JOHN REFLECTION - Week 4

 Now before the festival of the Passover, Jesus knew that his hour had come to depart from this world and go to the Father. Having loved his own who were in the world, he loved them to the end. 2 The devil had already decided that Judas son of Simon Iscariot would betray Jesus. And during supper 3 Jesus, knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands and that he had come from God and was going to God, 4 got up from supper, took off his outer robe, and tied a towel around himself. 5 Then he poured water into a basin and began to wash the disciples’ feet and to wipe them with the towel that was tied around him. 6 He came to Simon Peter, who said to him, “Lord, are you going to wash my feet?” 7 Jesus answered, “You do not know now what I am doing, but later you will understand.” 8 Peter said to him, “You will never wash my feet.” Jesus answered, “Unless I wash you, you have no share with me.” 9 Simon Peter said to him, “Lord, not my feet only but also my hands and my head!” 10 Jesus said to him, “One who has bathed does not need to wash, except for the feet, but is entirely clean. And you are clean, though not all of you.” 11 For he knew who was to betray him; for this reason he said, “Not all of you are clean.”  John 13:1-11 (NRSV)

This story came up in an Alpha video the other week and it was one that, to me, was so familiar that I didn’t really remember the actual point. Then reading it again this week, I’ve delighted in getting stuck back into exploring meaning in a passage which is neither stand out nor entirely forgettable. There’s so much goodness in the ‘inbetweener’ passages that we just skim through!

First, I’ll unpack some of what’s going on in what we’ve just read, and then I’ll share the interesting/helpful point that Alpha used this passage to illustrate.

Let’s start by noting a nice callback to the idea of Jesus’ hour coming. We saw at the Wedding at Cana that Jesus was keen to communicate that his hour had not yet come. Though, in that instance, we might understand Jesus as talking about the hour at which his divinity, or power, or glory would be revealed, this mentions that it’s talking about the hour of Jesus’ departure and return to God. Maybe Jesus’ has a few different hours? Or maybe those two things are one and the same?

John’s author(s?) can’t help it with the foreshadowing. We’ve seen this already a number of times – back in the week 2 reflection we looked at John 6, where it’s written that Jesus knows who will betray him. Here, we get a slightly different angle, as the narrator says that Jesus’ loved his own ‘until the end’. Remember, this is chapter 13 of 21, so there’s still a long way to go until the end of this particular account. Though I’m reading it and finding it amusing that there these little interruptions, breaking the fourth wall, and speaking to the reader, it is an interesting literary device to deploy and one which can be very effective. Put yourself in the shoes of a someone first encountering the story of Jesus through John’s Gospel – these little comments shape and colour how one reads the story. For many of us, it’s not new information, but there will have been people for whom these additional comments really do let you in on something. As well as this, these comments serve as a helpful point of reiteration. We’re told now that Jesus loved them until the end, and then we see that play out in the narrative. This highlights these points because the writer keeps the reader informed in advance. We know what to look out for.

Now, verse 2 is a fun one! ‘John’ tells us that it was the Devil who decided that Judas would betray Jesus. We then see this developed later in this passage (13:27) as it says that Satan “entered” Judas after he had received the bread from Jesus. Jesus says just beforehand that whoever it gives the bread to is the one who will betray him. Were it not for verse 2, you could interpret that as Jesus selecting Judas as his betrayer. But with that slightly oddly placed warning in verse 2, it comes across more as though Jesus just knows what is going to happen and who will do it.

So that’s tidy enough within this passage. But it is intriguing to me that this references the Devil as the selector of Judas. First, this is interesting on the theme of accountability, because it portrays events as though it is the Devil who is to blame for Jesus’ betrayal and the Devil who is ultimately responsible, not so much Judas. Judas is merely a vessel that Satan enters into. That’s complicated enough theologically.

Then we note that, once again, John’s gospel is unique in this telling of events. Neither Matthew or Mark mention anything in relation to Judas and the Devil. Luke’s gospel does, but at a later point (Luke 22:1-4 shows Satan enter Judas just before he goes to the chief priests). So what really happened? I suppose we can’t know, but hopefully by now we’ve learnt that that is the wrong question. The real question is what is John trying to say by presenting it this way?

