The Findlay Jeffersonian. [volume] (Findlay, Hancock County, Ohio) 1870-1881, 1875-09-10
Sunday &leadirg.
For the Jefiersonian.
Feet Washing. No. 2


Before proceeding with my regular
course of argument, l will pay little
attention to some of the assertions of
my friend | certainly think our read
erS are capable of deciding what have
not done without being told in every ar
tiele. Leaving that to their good sense.
think, would display a much better
taste. 1t looks suspicious when man
has to tell his readers so often what his
opponent has not done We naturally
conclude no one but himself can see II
The following points will show what I
have done:
l. Feet Washing obtained as a custom
In the world from Abraham until Christ.
as shown Gen. IS: IL; 10: ?; 24: 32: "a:
"A. Judges 10: 81.
2. Feet Washing was practieed. not
as an ordinance in any public assembly.
but in the family circle, as shown by
the same scriptures
j. was SOMETIMES done Jr as we'll
as to servants, / Sam, 25: Al.
We are told this text by no means
proves what l claim. D." 1 have not in any
OF my articles claimed this was the e7Ls-
tom, hence my friends quotation from
Webster is not to the point. aeeepti il
as correct and apply it to Loint No. 1.
viz: "that feet washing obtained as a
custom, etc. He says ''the act was an
unusual one and was never performed.
Please read Luke. z: 36-41.
Smiths Bible Dictionary, Page 9Ss.
1T was yet more complementary act,
betokening equally, humility and afTec-
tion, if the host actually performed the
office for his guest. Such a token of hos
Pitality is still occasionally exhibited in
the East, see 1 Sam 25: Al, Luke. q So
40. However. doctors will differ
Examine Ex. 30: 1921. / stopped
short of an application of this passage
designedly. l wanted to see if he would
walk into my trap. He did, without see
ing how fatal his application would be
to his practice. Now 1 observe first that
under the Mosaic dispensation the priests
were commanded to wash not the feet
alone, but the hands also, notwithstand-
ing 81 says 70 the contrary. Second,
God gave to Aaron and his sons a spe-
cial command for washing their hands;
the hands and feet were coupled in the
command. But they are not so coupled
in the practice my friend insists upon.
Again, it is universally admitted that
the holy place in the tabernacle was
typical of the Church in this dispensa-
ton But the washing of the hands and
feet in the brazen laver was attended to
before entering into the tabernacle. Now
if feet washing be the antitype of the
washing of the hands and feet in the
layer-if not his reference thereto is not
pertinent at all-feet washing must be
performed outside of the church and not
inside of it according to his practice.
will close this article by giving our
readers clear and distinct statement of
the question in debate.
We agree in the following points;
l. That Christ washed his disciples
feet
2. That lie commanded his disciples
to do the same.
3 That the act was intended to teach
them lesson of humility.
4. That the washing of one another's
feet should continue as long as the
Church of Christ remains.
We disagree OH only one point, and L
wish to keep your minds fixed upon that
as being the issue, the only issue between
us and that is, should the washing of
feet be performed as a religious OTdi-
nance in the public assembly of the
Church. Let all minor points drop out
of this discussion. / will adopt my
brothers practice as soon us this point
is established in his favor. This he can
do by showing either the command or
the example Of Christ or his apostles for
such feet washing in the public assembly
of the saints
Ny brother, will you affirm your prae-
tice, OF shall / continue my investigation
in harmony with the course laid down
in the beginningl
care very little about this, except it
places me in a very awkward position.
Yours for the truth,
'fPHILIP."