Meanwhile the offended and provoked dignitaries of Judaism were fast
making arrangements to crush the daring innovator, who had done so
much to bring their learning and their power into contempt. Some of the
most fiery spirits among them, were for defying all risks, by seizing
the Nazarene openly, in the midst of his audacious denunciations
of the higher orders; and the attempt was made to execute this act
of arbitrary power; but the mere hirelings sent upon the errand,
were too much awed by the unequaled majesty of the man, and by the
strong attachment of the people to him, to be willing to execute their
commission. But there were old heads among them, that could contrive
safer and surer ways of meeting the evil. By them it was finally
determined to seize Jesus when alone or unattended by the throngs
which usually encompassed him,――to hurry him at once secretly through
the forms of law necessary for his commitment, and then to put him
immediately into the hands of the Roman governor, as a condemned rioter
and rebel, who would be obliged to order his execution in such a way
as that no popular excitement would rescue the victim from the grasp
of the soldiery. This was the plan which they were now arranging, and
which they were prepared to execute before the close of the passover,
if they could get intelligence of his motions. These fatal schemes of
hate could not have been unknown to Jesus; yet the knowledge of them
made no difference in his bold devotion to the cause for which he came
into the world. Anxious to improve the few fast fleeting hours that
remained before the time of his sufferings should come on, and desirous
to join as a Jew in this great national festival, by keeping it in form
with his disciples, he directed his two most confidential apostles,
Peter and John, to get ready the entertainment for them in the city, by
an arrangement made with a man already expecting to receive them. This
commission they faithfully executed, and Jesus accordingly ate with
his disciples the feast of the first day of the passover, in Jerusalem,
with those who sought his life so near him. After the supper was over,
he determined to use the brief remnant of time for the purpose of
uprooting that low feeling of jealous ambition which had already made
so much trouble among them, in their anxious discussions as to who
should be accounted the greatest, and should rank as the ruler of the
twelve. To impress the right view upon their minds most effectually, he
chose the oriental mode of a ceremony which should strike their senses,
and thus secure a regard and remembrance for his words which they
might fail in attaining if they were delivered in the simple manner of
trite and oft spoken oral truisms. He therefore rose after supper, and
leaving his place at the head of the table, he laid aside his upper
garments, which, though appropriate and becoming him as a teacher
in his hours of public instruction, or social communion, were yet
inconvenient in any active exertion which needed the free use of the
limbs. Being thus disrobed, he took the position and character of a
menial upon him, and girding himself with a towel, he poured water
into a basin and began to wash the disciples’ feet in it, wiping them
with his towel. He accordingly comes to Simon Peter, in the discharge
of his servile office; but Peter, whose ideas of the majesty and
ripening honors of his Master were shocked at this extraordinary
action, positively refused to be even the passive instrument of such an
indignity to one so great and good,――first inquiring “Lord, dost thou
wash my feet?” Jesus in answer said to him, “What I do, thou knowest
not now, but thou shalt know hereafter.” That is, “this apparently
degrading act has a hidden, useful meaning, at this moment beyond your
comprehension, but which you will learn in due time.” Peter, however,
notwithstanding this plain and decided expression of Christ’s wise
determination to go through this painful ceremony, for the instruction
of those who so unwillingly submitted to see him thus degraded,――still
led on by the fiery ardor of his own headlong genius,――manfully
persisted in his refusal, and expressed himself in the most positive
terms possible, saying to Jesus, “Thou shalt never wash my feet.” Jesus
answered, “If I wash thee not, thou hast no part with me.” This solemn
remonstrance had the effect of checking Peter’s too forward reverence,
and in a tone of deeper submission to the wise will of his Master, he
yielded, replying however, “Lord, wash not my feet only, but also my
hands and my head.” Since so low an office was to be performed by one
so venerated, he would not have the favor of his blessed touch confined
to the baser limbs, but desired that the nobler parts of the body
should share in the holy ablution. But the high purpose of Jesus
could not accommodate itself to the whims of his zealous disciple;
for his very object was to take the humblest attitude before them,
by performing those personal offices which were usually committed to
slaves. He therefore told Peter, “He that is washed needs not save
to wash his feet, but is clean in every part;”――a very familiar and
expressive illustration, alluding to the circumstance that those who
have been to a bath and there washed themselves, will on their return
find themselves wholly clean, except such dust as may cling to their
feet as they have passed through the streets on their return. And any
