{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_36840/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_36840","id":"gutenberg_36840","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/36840","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Biographies","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Peter, the Apostle, Saint"],"text":"</pre>\n\n\n\nProduced by Al Haines\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nSmall Books on Great Subjects.--XI.\n\n\n\n\nTHE MAKING OF AN APOSTLE.\n\n\nBy R. J. Campbell.\n\n\n\n\nLONDON: JAMES CLARKE & CO.,\n\n13 & 14, Fleet Street.\n\n1898.\n\n\n\n\n_First Edition, October, 1898._\n\n\n\n\nContents.\n\n\nThe Making of an Apostle\n\nSimon Meets with Jesus\n\nThe Call to Service\n\nSimon's First Commission as a Preacher\n\nSimon Acknowledges Jesus to be the Christ\n\nSimon Peter Witnesses the Transfiguration\n\nPeter Thinks his Sacrifice Complete\n\nThe Scene in the Upper Room\n\nGethsemane and After\n\nThe Power of the Resurrection\n\nA New Commission\n\nThe Prince of the Apostles\n\n\n\n\nTHE MAKING OF AN APOSTLE.\n\n\nThe New Testament supplies us with little in the way of biography.\nEven from the Gospels themselves we do not gather much concerning the\nactual life of our Lord apart from His public ministry.  It has been\njustly said that no person has ever influenced the history of the world\non such a scale as Jesus of Nazareth, yet it would be impossible to\nwrite a chronological life of the Founder of Christianity.  What is\ntrue of the Master is true of His followers.  We know very little about\nthe Apostles themselves; apart from their life-work of preaching\nChrist, the details of their circumstances and fortunes are most\nmeagre.  Yet it is worth while from such materials as we have to\nattempt to trace the influence of Jesus Christ upon those through whom\nHe founded His Church upon earth.  The choice of Apostles, for\ninstance, is sometimes regarded as having been made in a very\nexceptional or semi-miraculous way, that Jesus summoned to His side\nindividuals upon whom His gaze fell for the first time, and that these\nmen forthwith became the instruments of His service.  But from\ncomparison of the Gospel narratives we discover that very interesting\nlife-stories might be written concerning the men who stood closest to\nJesus during His earthly ministry.  We find, as we might have expected,\nthat Jesus took in them an active personal interest, that their lives\nwere shaped under His influence as clay in the hands of the potter,\nthat He had a plan with each of them, and patiently worked at it, that\nHe applied to them a discriminating treatment and placed upon each his\nown individual value.  Is not the same process going forward even now?\nDoes not the risen Lord still continue to issue His summonses to the\nsouls of men?  We feel that it were better to think so, and that He by\nwhom the very hairs of our head are all numbered still gives to His\nservants in the world individual care, interest and attention,\nfashioning heroes and saints out of the most unpromising materials, and\nmaking apostles as in the days of old.\n\nAs an example of Jesus's ways of dealing with His servants the life of\nthe Apostle Peter is most suggestive.  In the first place, because he\nwas admitted to be the leader of the Apostles, or at any rate occupied\nthe position of greatest prominence amongst them, and also because we\nare able by the comparative method to obtain from the Gospels\nsufficient information for a history of his character, if not of his\ncareer during the three most formative years of his life.\n\n\n\n\nI.\n\nSimon Meets with Jesus.\n\nWe are fortunate in possessing an account of the first occasion on\nwhich Simon, the Galilean fisherman, met with Jesus of Nazareth.  We\nare told (John i. 35-42) that immediately after the Baptism of Jesus,\nand, therefore, before His public ministry began, John the Baptist made\na semi-public declaration that He was the long-expected Holy One of\nIsrael.  His words, as recorded in the Fourth Gospel, are: \"I knew Him\nnot: but He that sent me to baptize with water, He said unto me, Upon\nwhomsover thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and abiding upon Him,\nthe same is He that baptizeth with the Holy Spirit.  And I have seen,\nand have borne witness that this is the Son of God.