iK7ESTI^2HG- TE23 BOCEHISffja WASHING THE SAINTS FEET J1ELIVEKED AT MOXTICELLO. BY REV. IVESON L. BROOKES. MACON: PRXK'TE'D BIT ROSE <& SiLABS. 1800, fro THE RE WEU- 4he subject of Washing Feet as a Bcbgious „moi( cfal years excited a contention, in some instances unp < i* fhe Baptists in Georgia, especially within the boun s Kivcr and the Gcmulgee Associations. ,, . c,,mmrr The following discourse,■ in substanfcc, was deliveredJast » in the Baptist Church at Monticello. Vhe reasons w no. , " he author then to make a public expression of his sen • • _ tlussubji.cc, before the Church and Congregation un ^ ^ -tonal instruction, »vere principally t.\o. u , ♦. t r» duty to correct wliat he conceived to be an error, m the con^iuc i n of the transaction of Christ, recorded in the 13th (hap. o le iOS- pel by-St. John, and mider which error, a part of that Chiucli seem- rd disposed to make the matter of Feet Washing more important than a scriptural view bY the case would approve. 2. As he could not conscientiously unite with those Brethren in what Jie thought to he fin ifnscriptur'iil practice, lie deemed it to himself to make an e xhibition of his views on the subject, in justification of his conduct, against the censures of such as might attribute to liim motives' other than conscientiou > scrbptel. The author was requested to have this discourse published short¬ ly after its delivery, but as tlicrc was then texistiftg a feverish ex*1 c.itcrncnt, which might liave, perhaps, pvrt an uncharitable construc¬ tion upon such a procedure, lie deemed it, on reflection, best not to comply with his first promise on the subject. But as the public agi¬ tation has passed away, he has concluded to yeild to the repeated .solicitations with which lie continues to be pressed, to publish the discourse on feet washing in pamphlet form. Those who heard it delivered will perceive a few alterations ; indeed, the sensitiveness which w as then awake on the subj,eetin general,induced the author to omit some expressions, and even .pass over seyeral arguments' which he supposes, will now, since the agitation has subsided, be fnore likely to receive an impartial notice from those of opposite views. If any should look upon the sentiments of the piece unfa¬ vorably, all the author asks, is, that such- will remember that he is entitled to his opinions, and that they ivho differ from them, are in christian charity, required to give his arguments a fair hearing be¬ fore they condemn the sentiments exhibited in the discourse.— Therefore, under hdpe that it may enable many plain Christians, who desire to know and obey the truth, to arrive at a correct view of fhe subject of Washing the Saints1-Feet, .and under the belief that no austere critic will think it worth while-to trouble either himself or the public, with any notice of its defects, it is, without further afpojogy, committed to t}ie press, and placed before the community. THE AUTHOR A BISCOVB.SE, && I then, your Lord and Master have washed your Feet, ye ai^j ought to wash one anothers\'Fcet. For I have given you auexani« pie that you should do as I have done to you—John, xiii, 14. That the Savior washed the feet of iiis disciples, and laid them under the positive injunction to wash each others feet, is a scriptural Tuth, which probably nQae pretend to deny. But whether that in» junction is applicable to christians in this day, and if so, under what circumstances, it must be performed, are questions upon which there exists much difference of opinion. It is matter of serious re¬ gret, that the difference of sentiment and practice particularly among Baptists on this subject, has in many inst mces, resulted in coolness ot aftection between churches and individuals, which, the grea^ Prince of Peace evidently never intended any of his examples or pre¬ cepts to produce amongst his professed disciples. Perhaps the parties between whom,-censorious recriminations have reciprocally passed,have been wont to carry their opinions and pratice in this matter to extremes, attaching either too much or too little im¬ portance to the example and injunction of Christ, contained in th# iext under discussion. Those who place the highest estimateupon the act of Jesus, in washing his disciples feet, generally assume the position that the sup¬ per at which the transaction occurred, was the sacrament of thti communion. They thus connect that act of Christ with his admin* istration of that most sacred institution, and probably attach, uncon ¬ sciously, equal, if not paramount sanctity to it. On the other hand, the greater portion of the. Baptist denomination and the entire mass of other orthordox sects look upon the practice of washing the saints' feet, as having been a private duty enjoined upon the primi¬ tive disciples, but not to be considered obligatory upon christians in the present day. If we have gone too far in ranking the large majority of the Baptist denomination among those who esteem the practice of washing feet in a religous way, as obsolete,.we can per¬ haps safely say that non-6 of them having sufficient education to investigate the subject, and who have given themselves the trouble to do so, pretend to hold feet washing as a religious ceremony to bo performed in a church capacity. And we are satisfied that no au¬ thor having ability to write either grammatically or logically, haS ever attempted to prove it "a standing church ordinance of similar import or authority with the communipn. 