one may feel the force of the beautiful figure, who has ever gone into
the water for the purposes of cleanliness and refreshment, on a warm
summer’s day in this country, and has found by experience that after
all possible ablution, on coming out and dressing himself, his wet
feet in contact with the ground have become loaded with dirt which
demands new diligence to remove it; and as all who have tried it know,
it requires many ingenious efforts to return with feet as clean as
they came to the washing; and in spite of all, after the return, an
inspection may forcibly illustrate the truth, that “he that is washed,
though he is clean in every part, yet needs to wash his feet.” Such
was the figure with which Jesus expressed to his simple-minded and
unlettered disciples, the important truth, that since they had been
already washed, (baptized by John or himself,) if that washing had been
effectual, they could need the repurification only of their feet――the
cleansing away of such of the world’s impure thoughts and feelings as
had clung to them in their journeyings through it. So, after he had
washed their feet, and had taken his garments and sat down again, he
said to them, “Know ye what I have done to you? Ye call me Master and
Lord; and ye say well, for so I am. If I then, your Lord and Master,
have washed your feet, ye also ought to wash one another’s feet. For I
have given you this as an example, that ye should do as I have done to
you. Truly the servant is not greater than his lord, neither is he that
is sent greater than him that sent him. If ye know these things, happy
are ye if ye do them.”――A charge so clear and simple, and so full, that
it needs not a word of comment to show any reader the full force of
this touching ceremony.
Shortly after, in the same place and during the same meeting, Jesus
speaking to them of his near departure, affectionately and sadly said,
“Little children, but a little while longer am I with you. Ye shall
seek me; and as I said to the Jews, ‘whither I go, ye cannot come,’――so
now I say to you.” To this Simon Peter soon after replied by asking him,
“Lord whither goest thou?” Jesus answered him, “Whither I go thou canst
not follow me now, but thou shalt follow me afterwards.” Peter, perhaps
beginning to perceive the mournful meaning of this declaration, replied,
still urging, “Lord, why cannot I follow thee now? I will lay down my
life for thy sake.” Jesus answered, “Wilt thou lay down thy life for
my sake? I tell thee assuredly, the cock shall not crow till thou hast
denied me thrice.”――Soon after, at the same time and place, noticing
the confident assurance of this chief disciple, Jesus again warned him
of his danger and his coming fall. “Simon! Simon! behold, Satan has
desired to have you (_all_) that he may sift you as wheat; but I have
prayed for _thee_ (_especially_) that _thy_ faith fail not; and when
_thou_ art converted, strengthen thy brethren.” Never before had higher
and more distinctive favor been conferred on this chief apostle, than
by this sad prophecy of danger, weakness and sin, on which he was to
fall, for a time, to his deep disgrace; but on him alone, when rescued
from ruin by his Master’s peculiar prayers, was to rest the task of
strengthening his brethren. But his Master’s kind warning was for
the present lost on his immovable self-esteem; he repeated his former
assurance of perfect devotion through every danger, “Lord, I am ready
to go with thee into prison and to death.” Where was affectionate
and heroic devotion ever more affectingly and determinedly expressed?
What heart of common man would not have leaped to meet such love and
fidelity? But He, with an eye still clear and piercing, in spite of
the tears with which affection might dim it, saw through the veil
that would have blinded the sharpest human judgment, and coldly met
these protestations of burning zeal with the chilling prediction again
uttered, “I tell thee, Peter, the cock shall not crow this day, before
thou shalt thrice deny that thou knowest me.” Then making a sudden
transition, to hint to them the nature of the dangers which would soon
try their souls, he suddenly reverted to their former security. “When
I sent you forth without purse, or scrip, or shoes, did ye need any
thing?” And they said “Nothing.” Then said he to them “But now, let
him that has a purse, take it, and likewise his scrip; and let him that
has no sword sell his cloak and buy one.” They had hitherto, in their
wanderings, every where found friends to support and protect them; but
now the world was at war with them, and they must look to their own
resources both for supplying their wants and guarding their lives. His
disciples readily apprehending some need of personal defense, at once
bestirred themselves and mustered what arms they could on the spot, and
told him that they had two swords among them, and of these it appears
that one was in the hands of Peter. It was natural enough that among
the disciples these few arms were found, for they were all Galileans,
who, as Josephus tells us, were very pugnacious in their habits; and
even the followers of Christ, notwithstanding their peaceful calling,
had not entirely laid aside their former weapons of violence, which
were the more needed by them, as the journey from Galilee to Jerusalem
was made very dangerous by robbers, who lay in wait for the defenseless
traveler wherever the nature of the ground favored such an attack.
