Is Footwashing a Biblical Requirement?

Summary

Summary prepared by Acts 2:38 Life from the transcript below — the preacher’s words follow in full.

A scriptural teaching — the Pentecostal literal approach

• The frame: Jesus took a towel, and washed feet (as the preview tells the scene), and then told those whose feet he washed: if I then, your Lord, have washed your feet, ye also ought to wash one another's feet. Should we interpret the command literally, by washing each other's feet? Or did he just mean, we should look for ways to serve our fellow believers? The host's question: in a podcast episode earlier this year, you addressed the subject of communion. Which prompted some listeners, to ask about the subject of foot washing. The articles of Faith (the question styles the fellowship by its full name) do include a section about foot washing. And it references the chapter of John (the question numbers the chapter and the two verses at its heart) which gives us the account, of Jesus washing feet, and of the saying: that they should do the same as he had done to them. In that chapter, Jesus says — in the saying the question quotes — if I then, your Lord, have washed your feet, ye also ought to wash one another's feet. Should we interpret Jesus's command literally, that — and literally wash one another's feet ('wash one under his feet', as the question's letters stand)? Or did he just mean, that we should look for ways, that we can serve one another? Is foot washing — what do you — do you see it, as a scriptural requirement? The answer: I would say that foot washing is a scriptural teaching. Now, requirement is a strong word. I would prefer to say: it is a scriptural teaching. I think we should practice foot washing. Now, some people think it's symbolic only. But, you know, we Pentecostals — generally, our approach is, to take the scripture as literally as possible. So, obviously, some things are symbols. Some things relate to first century culture. Or some things are Old Testament typologies. So we understand that some things aren't duplicated, in a literal sense. But overall — especially the teachings of the New Testament — if they can be applied in actuality, we tend to say: let's do it that way. So: we baptize in water, literally. We anoint with oil, literally. We lay hands on the sick, literally. And where there are other groups that symbolize all those things — it's figurative, you don't actually do that — you know, we tend to say: well, if it says do it, and if you can do it, it's possible, and it's available, then go ahead and do it. So, on that basis, I would say yes. Now, where I would say — you know, instead of requirement, it's a teaching — is that you only have one clear statement here. So there — I understand there could be some dispute. Although: in first Timothy, the Apostle Paul talks about the widows that you would support — the church should support — it should be those who've washed the Saints feet ('who've watched the Saints feet', as heard). So whether that means a practice of the church — they're faithful in church, they're participating in all the activities of the church — or whether it's talking about a secular counterpart, I guess that also is subject to dispute. And I guess also, maybe part of the problem is: in the first century, people wore sandals. When they came into the house, they would need to take their sandals off. The roads were Dusty. And so normally, a servant would wash their feet. That was the first thing. And so that was a cultural norm, in a way that it's not today. So some people say: well, it's just the principle. So learn to serve others. Learn to do things for others.

Scriptures: John 13; John 13:14-15; 1 Timothy (book-only)

The purpose — humility and mutual service

• But, you know, you do have a very specific statement: I did this, and I want you to do this. And it is — I guess, whether you think it's literal or symbolic — let's ask: what's the purpose? It seems obvious: it's designed to teach humility. That Jesus — I'm your Leader, I'm your Lord — but yet I will humble myself, to wash your feet. So how much more should you be humbled, towards one another? I think it definitely teaches humility. Not to think of ourselves more highly, than we ought to think. It also teaches service: that we should serve one another, no matter who we may be, and whatever our position is, in the church, or in society. We're all to serve one another.