0 13ut Ave, at the same tune, suppose that those who have, entirely exploded title practice of Washing feet as a religious duty, whether Baptists,or others, haye -verged to tluit extreme, which makes less of the Saviour's example and injunction upon this subject, than was originally intended. It seems to us possible, that there lies a path¬ way of duty between those extremes, upon which, if we could strike, and make it plain, we should probably render a useful service to th^ cause of christian union. In the discussion of oar text, it must not be forgotten, that th$ Saviour in the most emphatical terms, urged his example as the rul$ of conduct by which Iiis disciples wej-e 16 be governed in the matter of washing feet. " For I have given you an example that yon should do as I have done to you." The circumstances then which combined to constitute that example, must be ascertained and carefully observed. Because the simple act of washing feet, aside from the prominent circumstances under which Christ performed it., could not be an imitation of his example,-mid would not therefsi'^ .^s a fulfilment of his injunction expressed in. the text, 1 1*1n. .hen enquire—1* Whether it«» ~|E in Jerusalem, or a usual evening repast. 111 BetLaii), .it winch C']Tn«Sn-of'lhe case, as deMribed in the thirteen!], chapter oi' the oospel by John, we think tncrc can be piodiiced irif,t,m,l .es.im.ny «**«» .» »» u'.prej.xdtced m.»d that the supper at which Christ.performed that act.and enjoined ins ex¬ ample in such performance, was not the supper of the sacrament, but a common meal, . ; , , It is perhaps universally admitted, that Christ had pa.tal e of the paschal supper, when he proceeded to inst.oite «u a minis er the sacramental supper. Then to shew that, the supper a \\ kc i the case of washing the disciples feet occured, was previous to the. passover, will prove, that the act of Jesus 111 washing feet was nm connected with the sacrament of the communion. It might seem that John-intended to leave no ground for disputation on this point. For he commences his description of the case by specifically stating the time of washing feet to be previous to the passover. He be. gins by sayin<>", " now, before the feast of. the passovei. And when Judas left the table after the.feet washing, under the determi¬ nation to betray Christ, and Jesus said to him, "that. tho\i doest, do quickly," the other disciples supposed, as Judas was their trea¬ surer, that the Saviour had directed him to procure tilings necessary 4' against the feast" which was doubtless the passover, the stated anniversary of which was near, but of course not arrived, as the lie, cessary arrangements for it were not then made. But it is objected by those who-contend for the .identity of the c,om« munion and supper, from which Jesus rose when he washed the disciples feet, that the term " feast" as used by-the evangefist John, $id not mean the paschal supper itself, but "the " feast of unleavened bread," which was consequent upon the passover, and continued seven days. To which we would say, that the evangelist Luke, tells us the " feast of unleavened bread" was styled the passover, aad yjijich he shews most explicitly to have been from beginning to end, consequent upon Satan's entering into Judas. Our objectors, however, admit, theft the cirenmstance of Satan's enteiing mto Judasj after receiving the sop, occurred at the same supper at which the feet were washed. Says St. Luke, ." Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called,the passover, gnd the chief priests and scribes sought how they might "kill him ; for they feared the people. Then entered Satan into'Judas, surname ed IsCai iot, being of the number of the twelve. Then he went, his way and communed with the chief priests and captains how he might betray him unto them ; and they were glad and covenanted to give him money.'And he promised and sought opportunity to betray him unto thc-m, in the absence of the multitude. Then came the day of unleavened-bread, when the passover must fee killed, &c." Luke xxii, 1—t8. All of which seems most unequivocally to prove,that the interview of Judas ivith the Jewish Council to make the arrange¬ ments for betraying Christ, and , which was after