\"  With the\nexception of the mother of Jesus, John the Baptist appears to have been\nthe only person, who, at this particular time, was perfectly convinced,\nwithout a word from Jesus Himself, that the long-expected Messiah had\nappeared.  His declaration just quoted must have been made in the\npresence of a certain number of His disciples, though with what effect\nwe are not told.\n\nIn a sense the ministry of Jesus begins with the declaration of John,\nand a certain importance must therefore attach to the historicity of\nthe account of it.  If John recognised, as we are entitled to think he\ndid, that Jesus was the very person whose advent it had been his\nmission to inaugurate, then Jesus's own work must in its initial stages\nhave been greatly simplified.  There could be no possibility of rivalry\nbetween the teachers, nor was there any necessity for Jesus to exactly\nimitate the procedure of John, and to commence unaccredited the work of\nevangelising an unresponsive people.  John had prepared the minds of\nhis more spiritual and earnest followers for just such a revelation as\nJesus was about to give.  We may say without irreverence that our Lord\nappropriated the results of the preaching of John.  The latter beheld\nwithout jealousy or disquietude the departure of his best disciples to\nthe side of Jesus, and his own magnanimous statement in view of this\nchange has exalted him to a high pinnacle in the esteem of Christendom:\n\"He must increase, but I must decrease.\"  His work was not necessarily\ndone when Jesus arrived upon the scene.  The austere and noble-hearted\nprophet was still able to continue doing his best to prepare the way,\nto strengthen the hands of Jesus and to stir the hearts and awaken the\nspiritual susceptibilities of his countrymen.  What a majestic\nself-devotion!\n\nIt is not surprising that attempts should have been made at intervals\nto discredit the Gospel account of the close connection between John\nand Jesus in doctrine and discipleship.  M. Renan,[1] for instance,\nregards the Messianic proclamation as unhistorical.  He thinks the\nstory sufficiently refuted by the fact that John afterwards sent to\ninquire whether Jesus really was the promised Messiah.  (Matt. xi. 2\n_et seq._, Luke vii. 18 _et seq._) John's inquiry in this case was\ncertainly very peremptory.  \"Art Thou the Christ, or look we for\nanother?\"  But an easy explanation is to be found in the history of the\ntime that lies between the Messianic proclamation after the Baptism and\nthe date of his own arrest and imprisonment.  John's idea of\nMessiahship did not exactly accord with that of Jesus.  He was\nsurprised to find that Jesus went on quietly preaching and healing,\nsaying little or nothing about His own personal claims, and assuming\nneither state nor retinue.  This course of action puzzled the fiery\nprophet who had foretold One mightier than himself, a Messiah who\nshould impress the imagination of the world, and render to every man\naccording to his deeds.  Jesus's procedure disappointed, and perhaps\nirritated him, hence the abrupt inquiry, which seems to contradict his\nassurance at the outset of our Lord's ministry.\n\nSupposing, therefore, that John really did proclaim Jesus as the\nMessiah, we should expect the announcement to kindle a very great\ninterest in those who understood the Baptist best.  From the first\nchapter of the fourth Gospel we may infer that John had a school of\ndisciples to whom he gave esoteric teaching.  These few intimates were,\nno doubt, eagerly anticipating the near advent of Him who should\nrestore the kingdom to Israel.  We do not know how many were included\nin this group of enthusiasts, but it is more than probable that all, or\nnearly all, of the names which formed the nucleus of Jesus's first band\nof disciples were originally regarded as the followers of John the\nBaptist.  These were precisely the kind of men to whom Jesus would be\ndrawn and upon whom He could rely for the sort of exalted\ndisinterestedness which, in some degree at least, He required from them\nat the very outset of their acquaintance with Himself.\n\nBut to return to the narrative of that introduction: \"On the following\nday,\" the writer of the Fourth Gospel goes on to say: \"John was\nstanding, and two of his disciples; and he looked upon Jesus as He\nwalked, and saith, Behold, the Lamb of God!  And the two disciples\nheard him speak, and they followed Jesus.