very same tiling tliat He did ? Or did he only mean tliat we are to imitate the spirit of his action ?
The Church of Rome, it is well-known, puts a literal sense on our Lord's language. Once every year, about Easter, the head of the Romish Church publicly washes the feet of certain poor persons got ready for the occasion. The absurdity, to say the least, of this view is evident on a moment's reflection.
It seems absurd to take our Lord's words literally, and to sup- pose tliat the Pope's literal washing of a few feet at Easter can supersede the duty of all Christians to do the same. Yet it is only fair to remember that the Moravians to tliis day take a literal view of those words, and have a custom called " pedi- lavium."
It is in any case absurd to suppose that our Lord would require His disciples to perform a duty which the young and the feeble would be physically unable to do.
It is inconsistent with the general tenor of our Lord's teach ing to suppose that He would ever attach so much importance to a mere bodily action. " Bodily exercise profiteth little." (1 Tim. iv. 8.) A formal performance of bodily acts of religion is just the easiest thing that can be imposed on people. The thing that is really hard, and yet always required, is the ser- vice of the heart.
The true interpretation of the two verses is that which places a spiritual sense on our Lord's words. It is a practical illus- tration of Matt. XX. 26 — 28. He wished to teach His disciples that they ought to be willing to wait on one another, serve one another, minister to one another, even in the least and lowest things. They should think nothing too low, or humble, or menial to undertake, if they can show love, kindness, and con- descension to another. If He, the King of kings, condescended to leave heaven to save souls, and dwell thirty-three years in this sin-defiled world, there is nothing that we should think too lowly to undertake.
Pride, because we possess wealth, rank, position, place, edu- cation, or high-breeding, is condemned heavily in this passage. He who would shrink from doing the least kindness to the poorest Christian, has read these verses to little purpose, and does not copy his JNIaster's example.
One caution only we must remember. Let us not suppose that an ostentatious attention to the poor constitutes the whole of obedience to the law of this passage. It is easy work com- paratively to care for the poor. We are to be ready to do the least acts of kindness to our equals quite as much as to the poor. There is nothing about temporal poverty in the passage. The disciples were told their duty to " one another." 'This is a very important point. It is much easier and more sel f-satisfy-