Through history — leaders' ceremony, revival congregations

• And I do think it's interesting: throughout history, various churches have tried to implement this. So what's interesting is that, in the more liturgical churches, or historical churches — like the Roman Catholic church, and the Anglican church, and so forth — they don't participate as a congregation, probably because it's no longer a cultural norm. But their leaders will do it. So the pope, once a year, will choose a beggar, and wash feet. And the other denominations: a lot of times, their top leaders, their Bishops, will — once a year, or certain intervals — will wash a humble person's feet. So they do feel the need to do this, you know, and to do it literally. Of course, if it's a high official, washing a lowly person's feet, once a year: it's that — almost is taking pride, in your humility. You know, the saying is: humility is that one virtue, that just when you think you have it, you've lost it. You know: I'm proud of being humble — well, you're not humble. So I guess humility is: what you have, when you don't really think about it. You're not — you don't really think you have it — is when you have it. So that symbolic performance almost turns it on its head. You're showing how great of a Christian you are, or how great of a leader you are. Which is not really the point. Now, among Revival churches — it's interesting, throughout the centuries: like the anabaptists of the 1500s. And the Methodist — some of the Methodist people ('some of the methods', as the letters also carry it). The Holiness movement of the 1900s. The Pentecostal movement of the 20th century. The holiness movement of the 1800s ('the holiest movie of the 1800s', as the letters stand). Many of those congregations would actually, as a congregation, institute the practice of foot washing. Say, whenever they did communion. Or maybe once a year. Or maybe in a watch night service ('a watch tonight's service', as heard). So, to me, it is significant — that many of the more conservative, literal, Bible-believing ('literal by believing', as spoken), revivalistic movements — that are deliberately saying, let's go back to the Bible, and recapture what's been lost, or missing, or neglected — well, they would literally wash feet. So, in the early Pentecostal movement, it's very common. And that's why it's in the upci Articles of faith. I think that was considered the standard, for most churches, at the time of the formation of the upci, in 1945. It was the most common expectation: yes, just as you would literally practice communion, you would literally practice foot washing ('you had literally practice foot washing', as spoken). I will have to say: I do believe it's diminished greatly. And I'm a little saddened by that. There is a great book, by John Christopher Thomas — who's a Church of God, Cleveland, Tennessee, Theologian. It's called — I can't remember the total title, but it has foot washing in the title. John Christopher Thomas, foot washing: it's a great biblical study, of why, yes, it should be practiced today.

His own practice — and why the reluctance is the reason

• So when I was a pastor, we did practice it, once a year. When we were smaller, we would have a watch Night Service. We'd have communion, foot washing, on December 31st. We had more extended time. But as the church got big, it became difficult. What we would do is: I would take — usually in February, towards the beginning of the year — one midweek service. I would announce in advance. But the men would all meet, for a class. And I would address some issues, that I felt were pertinent to men. The women would go to the fellowship hall, for foot washing. And then the next week, we would reverse it: the men would have foot washing. And what we would do is — of course, it was mostly symbolic, in the sense — you know, you want to come to church clean. But you take somebody — you have pans of water — and you wash someone's feet. As you're washing, you pray for them. And then, when you finish, they wash your feet. So it's mutual submission. You pray for one another. And then, when you finish, you find other people to pray for. So it becomes a Brotherhood. It becomes a prayer service. And I would usually teach a little bit, on the significance. Then we would participate. And then we would pray. So it would take the bulk of the service. And, you know, I've been in services, where they've been powerful moves of God. And in fact, we — I remember one time, we had — someone received the Holy Ghost, in the foot Washing Service. Because it was taught and practiced, as a spiritual event. Yes, it is a little humbling, and humiliating. But here's my thought — final thought on it: whether it should be symbolic or literal, I tend to say: yes, it should be done literally. And I do understand: even though it's not a cultural norm, still — to wash someone's feet ('to watch someone's feet', as heard) is a humbling experience. And so, probably — whereas if you substitute: well, let's shine their shoes, or let's wash their car — it's not the same level of humility. So is there really a good substitute? And probably my final thought would be this: probably, if you list the reasons why you don't want to do it, that's probably the reasons why you should do it. So, I, you know — obviously, we respect local pastors, and the choices they make, for their congregation. But since you're asking me: I feel like it is a Biblical practice. And I feel like it is a practice that's worth preserving, in the Pentecostal movement.

Scripture index: John 13; John 13:14-15; 1 Timothy (book-only).