\"  Doubtless they were\ninfluenced to do so because of the announcement of the day before.  The\ndisciples of John were all well aware of the fact that John was the\nherald of a greater to come.  John's statement in regard to Jesus,\ntherefore, which statement he now repeated to themselves alone,\nstimulated their eager interest, and leaving their master, they\nfollowed the Nazarene.  The opportunity was an easy one; there was no\ncrowd, John was simply talking to his two followers; Jesus was alone.\nThe sequence of events was very simple; Jesus turned, saw them\nfollowing, and asked what they sought.  Their reply was the counter\nquestion, \"Rabbi, where abidest Thou?\"  \"Come,\" said He, \"and ye shall\nsee.\"  \"They came, therefore,\" continues the story, \"and saw where He\nabode, and they stayed with Him that day; it was about the tenth hour.\"\nHere we have a complete little narrative, full of beautiful and natural\nsuggestion.  These two men evidently had a long conversation with\nJesus, perhaps far into the night, nor did they leave Him the next day,\nsave for a purpose to which we must presently refer.  A sacred intimacy\nwas begun in those hours of association with the new teacher.\n\n\"One of the two that heard Jesus speak and followed Him was Andrew,\nSimon Peter's brother.\"  Who was the other?  Could it be the writer of\nthe Fourth Gospel himself, John the Divine?  If so we have here the\nrecord of the beginning of a holy friendship, which so long as the\nChurch of God lasts will be spoken of.  John enjoyed the singular\nprivilege of being \"the disciple whom Jesus loved,\" though he was not\nthe one chosen to lead the little band of adherents whom Jesus left\nbehind Him.  To observe this first mention of John the Divine is not a\ndigression, for the life of the Apostle John is linked in a very\nspecial way with that of the rugged fisherman whom Jesus called to the\nforemost place.\n\nWhy Andrew and his brother Simon were to be found in this particular\nneighbourhood just now we do not know.  Probably they were in Jerusalem\nfor a special purpose, and before returning to Galilee went to listen\nto John the Baptist, among whose disciples they counted themselves to\nbe.  Andrew was certainly such, though possibly his brother was not.\nAt any rate, Andrew's first thought before returning home was to bring\nSimon to Jesus.  The narrative continues: \"He findeth first his own\nbrother Simon, and saith unto Him, We have found the Messiah.  He\nbrought him unto Jesus.\"  And as in the case of Nathaniel, recorded in\nthe same chapter, Jesus seems to have anticipated an introduction.  The\nGospel says, \"He looked upon him, and said, Thou art Simon, the son of\nJohn, thou shalt be called _Rock_.\"  No doubt Andrew had told Jesus the\nname of his brother, and also that he was going to fetch him; possibly,\nlikewise, he had referred to his impulsive, wayward character, his\ninstability and irresolution.  All the more surprising, therefore, must\nhave been the reception which Jesus gave to the newcomer: \"Thou art\nSimon (whom I have been expecting).  Thou shalt be called _a rock_.\"\nJesus looked very far ahead when He welcomed poor, impetuous Simon with\nsuch a prophecy.  A _rock_ was the very last thing in the world which\nin character he would ever be likely to resemble.  The new Teacher\nevidently saw possibilities in him which every one, including himself,\nhad ignored before.\n\nThis, then, is Simon's first meeting with Jesus, the commencement of a\ntraining which was to yield him a destiny that the great ones of the\nearth might well envy.  To him it was given to see a day which many\nprophets and righteous men had desired to see and had not seen.  In\nthis apparently commonplace man who lived, possibly, a coarse and\nsinful life, Jesus had discovered, though he did not say so, save in a\ngeneral prophecy, the prince of the Apostles, the leader of the Church\nthat was to be.\n\n\n\n[1] \"Life of Jesus,\" p. 156.\n\n\n\n\nII.\n\nThe Call to Service.\n\nWe may assume that Peter's acquaintance with our Lord continued for\nsome time ere he was called to actual service.  The Synoptists all\nrefer to this call, but with certain differences in detail.  Matthew's\nfirst mention of Simon (iv. 18) occurs in connection with his account\nof the commencement of the preaching ministry of Jesus.  