It's often said that John’s gospel is particularly theological, or at least more so than the synoptic gospels. And whilst we can’t be sure, a strong guess as to why John describes events this way is that it’s making a theological point. The emerging worldview within the Jewish world, for the couple of centuries up to the writing of John’s gospel, was one predicated on the idea of ‘Good vs Evil’. This is, in part, why there isn’t mention of a Devil (as a character) in the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament – they just didn’t see the world that way! Under continued and intense oppression during the 2nd and 1st centuries BC, a theology developed that there was more at play than just human warfare and persecution, and that there was a spiritual element to their suffering. This idea is evident in the early Christian writings that we have, including the gospels, but John seems to particularly emphasise some of these teachings.

Satan entering Judas elevates this from a human betrayal between friends to an act of spiritual warfare. This is Satan playing a move at the end of this epic cosmic chess battle, whilst God – the Grandmaster – watches on and sees that this is exactly the move that They were expecting.

It also shows the vulnerability of humanity to sin, evil and the Devil. If Judas, one of Jesus’ own disciples, can fall prey to Satan, then so can all of us. John’s gospel makes clear that we are powerless to these attacks on our own, but Jesus knows what’s happening and has a plan.

Now let’s focus on the foot washing. This is another element which is just found in John’s gospel. There are a few learnings that can be taken away from this story. Typically, we can start with the surface level reminder of Jesus’ humility and service. Foot washing, in a culture where they didn’t have proper shoes, was a mucky task that was reserved for servants. Walking around all day, their feet would be dusty and dirty and so they would have their feet washed once home or as a guest in another’s home. So, Jesus humbles himself to a lowly status and washes the disciples feet, which subverts ideas around leadership and reveals the counter-cultural values of God’s Kingdom.

That alone is a beautiful point and would be more than enough to warrant it a place in a gospel account.

But there’s more.

We can also read this passage as symbolic. In fact, we are intended to. Beyond its literal meaning, foot-washing symbolizes spiritual cleansing. Jesus tells Peter, "Unless I wash you, you have no part with me" (John 13:8), suggesting that the act represents the spiritual purification necessary for discipleship and fellowship with Christ.

Poor Peter misunderstands and, so keen to do what’s right, he asks Jesus to wash all of him… He’s trying, bless him! He manages to get his head around the need for spiritual cleansing, but doesn’t quite understand. So Jesus spells it out.

“One who has bathed does not need to wash, except for the feet, but is entirely clean. And you are clean...”

I’ll finish by exploring this using some of the description that Alpha offers. We can move beyond the symbolic language of being ‘made clean’ and use words like ‘forgiven’ instead. Hold on to the idea of Jesus ‘washing away our sin’ as the imagery which bridges the gap.

Jesus is giving an important lesson in the mechanics of divine forgiveness. Alpha talks about two processes;

Justification and Sanctification.

Justification is the process of being made right with God, the overall forgiveness of our sin. This is what is achieved through the death and resurrection of Jesus. It is an offer made by God to all people and we can choose to accept this gift by receiving that forgiveness.

Sanctification is an ongoing process of being renewed. The word ‘Sanctify’ has it’s linguistic roots in the word for ‘Holiness’, so we can understand this as a process of being made Holy. This continues throughout our lives.

Justification, then, is the bathing that Jesus mentions. After a bath, we are (if you’re doing it right) all clean. That is our new beginning, our new state. We have been made clean. Forgiven.

Sanctification, on the other hand, is the washing of our feet. Even those who have taken a bath might get dirty feet in daily life. We don’t stay in the bath, but re-enter the world which is covered in dust and dirt. We don’t need to take another bath for the sake of some dust on our feet.

Maybe, in our culture, we can relate more to washing our hands. If we touch something grubby or germy, as sometimes happens, we don’t need to take a bath or shower. We can just wash our hands to return to that state of cleanliness. Jesus is offering the disciples this kind of ‘top-up’ purification.

We can be ultimately forgiven – which then defines us- but still need to ask for forgiveness from time to time. The dirt on our feet doesn’t change our identity or take away from that ultimate forgiveness.

It just needs washing off from time to time.