the. entering of Satan :nto Judas at the feet washing, took place previous to the day upon the night of which the paschal supper was eatery and after which the sacrament of the Lord's supper was instituted. We.think this irguflTeiit without further remark'jon this point, should be con¬ sidered sufficiently conclusive to correct the error of those who make the qase of washing feet, the closing scene of the . communion, and an indispensible appendage to that.most solemn ordinance. But ^iiany hnive been so long accustomed to think John was describing in the loth chan.of hisgospeL, those events which the other evangelists 3 Represent in connexion with the Lord's supper, that it "Wilt retpiV'^ nice distinct iocs to produce conviction over the prejudice asm j.-re~ posession which have given sanction to their loug established cp.ti-. ions. We milst therefore dwell yet longer upon this point. It sl'oukl be remembered that John, dkl not write liii gospti account tjrtoftg after the others were given, and that his object was to record t'hkiJ|r those instructions of Christ, and those circumstances of his his¬ tory, which had been omitted by the other evatigelibts. Kc^oc, it jtiajr-he observed, in the writings. «f Joint, that "iew Of tht, events recorded by the othtr historians, are even vlludt.J Jt>, it i,a to par- ticuiarize some ©f the Hording- circniretai.ces, j^.f-scd *u wler'cd Iv the rest of hits brethren. Therefore John makes no mention of *l.e sacramental supper,-anti but seldom aliudhall crow thou shalt deny me" thrice." Behold,',he is. ai handthut doth betray me, & he was abox;t to ut¬ ter in accordance with the prophecy he had just quoted from Psahfis xli, 9, were not to receive their fulfilment till, a future period of ?onie days to come, he introduced them with this preface. " Now" (marginal translation " From henceforth"' shewing an intervening space of time) "I tell you before it come tliat - when* it is come to pass ye may. believe that I am he, John xiii,19. Indeed this pre¬ diction seems to resemble that general -prophetic instruction which "Jesus delivered to his disciples concerning- his death'before "Ijis arri¬ val at Jerusalem, and which seems to have been repeated' at dirtc- ront. times Tor the purpose of giving the impression of its expected -fulfilment, the more force,—says Matthew' (svi,.23)—From thut time forth began Jesus to show unto-his disciples how that he must go unto Jerusalem and Suffer many things of the' eVdtrs and clutf otiests and scribes! and be-killed, and be "Wiised ngnin the third Hay." in the nc:*t chapter {xvii,22) he repeats the same prophecy." " And bile they abode in Galilee, JeS'J9 Said "unto them, tire sou of jisati hli-ili he betrayed into the hands of men aud they shall kill him ant| the third dav he shall be raised again. And they were exceedingly sorrowful"—see also Mark ix,30,31. We may then very rationally suppose, that the conversation described by John as having occurs red after washing; feet,eusucd upon a repetition of that general predion tion of his death, quoted from the Jewish Scriptures,and the accom.- plishment of which had been by him limited to the approaching feast, and that John records some particulars oipitted by the other evan¬ gelists in reference to the traitor by \yhorn this prophecy should be brought to its fulfilment, and ii) regard to the manner in which it would affect the disciples. The correctness of this view of the sub¬ ject will appear still more probable when we ca|l to mind that John in the two preceeding chapters > records the journey and arrival of Je¬ sus at Jerusalem, corresponding to the record of that fact given by the other evangelists, and who inform us that on bis way tv> the feast, he repeated to the disciples,the prediction that he should there be be» frayed, see Jdcom<> partaker in the high interests of his spiritual kingdom, «©t4br the purpose of .teaelii«g_ Pctet that the act of washing feet was ceremonial and figurative of spiritual "operation, hut tg -remind Peter of wUat gr«at things he had. done for his soul, and to teach IthA his dependence upon his spiritual Saviour, to whom he was u;i c!tir the strongest obligation to yield implicit oWdience and uu- fcesiiatinor auh«niss';oa in all things temporal as Well as spiritual. . By referring*© the general clreumdtauces of the case aud the cus¬ toms of those times, we may obtain further evidence, shewing that t-;£ act of washing ftiet warf necessary on that occasion, it was shewn under th§ former~head."of our investigation, that Jesus and liss disciples were in the Jiabit of lodging in Bethany, and spending tlio day in Jerusalem, ' So that Jesus and his disciples daily walked four miles m going, to Jerusalem and back, to Bethany, which are about two miles aparU After they had spent the day in traversing the crowded Streets of the cnpital and had returned to their