He tells us\nthat after the temptation our Lord went to live in Capernaum.  We know\nlittle or nothing of His movements save that He began to preach, and\nthat the substance of His exhortation was, \"Repent, for the Kingdom of\nHeaven is at hand!\"  A great deal, however, is suggested here.\nCapernaum was Simon's home, and by piecing the narrative in John i.\nwith that in Matthew iv. we are justified in thinking that after making\nacquaintance with Andrew and Simon in Bethabara beyond Jordan, Jesus\nwent with them to Galilee and continued His association with them on\nterms of intimacy, _vide_ John i. 43, John ii. _et seq._ John ii. 12.\nJesus's sojourn in Capernaum was not intended to be permanent, as we\nsee in John ii. 12.  It is quite possible it was only undertaken for\nthe sake of drawing closer the relations between Himself and the two\nbrothers whose acquaintance He had made through the medium of the\nBaptist.  In Matt. iv. 18 we are informed that \"walking by the sea of\nGalilee He saw two brethren, Simon and Andrew his brother, casting a\nnet into the sea, for they were fishers.  And He saith unto them, Come\nye after Me, and I will make you fishers of men.  And they straightway\nleft the nets and followed Him.\"\n\nBut for the considerations presented above we might imagine that this\nwas the first time Jesus had ever seen Peter.  Mark and Luke are more\nexplicit, Luke especially.  In Mark i. 16, that is very early in this\nparticular Gospel, we read that after John was delivered up Jesus came\ninto Galilee.  \"And passing along by the Sea of Galilee, He saw Simon\nand Andrew the brother of Simon, casting a net into the sea, for they\nwere fishers.  And Jesus said unto them, Come ye after Me, and I will\nmake you _to become_ fishers of men.\"  When we remember that Mark's\nGospel is really Peter's own Gospel, written in all probability under\nhis guidance, we are prepared for the early introduction of the call of\nthe first Apostle.  A previous acquaintance is clearly presumed here.\nMark states with his usual simple directness and vividness, \"He saw\nSimon.\"  The presumption is that Simon was already well known to Jesus,\nand the fact that the two brothers left their nets and followed Him is\nnot so wonderful if we consider that their friendship with Jesus was\nalready well established, and their belief in His authority confirmed\nby their increasing knowledge of Himself.\n\nIt is to Luke, however, that we must turn for a circumstantial account\nof the crisis so briefly referred to by Matthew and Mark.  Under the\nguidance of Luke our conjectures as to the intercourse between Jesus\nand Simon become certainty.  In Luke iv. 38 we are told that after\npreaching in the synagogue of Capernaum He entered into the house of\nSimon.  He healed Simon's wife's mother, who was suffering from fever.\nThis appears to have been one miracle among many of a similar kind that\nday; possibly the news of it went forth, \"And,\" Luke continues, \"when\nthe sun was setting all they that had any sick with divers diseases\nbrought them unto Him.\"  Evidently Jesus is here a familiar guest in\nthe house of Simon and makes it His head-quarters.\n\nIn the next chapter (Luke v. 1-11) we have Luke's account of the call\nto service and the circumstances which led up to it.  Jesus, as an\nhonoured guest, seems to have made use, not only of Simon's home, but\nof his fishing-boat.  This fishing-boat on occasions supplied him with\na pulpit from which He was able to address the crowds that lined the\nseashore.  On one such occasion, when He had finished speaking, He\nasked His host to put out into the deep.  Simon did so, no doubt\nthinking that the new Teacher required to escape and rest after His\nlong exertions.  But Jesus had another motive than this.  Simon had\nbeen obliged to wait His pleasure while He was preaching; he had been\nout the whole of the previous night plying his calling, and was,\ndoubtless, weary and exhausted.  Jesus knew all this and intended to\nhelp him.  By His direction Simon let down his net for a draught,\nexplaining, however, while he did so, that he expected no result in the\nday-time since he had taken nothing through the hours of darkness.  He\nlowered the nets simply to please Jesus, to whom he had become, by this\ntime, much attached.  The result was the miraculous draught of fishes.