Should churches practice foot washing as an ordinance?

On the night before his crucifixion, Jesus did something none of his disciples expected: he took a towel, filled a basin, and began washing their feet — the job of the lowest household servant (John 13:3-5). Peter initially refused, unable to reconcile the Lord doing a slave’s work (John 13:6-8). When Jesus finished, he explained himself directly: “You also ought to wash one another’s feet… I have given you an example, that you also should do just as I have done to you” (John 13:14-15). The plain command raises a real question many churches have wrestled with for centuries: did Jesus institute a literal ritual, or was he teaching a principle through a vivid act?

Some traditions, including many Anabaptist, Mennonite, and certain Baptist and holiness congregations, practice literal foot washing, often alongside the Lord’s Supper. Their reasoning is straightforward: Jesus’s command is direct and repeated (John 13:14, 15, 17), given at a formative moment alongside instruction that later shaped how the church understood baptism and communion. If Jesus says “you also ought,” they argue, obedience calls for actually doing it, not merely admiring the principle from a distance.

Churches that practice it often incorporate foot washing directly into a communion service, sometimes structuring the evening as a threefold observance — communion, foot washing, and a shared fellowship meal — drawing together the same evening’s events described in John 13. Advocates also caution that treating the command as merely symbolic risks the same reasoning some use to reduce baptism or communion to optional metaphors, when Jesus’s own words in context read as a direct, repeated instruction addressed to his gathered disciples, not a passing illustration.

Most evangelical churches, however, do not treat foot washing as a required ordinance on par with baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Several factors support this reading. First, foot washing addressed a specific first-century need — dusty roads and open sandals made washing a household necessity, unlike baptism and communion, which Jesus explicitly instituted as ongoing signs pointing to the gospel itself (Matthew 26:26-28; 28:19). Second, nowhere else in the New Testament epistles is foot washing prescribed as a regular church practice the way baptism and the Supper clearly are; Paul, writing extensively about worship practices, never mentions it as an ordinance, though 1 Timothy 5:10 references it as a mark of a godly widow’s hospitality, suggesting a service, not a sacrament. Third, Jesus’s own explanation points past the physical act toward its meaning: humble, self-giving service toward one another, following the example of the one who “though he was rich, yet for your sake he became poor” (2 Corinthians 8:9).

It also helps to notice what Jesus does not say. Unlike his words instituting the Lord’s Supper, where he explicitly commands “do this in remembrance of me” regarding bread and wine as ongoing symbols of his body and blood (Luke 22:19; 1 Corinthians 11:23-26), Jesus frames foot washing as “an example” to follow (John 13:15), language more naturally suited to a pattern of character and conduct than a fixed liturgical rite with its own theological significance requiring repetition in worship.

Whether or not a congregation practices literal foot washing, everyone who takes the passage seriously should agree on its unmistakable point: genuine spiritual leadership looks like lowly service, not status. Jesus, the eternal Son, took the towel; his followers, especially those who lead, have no excuse to consider any act of service beneath them (Philippians 2:5-8; Mark 10:43-45).

Whatever a church decides, there is a real danger worth naming: turning an act meant to display humility into a performance of humility, which is really pride wearing a servant’s clothing. Jesus warned against practicing righteousness “in order to be seen by others,” including acts of charity done publicly for applause (Matthew 6:1-4). A church could practice foot washing faithfully every year and still miss its point entirely if participants secretly compare who seems more willing, more emotional, or more visibly humbled than others. The same danger exists for churches that skip the literal ritual: quietly assuming that theological sophistication in interpreting the passage correctly makes them more mature than congregations who wash feet literally. Genuine humility, wherever it is practiced, does not announce itself; it simply serves and moves on.

This is a matter believers can hold with conviction while still extending grace to churches that practice it differently. If your congregation practices foot washing, do it with genuine humility rather than as empty ritual. If it does not, find other tangible ways to obey the same command — serving people in unglamorous, unnoticed ways that cost you something. The towel matters far less than the posture of the heart that picks it up.

Consider practical modern equivalents: quietly cleaning up after a church event without being asked, caring for someone’s physical needs during illness, or serving a person who has no way to repay you. Peter’s initial refusal to let Jesus wash his feet reflects a very human instinct to avoid the vulnerability of being served, and Jesus’s answer, “If I do not wash you, you have no share with me” (John 13:8), reminds every believer that receiving humble service, not just giving it, is also part of following him. A congregation that grasps this principle, whatever its stance on the literal ritual, will look noticeably different from one that has missed it entirely.