lodgings, it would he natural tof suppose tl»em hungry and ranch fatigued, par¬ ticularly: as the ivhole1 region of their travels was very mountain orrs, and that after supper, sleep would be next in requisition. And if w^ furlhfer consider that the people of that day and country wore sari- dais (333 Stark vi 9,} a; species of shoe eonsjsting of a sole fastened to the bottom of the naked foot by-straps which extended over the tap of the foot and lashed about the ancle, we shall at once (lis- ctkvor that it was indispensably to their .comfortable rest to have the feet washed before retsrm^ to sleep. * • Moreover, it mast-not be forgotten, that tlte position at the tabl<* SKjcordng to the oustom of that day, was to recline on a couch, lean¬ ing on the left elbow, with the face towards the table, and the right hand at liberty to be used in eating, while the feet were extended jit length upon the couch.- Hence it was necessary to have'the fbet washed, perhaps not only at supper, but at every meal. Here it may not be amiss to call to remembrance, the scriptural fact;; that these sources of necessity bad given rise tQ the usage of waslxmgfeet, which had from time immemorial, been observed among- the* Jewish people. As the men' of the East performed travelling chiefly on foot, and wore only sandals, they found it necessary to per¬ sonal comfort to Wash their feet whenever they stopped, either to eat a-id'rest in the day, or to sup and tarry through the night. Hence il was j-eekoaed arnojig the first acts of civility and hospitality, to present a travelling guest.with water to wash the feet. • Thus, when Abraham invited the visiting angels to re3t with him And take a lit¬ tle refreshment, he proposed to bring them water to wash fheir feet,- ns hi§ first act of hospitality ■; and when they had proceeded to Sodo n and were invited by Lotto tarry at his house all night, he pro¬ posed to them to wash their feet among the promised comforts of Lis "hospitable entertainment—sefeGenesis xviii, 4, and xix, 2. When Abrahams* servant was sent to 'seek' a wife for Isaac, Rebecca's brother on receiving him in the house, speedily furnished water for him to wash his feet, and Ills men to wash they- fvqt- ■ JSce Genesis, xxiv, 0 "When Josephs' brethren were .conducted into his bduse, the ste'vCr &rd proceeded without' delay to place bclore than water to wash their.leet—(jlenesis,-xlm, 24. "When'David sent lor Uriah to re¬ turn trow the army, he directed .him to go home, wash Jus feet, &c, Other instances' of that custom otuoug the ancient Israelites might be produced if necessary—see Judges xix, ill—Song v, 3. And thaw; 'the same custom was couudoii in the days of Christ, may he inn rred from his complaint against the i'harteee who invited him to eaC with him, but gaVe him no water to wash his feet—see Luke vii,44,. The circumstances of this custom, render it evident too, that it was hot numbered amOng the typical ceremonies enjoined upon the Jews by divine command, neither among those " divers washings," which they held as sacred traditions from their elders, and which Christ reprobated, but that it was the result, of necessity arising out of the nature of the case. There is therefore no reasonable doubt, that Christ and his apos¬ tles under the same sort of necessity which gave existence to tho above universal custoin, habitually "washed their feet, every night on retiring to supper and to rest, from the wearisome travels and fatiguing labors of the day. All that is new then in the case mentioned in the thirteenth chapter of Johns' gospel history, is, that^ instead of each one as usual washing his own feet, Jesus proceeded to wrash their feet for them. The design of which evidently was to set them a general example of humility and brotherly kindness. And he enjoined upon them to wash one anothers' feet, that in so doing they might give evidence of their mutual, aftection, by manifesting ait humble spirit ofwillingness to perfornj for each otheV the lowest sex,-' vice, when nr^ded to promote their comfort. Then , since Jesus did not perform for his disciples the menial service i)f washing their feet, when it was as to the literal act, unnecessary,' but absolutely needed, as shewn by the assertion of Clnist, and the circumstances of the case taken in connexion with the customs cTf the times, We nlust therefore infer that his injunction to wash one anothers' feet did not require the" disciples to meet with clean feet, simply for the purpose of performing the act merely as a religious ceremony. .We should rather presume that his meaning was, that in travelling about for the diligent performance of their great Mas¬ ters'service, they ought to wash one ajiothers' feet whenever they •Speeded elearising, instead of each onef as usual, washing his own fee/. But once more let us examine— III. Whether the sacred writers