\n\nThe effect upon Simon of this beneficent exhibition of the super-human\npower of Jesus was overwhelming.  His impulsive character showed itself\nat once.  He threw himself down at the feet of his Master with the\nill-considered but earnest petition born of the feeling of the moment,\n\"Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord!\"\n\nWhat was the reason of this strange outburst?  The miraculous draught\nof fishes was not of itself sufficient to account for it; it was the\noccasion but not the cause of Peter's action.  A better way of\nexplaining it would be to try to form a sympathetic estimate of the\nworking of this rude fisherman's mind under the influence of his short\nacquaintance with Jesus of Nazareth.  Like others of his class, Simon\nhad very likely been, until the day when Andrew introduced him to\nJesus, ill-disciplined and coarse.  He may have thought very little\nabout high and holy things, and yet, as often happens in a rude but\ngenerous nature, he felt an instinctive respect for goodness whenever\nhe saw it embodied in another.  He was attracted to Jesus by Andrew's\nassertion that He was the Messiah.  In the increasing intimacy of\nsubsequent intercourse he must have come to feel that Jesus was the\nbest man he had ever met.  Jesus came as a benediction to Simon's home.\nHis very presence must have stirred the better feelings latent in the\nboisterous fisherman's heart.  Simon came to love Jesus, and listened\nno doubt with a simple, awe-struck interest to the words He was\naccustomed to address to the crowds from the vantage-ground of Simon's\nboat.  Jesus discovered him to himself: he saw how poor and mean and\nunsatisfactory his own life and ideals were when compared with the\ncharacter of this august stranger.\n\nTo these considerations Jesus added another.  Out of pure\nthoughtfulness and kindness for Simon He had asked him to put out to\nsea and let down his nets, and poor Simon, totally unprepared for the\nresult, now saw that in his friend and guest were combined at once\nmarvellous goodness and marvellous power.  Simon's first feeling was\nthat he wanted to get away from Him, that he was totally unfit to be in\nthe presence of such a Being, and, like the centurion afterwards, was\nnot worthy that He should come under his roof.  The cry, \"Depart from\nme!\" meant, doubtless, \"Leave my home.  Do not stay with me any more.\nI am unfit for such a privilege, unworthy of such companionship.\nSelect another and a better associate, for I am a sinful man!\"\n\nWe are beholden to Luke for this circumstantial account of an important\nevent in the life of an interesting man.  Some persons think that Luke\nhas mixed up this story with the similar one recorded in John xxi.\nThere is no need to think so, the scene ends very naturally.  Matthew\nand Mark omit to say how it was that Jesus came to extend the call to\nSimon and Andrew, James and John.  According to their brief statement\nJesus saw them casting a net into the sea; according to Luke it was He\nwho told them to cast that net.  Simon's confession and request\nsupplied Him with a further opportunity: \"Fear not, He said, from\nhenceforth thou shalt catch men.  And when they had brought their boats\nto land they left all and followed Him.\"\n\nWe see from this beautiful sequence of dealings that Jesus bestowed\nmuch tender thought and care upon the training of the men who were to\nserve Him in the work of evangelising the world.  His prophecy in\nrespect to Simon at their first meeting He set Himself to fulfil.\nPeter was not then ready to be called, nor did Jesus call him; without\nexplaining His meaning He uttered a prophecy in regard to Simon's\nfuture character which no one but Himself could understand.  He\nwelcomed Simon's avowal of unworthiness as the first condition toward\nthe attainment of that character.  Simon was fit to be used just in\nproportion as he realised his own unfitness.  \"I am a sinful man,\" was\nthe utterance which made it possible for him to arise and become a\nsaviour.\n\n\n\n\nIII.\n\nSimon's First Commission as a Preacher.\n\nBefore long it became necessary for our Lord to make a selection from\namongst the number of His disciples of those who were to represent Him\nand be clothed with His authority, after His visible presence was\nwithdrawn from the infant Church.  In Matthew x., Mark iii., and Luke\nvi., we have the Gospel accounts of the appointment of Apostles.  