John 13:6-11

“ He comes therefore to Simon Peter, and he says to him, Lord, Dost thou wash my feet? 7. Jesus answered and said to him, What I do, thou knowest not now, but thou shalt know hereafter. 8. Peter says to him, No, thou shalt never wash my feet. Jesus answered him, If I wash thee not, thou hast no part with me. 9. Simon Peter says to him, Lord, not only my feet, but also my hands and my head. 10. Jesus says to him, He that is bathed has need of nothing except to wash his feet, but he is altogether clean; and you are clean, but not all. 11. For he knew him that should betray him; therefore said he, You are not all clean. ”

It must be observed, indeed, that this conversation with St. Peter comes upon this scene as an unexpected episode. Οὖν, therefore (John 13:6): when going from one to another according to the order in which they were seated. The natural conclusion to be drawn from this therefore is that Peter was not the first whose feet Jesus washed; he was not seated therefore beside Him (comp. John 13:24). The feeling of reverence which called forth this resistance on Peter's part expresses itself in the antithesis of the pronouns σύ, thou, and μού, me, and in the title Lord. Here, as in Matthew 16:22, it is respect which produces in this apostle the want of respect. The antithesis of ἐγώ and σύ (I thou) in John 13:7, answers to that of σύ and μού (thou me) in John 13:6. The expression μετὰ ταῦτα, hereafter, signifies according to Chrysostom, Grotius, Tholuck, Reuss: by the light which the experiences of thy future ministry will give. But the relation between γνώσῃ, thou shalt know, and γινώσκετε, know ye (John 13:14), shows that Jesus is thinking rather of the explanation which He is about to give at the very moment, after having finished the act which was begun.

The gentleness of Jesus emboldens Peter; he had only questioned (John 13:6); now he positively refuses, and even for ever. If this refusal of Peter springs from modesty, it is nevertheless true that, as Weiss says, this modesty is not destitute of self-will and pride. Jesus answers him in the same categorical tone, and there is certainly an echo of Peter's for ever in the no part with me of Jesus. This relation it is which prevents us from holding, with Weiss and Reuss, that these words mean: “Thou dost not at this moment share in my feelings,” or “Thou art not in communion with me” (present, ἔχεις, thou hast). The ἔχεις may perfectly well be a present of anticipation and may refer to the blessedness to come. The phrase μέρος ἔχειν μετά, to have part with, indicates the participation of the inferior in the booty, the riches, the glory of his leader (Jos 22:24; 2 Samuel 20:1; 1 Kings 12:16). The refusal of Peter to accept the humiliating service which Jesus desires to render him, is equivalent to a rejection of the spirit of His work, to the resolution to persevere in the love of the carnal grandeur from which precisely Jesus desires by this act to purify His disciples. In rejecting the humiliation which his Master imposes upon Himself for his sake, Peter rejects in principle that which he was one day to impose upon himself for the sake of his brethren. The reply of Jesus is in harmony with this meaning; it reproduces with a natural force the warning which He addressed to all the disciples, on occasion of a quite similar dispute among them: “ Except you are converted and become as little children, not only will no one of you be the greatest in the kingdom of heaven, but you will not enter into it at all ” (Matthew 18:1-4).