A modern explanation of the Jesus' washing his disciples' feet

A king has an unwritten social contract between his domain and himself. As the monarch the people trust him to rule effectively and benevolently and ensure they are provided for and protected from the threats of other nations and territories. In so doing the king is permitted to use violence according to his own judgment as a means of accomplishing that task.

When any person uses violence to achieve a goal, they descend to the lowest nature of the human being. That is the most base, primal, beast-like form of our existence in total expression of self without the mind. It is all animal commanded by a human purpose. For human standards violence should never be tolerated and avoided at all costs, and all conflicts should be resolved with language instead. If language fails, it is a failure of the people communicating, who have proven themselves inadequate as leaders on one side or the other or both sides.

As a result of human failure when they resort to sub human behavior of violence to achieve their goals, they come to the instinctual and stupid conclusion that because violence can silence a person’s ability to use language by ending their life it is superior to language as a form of power. It doesn’t take much intelligence to see how backwards and inhuman those conclusions of bestial humans are. However, when confronted with such fools it may be required to answer with violence, because it remains a part of human nature even if it is rejected as a means of resolving human conflict unless the situation makes non-violence impossible for the defense of one’s own life and those under their protection.

That is why a king is trusted by his citizens to employ violence while the citizens reject violence as a means of solving problems. If they use violence they generally are arrested by the king’s authorities and submitted to justice at court in which case the king or the king’s representative determine whether or not the person who used violence was acting with the king’s wisdom, which extends to all subjects as one of the benefits of a kingship. If the king wanted violence to be used it would not be against the law, but kings have the authority to judge matters outside of defined parameters according to their wisdom, because defined parameters of law are always inadequate.

Kings can be held accountable to those judgments if the wisdom of a man who is not a king proves them foolish, and thus the king must submit to his own justice in order to maintain order and retain his authority. If he defies his own justice, then the citizens have no reason to accept his justice because he does not accept it himself and it is therefore unacceptable all around.

So, knowing now that violence is beneath the dignity of human standards, a king employs violence as a servant underneath the dignity of the common man. They “wash the feet” of their servants in these situations. The use of violence does not make them greater. It makes them lesser, and they do so knowingly as a form of humility. The violence is not what gives them authority over the people, it is the wisdom they demonstrate. Wisdom is humble with power. It does not degrade those who receive its force. It uplifts them. It does not lower the common man, it raises him. This can either be in a form of “tough love” or “soft love” so to speak.

In conclusion, when a king goes to war, they do what Jesus did at the Last Supper by removing his cloak and tunic, tying a towel about his waist as the lowest, most humble servant who is half naked and may be performing services that people do not want to talk about because they are private matters that only trusted servants are in their confidence to engage in. Feet are a common metaphor for sexuality in storytelling if you are unaware. In any case, the king descends to a lower level of dignity and in effect, lowers the standard, which is why his subjects may join him in acts of violence as long as he retains his authority as the king. When the war is won, the violence is ended and people are no longer permitted to use it because the king once again raises to the base standard of dignity which all subjects receive.

In any case, violence and sex are on the same level as beneath the standard of human dignity. That’s why it is frowned upon to be fucking in public places unless it is specifically identified as an acceptable place to fuck, which is rare and usually discreet. Violence is the same way. It is frowned upon to beat your servant in public for failing at a task, if that was still done. In these days it is more like it being more appropriate to reprimand a subordinate in private than in front of others.

Last thing, if a king is failing on his end of the unwritten social agreement, the subjects may rebel against him and put him to death without a trial.