Of this character was that part of the road between Jerusalem and
Jericho, alluded to in the parable of the wounded traveler and the
good Samaritan,――a region so wild and rocky that it has always been
dangerous, for the same reasons, even to this day; of which a sad
instance occurred but a few years ago, in the case of an eminent
English traveler, who going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, fell among
thieves and was wounded near the same spot mentioned by Christ, in
spite of the defenses with which he was provided. It was in reference
to such dangers as these, that two of his disciples had provided
themselves with hostile weapons, and Peter may have been instigated
to carry his sword into such a peaceful feast, by the suspicion that
the danger from the chief priests, to which Christ had often alluded,
might more particularly threaten them while they were in the city
by themselves, without the safeguard of their numerous friends in
the multitude. The answer of Jesus to this report of their means of
resistance was not in a tone to excite them to the very zealous use of
them. He simply said, “It is enough,” a phrase which was meant to quiet
them, by expressing his little regard for such a defense as they were
able to offer to him, with this contemptible armament.
Some have conjectured that this washing of feet (page 97) was
a usual rite at the Paschal feast. So Scaliger, Beza, Baronius,
Casaubon and other learned men have thought. (See Poole’s
Synopsis, on John xiii. 5.) But Buxtorf has clearly shown the
falsity of their reasons, and Lightfoot has also proved that it
was a perfectly unusual thing, and that there is no passage in
all the Rabbinical writings which refers to it as a custom. It
is manifest indeed, to a common reader, that the whole peculiar
force of this ablution, in this instance, consisted in its being
an entirely unusual act; and all its beautiful aptness as an
illustration of the meaning of Jesus,――that they should cease
their ambitious strife for precedence,――is lost in making it
anything else than a perfectly new and original ceremony, whose
impressiveness mainly consisted in its singularity. Lightfoot
also illustrates the design of Jesus still farther, by several
interesting passages from the Talmudists, showing in what way
the ablution would be regarded by his disciples, who like other
Jews would look upon it as a most degraded action, never to
be performed except by inferiors to superiors. These Talmudic
authorities declare, that “Among the duties to be performed by
the wife to her husband, this was one,――that she should wash
his face, his hands and his feet.” (_Maimonides on the duties of
women._) The same office was due from a son to his father,――from
a slave to his master, as his references show; but he says he
can find no precept that a disciple should perform such a duty
to his teacher, unless it be included in this, “The teacher
should be more honored by his scholar than a father.”
He also shows that the feet were never washed separately, with
any idea of legal purification,――though the Pharisees washed
their hands separately with this view, and the priests washed
their hands and feet both, as a form of purification, but
never the feet alone. And he very justly remarks upon all this
testimony, that “the farther this action of Christ recedes from
common custom, the higher its fitness for their instruction,
――being performed not merely for an example but for a precept.”
(Lightfoot’s Horae Hebraica in Gospel of John xiii. 5.)