speak of this example of Christ ill a manner which attaches to it the character of a public church ordinance, or only that of an inferior private duty. Although the disciples, during the Ministry of Christ, frequently appeared dull of apprehension in regard to majiy of his instructions,, and especially his prophetic annunciations concerning his ap¬ proaching death, yet we must recollect his having told them that the holy spirit whom he promised to send to be their guide should " lead' them into all truth." We are then bound to admit that the sacred penmen who wrote under the inspiration of the" holy spirit correctly comprehended the true import of Christs' instructions when they recorded their historical accounts, or issued their espistolary advice and comments on gospelduties. Nor can we for gi moment ima¬ gine that the evangelists & apostles in giving the written history of gos¬ pel transactions and delivering the necessary instructions to the con¬ verts from idolatry,would.either pass-in silence any gospel ordinance,; mention in a way which. woujd lessen their i^up*i't^nc© aoay 0 io ^iiri.-l? commands?, or prescribed christian duties. We must tliorefor|s infer, from the comparative silence of the disciples, both evangelists and apostle, on the act of Christ in washing their feet, that his exam-' jue and injunction on that subject, could have been designed in their conception, to have reference only to private duties among christian^, and r.ot to be observed in tli£ character of a public church ordi¬ nance or even religious ceremony. It is altogether probable, that the apostles, in compliance with this example and injunction oftheir Lord and Master, while so actively engaged in their missionary la«. bons, both among Jews and Gentiles, frequently, when necessary, m ashed one anothers' feet. But that they considered it a merfr common-place diity of too private import and too little weight to compare with the spiritual concerns of men, may be inferred from the partial notice assigned it in the epistles. It seems that ijone of the apostles thought it of sufficient importance to have a place in. their instructive and exhortative addrbsses cither to Jewish or gen¬ tile Churches. Nor is mention made of it in any of the private c~ pistles, except one bare allusion to it in the letter to Timothy. In specifying the qualifications which should entitle an aged widow to the charitable bounty of the Church, Paul in requiring a course of conduct giving evidence of her exemplary piety, says, "ifshe have brought up children, if she have lodged strangers, if she have washed the saints feet, if she have relieved the afflicted, if she have dili4 gfently followed every work," 1. Tim. v. 10. The meaning of this allusion, to washing feet, we may safely inferA was that Timothy should ascertain upon the application of a poojr widow for the support of the brethren,whether among those, charitable deeds which had impoverished her, such as taking care of the chil¬ dren of deceased poor Christians and supplying the necessaries of life to infirm or helpless living Christians, she had also acted hos¬ pitably to travelling saints or ministers. And whether among those acts of hospitality rendered to such she had for their comfort wash¬ ed their weary feet previous-to {heir supping and retiring for sleep, according to the custom of Christians in compliance with the ex* ample and injunction of Christ upon that subject. And as this bare allusion, which is the only .hint at the practice in all the apos¬ tolic writings, ranks feet washing' with private duties, it of course forbids the idea of its being entitled to a place among the ordinary qes of the gospel, or even among public Church acts. Nor does the notice given to thjs example of Christ by the evan¬ gelists, suggest the propriety of attaching to it any special impor¬ tance. Indeed so. unimportant did the sacred historians themselves think this duty/that none' except John,howevef minutely particular in recording the numerous instructions of Christ on other points .of duty both public and private, ever once allude to his act of washing feet either as taught by Jesus or practised by the disciples. Evefi Lukcs the beloved physician, tvho was the companion of Paul in moat of his perilous missionary career among the heathens, and who profess^ ed to have an intimate, acquaintance With the acts of Christ and transactions of the apostles,though he had no doubt often seen the dis¬ ciples washing one another's feet, is entirely silent about the matter., both in his accurate history of the life and minis try of Jesus and ill liis detailed account of the apostles varied ministerial labors and pri¬ vate christian duties, whether temporal or spiritual; so that if John, in his old age, long after the other evangelists wrote their gospels, had not made a supplementary statement 6f some