The\nchoice was very solemnly entered upon, the Master \"continued all night\nin prayer to God, and when it was day He called His disciples: and He\nchose from them twelve, whom also He named Apostles.\"  In this little\nband Simon was permitted a special prominence.  In the lists severally\ngiven by the Synoptists, Simon's name is always at the head.  Matthew\nespecially opens with the distinctive words, \"But first, Simon who is\ncalled Peter.\"  Simon's precedence was evidently the wish of Jesus\nHimself.  The twelve, moreover, accepted it without demur; Simon is\nalmost invariably their spokesman.  If ever Jesus had occasion to ask a\nquestion of all Simon usually made reply in the name of the others.\nThe only case in which his leadership was disputed was during the\nrivalry with the sons of Zebedee.  To this, however, we must make\nreference presently.\n\nThe newly-appointed apostles were now sent forth on a preaching\nmission; their business was to herald the advent of Jesus Himself in\nthe districts into which He was about to come.  Their theme was to be,\n\"The Kingdom of Heaven is at hand.\"  Certain miraculous powers were\nbestowed upon them; they were to heal the sick, cleanse the lepers,\nraise the dead, cast out demons.  They were to travel without gold or\nsilver; they were not to take two coats or shoes or a staff, but were\nto trust to the hospitality of those to whom they preached.  They were\nto regard themselves as sheep sent forth in the midst of wolves; they\nwere to be wise as serpents and harmless as doves.  They were to expect\npersecution; and here their Master foreshadowed what was to take place\nlong afterwards, namely, that they were to expect to be brought before\ngovernors and kings for His sake and for a testimony to the heathen\nworld.  They were not to be over-anxious as to the form of their\nmessage; \"for,\" said Jesus, \"it is not ye that speak, but the spirit of\nyour Father that speaketh in you.\"  They were not to fear opposition,\nthey were bidden to have a high courage and a simple faith.  They were\nto yield themselves in the most thorough obedience and submission to\nthe Leader in whose service they were now enrolled.  Jesus expected to\nbe the supreme interest in their lives.  He asked for a devotion which\nshould shrink from no sacrifice, reaching the climax of His exhortation\nin the statement that \"He that doth not take his cross and follow after\nMe is not worthy of Me.  He that findeth his life shall lose it, and he\nthat loseth his life for My sake shall find it.\"\n\nThis preaching journey was Simon's first trial in the work of the\nministry.  Jesus had not only called him, He had given him work to do.\nIt was but a simple duty, yet the faithful discharge of this\npreliminary obligation was by-and-by to lead to greater things.  There\nis no doubt that it was Jesus's intention to test in this way the men\nwhom He had summoned to His side.  This preaching tour was the humble\nbeginning of the heroic days of the early Church.\n\n\n\n\nIV.\n\nSimon Acknowledges Jesus to be the Christ.\n\nSo far our Lord seems to have said little or nothing to His disciples\nin regard to His own personality.  He must have had certain reasons for\nthis course, the principal one being, no doubt, that He shrank from\narousing mistaken expectations in the minds of His followers.  They\nlooked for a hero Messiah, a great liberator, a secular prince.  Jesus\nknew from experience how extremely difficult it is to change any man's\npoint of view, or to dislodge a prepossession from his mind, hence He\npreferred to allow His character to produce its own impression, and\nfrom this new standing ground to raise men's ideas of the functions of\nMessiah.  His ministry would have been seriously maimed by any\npremature insistence upon His supernatural claims, indeed, the danger\nwas on certain occasions only narrowly averted.  At one time the people\nwould have taken Him by force to make Him a king, at another time they\nwelcomed Him to Jerusalem with hosannas.  He was often addressed as the\nSon of David, a description applicable only to the Christ, as the ready\nreply of the Pharisees to His own question on a critical occasion\nclearly shows.  \"What think ye of Christ?  Whose son is He?\"  They\nanswered without hesitation, \"The Son of David.