught it, not simply by precept, but by example. A literal fulfillment is not expected, but the spirit of Christ s example may be truly shared.

4. In his benevolence. In the Savior was not only a kindly disposition, but a habit of active beneficence, a readiness to forgive injuries, and to deal patiently and forbearingly with the slow of heart and the unsympathizing. In these very difficult virtues there is room for Christ"s disciples to imitate their Lord. The work of copying the perfect model is to be a progressive work. It will not be completed here; and this fact points on to the future. The perfect conformity is to be attained in heaven, where we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is. T.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Ye ought also to wash one another's feet - And why did they not? Why do we not read of any one apostle ever washing the feet of any other? Because they understood the Lord better. They knew he never designed that this should be literally taken. He designed to teach them the great lesson of humble love, as well as to confer inward purity upon them. And hereby he teaches us,

1. In every possible way to assist each other in attaining that purity;

2. To wash each other's feet, by performing all sorts of good offices to each other, even those of the lowest kind, when opportunity serves, and the necessity of any calls for them.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

14. εἰ οὖν ἐγὼ ἔν. ὑμῶν τ. π. The pronouns are emphatic and opposed. The aorist indicates the act now accomplished: comp. Joh 15:20, Joh 18:23. But in English the perfect is more usual in such cases: if I, therefore, the Lord and the Master, (have) washed (see on Joh 8:29). Here ὁ κύριος stands first as the title of deeper meaning: the disciples would use it with increased meaning as their knowledge increased.

καὶ ὑμεῖς ὀφ. The custom of the ‘feet-washing’ on Maundy Thursday in literal fulfilment of this typical commandment is not older than the fourth century. The Lord High Almoner washed the feet of the recipients of the royal ‘maundy’ as late as 1731. James II. was the last English sovereign who went through the ceremony. In 1Ti 5:10 ‘washing the saints’ feet’ is perhaps given rather as a type of devoted charity than as a definite act to be required.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

14.] [The command here given must be understood in the full light of intelligent appreciation of the circumstances and the meaning of the act.] “Pedilavium, quod Dominus discipulis adhibuit, pertinebat et ad beneficium conferendæ puritatis totalis, et ad παιδείαν decendæ dilectionis humilis, ver. 34, coll. ver. 1. Inde pedilavium discipulorum inter se eo pertinet, ut alter alterum quoquo modo adjuvet ad consequendam puritatem animæ; et ut alter alteri pedes lavet,—vel proprie, 1Ti 5:10, idque serio, si scil. accidat, ut opus sit: est enim præceptum affirmativum, obligans semper, sed non ad semper: quale etiam illud, 1Jn 3:16—vel synecdochice, per omne genus officiorum, quæ alter alteri etiam servilia et sordida, modo opportuna, præstare potest. Dominus igitur per ipsum pedilavium purificavit discipulos: quare etiam Petrum amanter coëgit: sed discipulis pedilavium mutuum non hoc nomine præcepit; neque adeo tanta est pedilavii literatenus imitandi necessitas, quantam nonnulli statuerunt: quum Johannes v. gr. Thomæ pedes nusquam laverit; et tamen major pedilavii Dominici et fraterni similitudo, quam plerique agnoscunt. Hodie pontifices et principes pedilavium ad literam imitantur; magis autem admirandus foret, v. gr. pontifex, unius regis, quam duodecim pauperum pedes, seria humilitate lavans.” Bengel. The custom of literally and ceremonially washing the feet in obedience to this command, is not found before the fourth century.

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

14. εἰ οὖν ἐγώ κτλ., “If then, I, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, a fortiori, you ought to wash the feet of one another.” By this example were the dignity and the duty of mutual διακονία recommended (see on 12:26) to Christian disciples.

The precept was not taken by the Church to be the initiation of a sacramental rite; the pedilauium was never counted as a sacrament, although the custom grew up by the fourth century, in certain parts of the Western Church, of washing the feet of the poor on the Thursday before Easter. In England, the sovereign, or in his stead the Lord High Almoner, used to do this with ceremony until 1731; and in Rome the Pope still presides at the pedilauium. The pious widows described in 1Ti 5:10 “washed the saints’ feet,” but only as an incident of their hospitable ministrations.

ὀφείλετε. The verb occurs again in Jn. at 19:17, 1Jn 2:6, 1Jn 3:16, 1Jn 4:11.

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Your. Inserted in A. V. Better, the Lord and the Master as Rev. Both have the article.

Ought [οφειλετε] . The verb means to owe. It occurs several times in John's Epistles (1Jo 2:6; 1Jo 3:16; 1Jo 4:11; 3Jo 1:8). In the Gospel only here and Joh 19:7. Compare Luk 17:10. In Matthew's version of the Lord 's prayer occur the two kindred words ojfeilnma, debt, and ojfeilethv, debtor. Jesus here puts the obligation to ministry as a debt under which His disciples are laid by His ministry to them. The word ought is the past tense of owe. Dei, ought or must (see Joh 3:7, 14, 30, etc.) expresses an obligation in the nature of things; ojfeilein, a special, personal obligation.

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.