things which they >Sd emitted and among tJiojTc thjngs tjae atfcuiagtiwicej of ChA«st.y 'II • Slaving trashed his disciples feet, that transaction, togethex with the example and injunction issuing- from it to the primitive discipks> Would have remained to us unknown. In that event also the requi¬ sition of Paul upon pious widows to'wash the saints feet,' to us would ave been clothed in mystery far more inexplicable than his bap- ^eac*' a^l,ded-to as an argument for the resurrection in the first epistle to the Church at Corinth. Surely then, if any scrip-" tural injunction was by the apostles and •primitive Christians deem* •d a non-essential in the constituent duties of a course of pious obe¬ dience, it must have been that on the subject of washin"- feet, txs that »as received, perhaps less notice from them than any obligation to religious dutv enjoined in the New Testament. We need not wonder then that many intelligent christians, are Ior exploding the practice of washing the saints feet as a reli- g-jous duty, since the apostles themselves tr-eated it with so much in* difference. Nor should we feel half so much at a loss for argument in pleading the justification of such a*s ^fe would, in defending tin: conduct of those who have gone to the opposite extreme, in attach* ing to feet washing, that highimportance which in principle, pla¬ ces it upon an equal footing with the solemn sacrament of the communion, and in practice makes it supercede almost every good work by which the christian character is developed, and the king¬ dom of Christ carried forward in its heavenly operatious on earth. But it is time for us to review the ground over tvhich^ we have passed,in our investigation of this subject. Lei us then in the last place IV Sum up the prominent circumstances ascertained to have been. Connected with the example of Christ, in washing his-disciples feet, and specify some instances in which that example may be imifa*- £ed by Christians of the present day,in obedience to the Savior's ail'- ilexed injunction. Under the preceeding propositions of this discussion, we have n? • certained that the act of Christ in washing his disciples feet,. wits- performed at a private supper, a-nd on a common" occasion ; that it was needed as being preparatory to reclining at table and for com¬ fortable rest, after active employment in the Lord's vineyard, during the da}r; and lastly,that the scriptural notices of feet washing, rank it ao?ong the least important christain duties. But the chief circum¬ stance which we think gave rise to the act of Christ ia washing his disciples feet, and which constituted the grand source of h's in¬ junction to them on the subject, was the fact, that their feet needed cleansing. . - Hence our reason for supposing the path way of duty in this matter, to be between those who had entirely exploded the practice of wash¬ ing, the saints feet, and those who make it a gospel ordinance. Tor th^^nies of decency as well as the laws of health, require aril persons rich and poor, to have the feet occasionally cleansed. We there¬ fore conclude, that although christians in the present day, and in most sections of christervdom do not so generally travel on foot or wear sandals, or recline on couches at meals, which circumstance.* rendered washing the feet so necessary, and required it to be so fre¬ quently repeated among aricient christains, that still there are times when the feet need to be washed, and when without its performance it would be impracticable to rest comfortably. And as the act-which Jesus performed for the disciples, and en¬ joined on them, to perform, for one another* was needed, go Under some ofthe most prominent of sfmd-ar circumstances irt connexion with:the same act being n§ededvlet cliristains in _tue prescn ^ 13 TLffiVm it for our another. Ab when ministers of tV go ,pel ar« trawll i g too ther ou their great M istu-'s business,and especially iu the »iili*>i nt diwhurj,? of Ji ss tmuiy duties, whenever it may become Ticc< ss iry to their cleanliness anclcomlort to huvc thtirtfi't bntlied, Jet lilt in on retiring to rest, instead ol each washing his own, w «sH one uaollier's feet j and when brethren meet together fc >r- the purpose of trdis.icting business for the promotion of the Lord's cause, partic¬ ularly at the sessions, of missionary and benevolent associations, af¬ ter having goittn thro.' the Lati^utS oft lie day, and retired to some friend's house to spend the«ni<;ht, as Jesus and his diciples did, af- t^r supper, let ns many as wish their feet washed, mutually join and wash one another's feet. This we think would be coming as near¬ ly within the precincts of Christ's £xwnpie, and injunction, as the circumstances under wTliich we live* could admit,.' , And if the pious sistprs, who are generally most prompt in the «lischrage of religious duties would desire