_Laid aside his garments._――The simple dress of the races of
western Asia, is always distinguishable into two parts or sets
of garments,――an inner, which covered more or less of the body,
fitting it tightly, but not reaching far over the legs or arms,
and consisted either of a single cloth folded around the loins,
or a tunic fastened with a girdle; sometimes also a covering for
the thighs was subjoined, making something like the rudiment of
a pair of breeches. (See Jahn Archaeologia Biblica § 120.) These
were the permanent parts of the dress, and were always required
to be kept on the body, by the common rules of decency. But the
second division of the garments, (“_superindumenta_,” Jahn,)
thrown loosely over the inner ones, might be laid aside, on any
occasion, when active exertion required the most unconstrained
motion of the limbs. One of these was a simple oblong, broad
piece of cloth, of various dimensions, but generally about
three yards long, and two broad, which was wrapped around the
body like a mantle, the two upper corners being drawn over the
shoulders in front, and the rest hanging down the back, and
falling around the front of the body, without any fastenings
but the folding of the upper corners. This garment was called by
the Hebrews שמלה or שלמה, (_simlah_ or _salmah_,) and sometimes
בגד; (_begedh_;)――by the Greeks, ἱματιον. (_himation_.) Jahn
Archaeologia Biblica. This is the garment which is always
meant by this Greek word in the New Testament, when used in
the singular number,――translated “cloak” in the common English
version, as in the passage in the text above, where Jesus
exhorts him that has no sword to sell his _cloak_ and buy one.
When this Greek word occurs in the plural, (ἱματια, _himatia_,)
it is translated “garments,” and it is noticeable that in most
cases where it occurs, the sense actually requires that it
should be understood only of the outer dress, to which I have
referred it. As in Matthew xxi. 8, where it is said that the
people spread their _garments_ in the way,――of course only their
outer ones, which were loose and easily thrown off, without
indecent exposure. So in Mark xi. 7, 8: Luke xix. 35. There is
no need then, of supposing, as Origen does, that Jesus took off
all his clothes, or was naked, in the modern sense of the term.
A variety of other outer garments in common use both among the
early and the later Jews, are described minutely by Jahn in his
Archaeologia Biblica, § 122. I shall have occasion to describe
some of these, in illustration of other passages.
My exegesis on the passage “He that is washed, needs not,” &c.
may strike some as rather bold in its illustration, yet if great
authorities are necessary to support the view I have taken,
I can refer at once to a legion of commentators, both ancient
and modern, who all offer the same general explanation, though
not exactly the same illustration. Poole’s Synopsis is rich in
references to such. Among these, Vatablus remarks on the need
of washing the feet of one already washed, “_scil. viae causa_.”
Medonachus says of the feet, “quos calcata terra iterum inquinat.”
Hammond says, “he that hath been initiated, and entered into
Christ, &c. is _whole clean_, and hath no need to be so washed
again, all over. All that is needful to him is the daily
ministering of the word and grace of Christ, to cleanse and
wash off the frailties, and imperfections, and lapses of our
weak nature, those feet of the soul.” Grotius says, “Hoc tantum
opus ei est, ut ab iis se purget quae ex occasione nascuntur.
Similitudo sumpta ab his _qui a balneo nudis pedibus abeunt_.”
Besides these and many others largely quoted by Poole, Lampius
also (in commentary in Gospel of John) goes very fully into the
same view, and quotes many others in illustration. Wolfius (in
Cur. Philology) gives various illustrations, differing in no
important particular, that I can see, from each other, nor from
that of Kuinoel, who calls them “contortas expositiones,” but
gives one which is the same in almost every part, but is more
fully illustrated in detail, by reference to the usage of the
ancients, of going to the bath before coming to a feast, which
the disciples no doubt had done, and made themselves clean in
all parts except their feet, which had become dirtied on the
way from the bath. This is the same view which Wolf also quotes
approvingly from Elsner. Wetstein is also on this point, as on
all others, abundantly rich in illustrations from classic usage,
to which he refers in a great number of quotations from Lucian,
Herodotus, Plato, Terence and Plutarch.
_Sift you as wheat._――The word σινιαζω (_siniazo_) refers to the
process of _winnowing_ the wheat after threshing, rather than
_sifting_ in the common application of the term, which is to
the operation of separating the flour from the bran. In oriental
agriculture the operation of winnowing is performed without any
machinery, by simply taking up the threshed wheat in a large
shovel, and shaking it in such a way that the grain may fall
out into a place prepared on the ground, while the wind blows
away the chaff. The whole operation is well described in the
fragments appended to Taylor’s editions of Calmet’s dictionary,
( Hund. i. No. 48, in Vol. III.) and is there illustrated
by a plate. The phrase then, was highly expressive of a
thorough trial of character, or of utter ruin, by violent and
overwhelming misfortune, and as such is often used in the Old
Testament. As in Jeremiah xv. 7. “I will fan them with a fan,”
&c. Also in li. 3. In Psalm cxxxix. 2. “Thou winnowest my path,”
&c.; compare translation “Thou _compassest_ my path.” The same
figure is effectively used by John the Baptist, in Matthew iii.