tp have -some privilege in tfie imitation ef their blessed Master on this subject, let them w hen¬ ever they meet together to transftct business for their Redeemer,lin¬ ger circumstances which make it necessary for their feet to be wash- eel, cordially unite in washing each other's feet, And especially if there be any venerable mother^ the church, whose hospitality lias made their houses the retreats for the, weary ministers,while travel¬ ling to bear the glad-tidings of salvation-to lost sinners; We would say to such, that whenever it may seem necessary to the comfort of their guests to have the feet Washed,and these venerable matrons out of reference for the exatnple of their Lord, and in religious respect for his humbly minister s bring forward the basin and towel and, wash and wipe the feet of the Lord's servants,such will seem to com* ply with the apostles directions concerning the pious widows of old. These we think aretjie occasions, wjien feet washing as a religi¬ ous duty,may in this day, possibly be performed by Christians with¬ in the snipe of scriptural injunctions. Nor do we conceive that the performance of that particular act under any other than the above, or s milar circumstances can be considered a scriptural imitation of Christ,or a rational compliance with his injunction or the apostles" requ'bition on the subject of washing the Saints feet. Then for the members of any particular church, or religious soci* £ty, to assemble in their house of worship in a public manner, with their feet carefully cleansed,for the purpose of ^vash ing one another's feet, cannot bean imitation of Christ's washiug his disciples feet.—- And more especially when either fill or part pf such Church mem bers,w hich is usually the fact with the leaders of that practice stani in the most pointed opposition tp all viiss'wnary benevolent opera tions for the support and spread of the gospel, and even decry the* | idea of affording pious young ministers the means of instruction, to qualify them for the responsibly worlf of expounding the oracles of salvation. Tprall of thos§ things are precisely the reverse of the circum¬ stances under which Jesus washed the feet of his disciples, or stu¬ dents in divine things, as that title pf his followers originally im¬ ported. * Perhaps those who have been designated as placing an undue es- tin upon the injunction and example expressed in the language of Christ,'which has been under discussion, are ready to charge us with partial ty of feeling towards those of the opposite extreme w ho cot sider,that the practice of washing feet as a reli.oious-(Juty,}ias be¬ come obsolete. Arid it may be that they v\ ill further charge u# 4 xar with thus conniving at those who are guilty ©f the'enormous crlm^' of diminishing from the book.of God t We would here remark tha* the adding to and taking from the sacred volume ere equally crimi¬ nal, so that it must be amore heineous. offence tcCadd a public ordi* nance than to take away a'private duty, by fis much, as the one is of more importance than the other. Then since we think the-ioatter of washing feet as enjoined by. Christ was never iiitended.to 1*; ob# served in any other light than a private duty, therefore the error* those who make it a gospel ordinance must'.be fraught with conso-4 quences far thejmost serious,.* We must then beg our friends':of that side of the subject to bear with our -blunt mode of reasoning1 while we exhibit a few of the many evils resulting from that errone-< i ous construction of our text,which connects the-case of feet washing " with the sacramental supper^ and thus attaches to it the sacredncss of a public ordinance^ ' 1 , 1." Perhaps the most dangerous evil arising from this erroneous viewi of feet washing, is,"that it leads to the abuse of the sacramental institutions bf Christ; / 4 W Vv» . ' f,.,, Baptism and the Lord's Supper being emblems of spiritual graces imparted .to the soul, and memqrials of perpetual allegiance to the great author of such graces, are "the only institutions 'of the gospel received by ortli6doX protestents as sacraments-- 'Silt'- since this- f term by which those, positive institutions ar© distinguished frma tbfr moral injunctions pf the gospel, is of Rom&n .Catholic: -origin* Baptists have generally 'prefered to style■ them,; " ordinances " T« prove washing the saints feet to be a gospel ordinance of «xjua2 rm-if - portance with those solem sacraments, the adyocatcs^ of the ulrr* * system under review, make the term, " ordinance" syribiilmous with appointment," as it is derived- from *' ordain/* whichmeacs* to appoint. Now brethren we may soon see.; to ^vvhat extremes of corruption, this rule would conduct. " By this mle ©fjdefinition, #11 injunctions of the New Testament,, are constituted' divine ordinan* ces' of equal importance. Of course all enjoined to, perform !them, i are authorised administrators of gospel sacraments^ so that lay' members in general,the sisters not excepted, may legally proceed tp preach the gospel and administer Baptism and the communion,the instructions,of.Paul* to the contrary notwithstanding. Further,'.the game rule which equalizes feet washing, with those received gospel . sacraments, would also give equal authority to some of those ob¬ solete apostolie injunctions whicb were peculiar to the customs of. that" age, but which would be rather ridiculous amongst us.' Take for instance, their mode of salutation, -The apostles- Paul, and Peter, both in their epistles, laid jtheir brethren "under ^the injunc¬ tion to "salute one another with an holy kiss/'-^-See Rom.' xvi,lG— i, Cor. xvi, 20—i, Thessa, v, 26—ii, Peter, v, 14—Acts,, xx, 37"."*— Now the divine authority of this injunction would *have to be 'ad-* ttiitted equal-to that given by Christ-, to wash one-anothers feet, as these inspired penmen spoke under the direction of the holy spirit fhe third person of the divine trinity, of .acknowledged equality with the Son, the second person. ,feo . that the same rule which makes Washing the saints feet a gospel ordinance, will also require the . " holy kiss" to be i*e-estafolished; for it seems to be enjoined with, equal positiveness ;• is more frequently mentioned in-the scriptures,- and when our*feet washers spiritualize it, they would probably find it of more important wo^th%than feet washing", particularly as a," test of humility,upon which point they lay special FVrss. For we may readily- conceive numerous instances whicfi shall be nameless, in 14 Vhieh the collision of lips in the act of kissing, Would be £ir motfe* humiliating, tlian the contact feet and hands in the other ordjfe nance. Indeed, brethren, the adoption of washing the saints feet as a goSl» jiel ordinance, in the received acceptation of the term, would be a leap into the mazes of religious superstition, even beyond the errors of Roman Catholics. For although that old " Mother of harlots" has in her indulgence in anti-christian absurdities, " perverted the riohtwaysof the Lord," by changing Baptism into JRmtism, and, the LOru's supper into transubstantiation, and adding five other sa- laments of her own invention, yet the Roman Catholics have not dreamed as we have learned of adopting washing the saints feet among their superstitious innovations. If we then, as a religious denomination, at this late period of the christian dispensation, embrace the sentiment that till gospel injunc¬ tions are divrtie ordinances, and thus at one fearful step of innova¬ tion, over stride the Catholics, in making feet washing a gospel sacrament, we should soon have to reconsider matters, and be compelled by our rule to take up some, if not all the Catholic sacra* tneitfs, over whijch we had leaped. For instance, " Extreme unc- 1 ion" is a. Komish sacrament, founded on the injunction of saint James—see James, v, 14; which we also should-have to adopt upon tiie additional authority of apostolic practice; see Mark,yi, 13—More¬ over, as the leaders among our Georgia feet washers, ^rnestly con¬ demn all human learning among the ministry,\jrere they to be success¬ ful in the propagation of these ultra sentiments, we, as a denomi¬ nation, in less than a century, would be more ignorant than the Irish Catholics. We might begin to tremble, therefore, under the apprehension of being soon merged into the depths of superstition, Amore gloomy than the errors of Catholicism. And as it is only a few of the'Baptist-s in Georgia, and several other Southern States which, have of late, begun to admit this fearful innovation; we trust f,hey will take the alarm and turn from the sad error. The next evil which we shall mention4, is, that this error creates in its advocates that sort of prejudice against those who differ with them iu sentiment which is injurious to "Christian fellowship. Many humble and sincere Christians of our denomiation, for the lack of education, either altogether, or in part, cannot read at all or are barely able to read the English Testament without the means of knowing the usages of'the age, when,or the circumstances of the history under which that sacred book was written. All such are taught by the zealous advocates who hold feet washing to be an or-> dinance that Jesus rose from the sacramental supper when he wash-. e$ his disciples feet. They thus imbibe the impression tjiat the scriptures are full of authority for feet washing as a gospel ordi¬ nance, and from the simple fact that it seems thus plain to them from reading or'hearing the case .described in the thirteenth chapter of John's gospel, they conclude that those who differ in opinion are not under conscientious scruples on this subject,but tbatthey are too much inflated with pride to obey one ofj&e Lord's most sacred an