12, and Luke iii. 17.
_Galilean pugnacity._――Josephus, who was very familiar with the
Galileans by his military service among them, thus characterizes
them. “The Galileans are fighters even from infancy, and are
every where numerous, nor are they capable of fear.” Jewish War,
book III. chapter iii. section 2.
_From Jerusalem to Jericho._――The English traveler here referred
to, is Sir Frederic Henniker, who in the year 1820, met with
this calamity, which he thus describes in his travels, pp.
284‒289.
“The route is over hills, rocky, barren and uninteresting; we
arrived at a fountain, and here my two attendants paused to
refresh themselves; the day was so hot that I was anxious to
finish the journey, and hurried forwards. A ruined building
situated on the summit of a hill was now within sight, and I
urged my horse towards it; the janissary galloped by me, and
making signs for me not to precede him, he rode into and round
the building, and then motioned me to advance. We next came to
a hill, through the very apex of which has been cut a passage,
the rocks overhanging it on either side. Quaresmius, (book vi.
chapter 2.) quoting Brocardus, 200 years past, mentions that
there is a place horrible to the eye, and full of danger,
called Abdomin, which signifies blood; where he, descending
from Jerusalem to Jericho, fell among thieves. I was in the act
of passing through this ditch, when a bullet whizzed by, close
to my head; I saw no one, and had scarcely time to think, when
another was fired some distance in advance. I could yet see no
one,――the janissary was beneath the brow of the hill, in his
descent; I looked back, but my servant was not yet within sight.
I looked up, and within a few inches of my head were three
muskets, and three men taking aim at me. Escape or resistance
were alike impossible. I got off my horse. Eight men jumped down
from the rocks, and commenced a scramble for me; I observed also
a party running towards Nicholai. At this moment the janissary
galloped in among us with his sword drawn.
* * * * *
“A sudden panic seized the janissary; he cried on the name of
the Prophet, and galloped away. As he passed, I caught at a rope
hanging from his saddle. I had hoped to leap upon his horse, but
found myself unable;――my feet were dreadfully lacerated by the
honey-combed rocks――nature would support me no longer――I fell,
but still clung to the rope. In this manner I was drawn some few
yards, till, bleeding from my ancle to my shoulder, I resigned
myself to my fate. As soon as I stood up, one of my pursuers
took aim at me, but the other casually advancing between us,
prevented his firing; he then ran up, and with his sword, aimed
such a blow as would not have required a second; his companion
prevented its full effect, so that it merely cut my ear in
halves, and laid open one side of my face; they then stripped me
naked.
* * * * *
“It was now past mid-day, and burning hot; I bled profusely,
――and two vultures, whose business it is to consume corpses,
were hovering over me. I should scarcely have had strength to
resist, had they chosen to attack me. At length we arrived about
3 P. M. at Jericho.――My servant was unable to lift me to the
ground; the janissary was lighting his pipe, and the soldiers
were making preparations to pursue the robbers; not one person
would assist a half-dead Christian. After some minutes a few
Arabs came up and placed me by the side of the horse-pond, just
so that I could not dip my finger into the water. This pool is
resorted to by every one in search of water, and that employment
falls exclusively upon females;――they surrounded me, and seemed
so earnest in their sorrow, that, notwithstanding their veils, I
almost felt pleasure at my wound. One of them in particular held
her pitcher to my lips, till she was sent away by the Chous;――I
called her, she returned, and was sent away again; and the third
time she was turned out of the yard. She wore a red veil, (the
sign of not being married,) and therefore there was something
unpardonable in _her_ attention to any man, especially to a
Christian; she however returned with her mother, and brought me
some milk. I believe that Mungo Park, on some dangerous occasion
during his travels, received considerable assistance from the
compassionate sex.”