\"  Jesus had no wish to\nconceal His pretensions, but on the other hand He was careful not to\narouse misconception as to His real character by declaring them.  This\nreticence puzzled the religious leaders a good deal, as is evident from\ntheir somewhat peremptory demand, \"How long dost Thou make us to doubt?\nIf Thou art the Christ, tell us plainly.\"\n\nWith the disciples themselves Jesus pursued the same course, for they\nwere liable to the same danger, the danger of misapprehending the real\nnature of Messiahship.  How long He refrained from speaking plainly on\nthe subject we cannot determine; but some time after the return of the\nApostles from the preaching mission He thought the time had come to\nelicit from them a theory of His Person.  One day, on His way through\nthe villages of Caesarea Philippi, He suddenly put to His followers the\nquestion, \"Who do men say that I am?\" and they answered, \"Some say John\nthe Baptist, some Elijah, and others one of the prophets.\"  Jesus\ncontinued His interrogation by the further inquiry: \"But whom say _ye_\nthat I am?\"  Matthew, Mark and Luke[1] are all agreed that Peter\nfurnished the desired response, \"Thou art the Christ, the Son of the\nliving God.\"  Matthew's account is the most circumstantial and conveys\nmost distinctly the impression that Jesus was pleased with the answer.\nHis words of commendation to Simon on this occasion are a remarkable\nextension of the prophecy contained in His first greeting to him as set\nforth in John i. 42.  Matthew's version is \"Blessed art thou Simon\nBar-Jona, for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but My\nFather which is in heaven.  And I also say unto thee that thou art\nPeter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of\nHades shall not prevail against it.  I will give unto thee the keys of\nthe kingdom of heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be\nbound in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be\nloosed in heaven.\"\n\nFrom this point Simon the fisherman becomes merged in Peter the\nApostle.  His training had now reached a point when his spiritual\nperceptions were sharpened and his faith in Jesus had led to the\nejaculation which is the fundamental article of the creed of\nChristendom.  Jesus's reference to Simon on this occasion has advanced\nsomewhat in fulness since the day of their first meeting.  Then He had\nstated, \"Thou _shall be called_ a rock,\" now He avers, \"Blessed art\nthou.  Thou hast been taught of God; thou _art_ a rock, and on this\nrock will I build My Church.\"  Here was a high distinction for the\nfirst apostle; a trust was committed to him, the guardianship of the\nnewly-formed Church, and how much was involved in that he himself at\nthis particular moment could not by any means foresee.  Much discipline\nis yet needed ere he becomes fit to undertake the grand responsibility.\nProbably he does not shrink from the task, for he knows not its\nmagnitude, neither is he modest in regard to his own qualifications for\nit, as will presently appear.  He is to be taught by failure and\nhumiliation that to follow Jesus is a way of the cross, that power for\nthe duty is resident, not in Peter the Apostle but in Christ who gave\nthe commission and in the Father who revealed to him the truth about\nthe Son of God.\n\nThe period upon the consideration of which we have now entered was a\ntime of spiritual ups and downs for the Apostle Peter.  He seems to\nhave been too easily elated, though as easily abased.  He now began to\nfeel his importance, and was doubtless somewhat exalted in spirit by\nour Lord's emphatic commendation of him in the presence of the Twelve.\nHe had declared Jesus to be the Christ, but a Christ who learned\nobedience through sufferings was as yet unthinkable to him.  This crude\nperception is the explanation of the mistake into which he immediately\nfell.  No sooner had Jesus elicited the declaration that He Himself was\nthe Christ than, after charging the disciples to say nothing to any man\nin regard to it, He began to teach them the true nature of Messiahship.\nIn their several accounts of what follows the Synoptists differ a\nlittle.  Matthew (xvii. 21) implies that some time may have elapsed ere\nJesus began to systematically instruct His disciples concerning His\nvocation and death.  Luke (ix. 22) states that He continued at once in\nthe same interview to prepare them for His coming humiliation, shame,\nand death.  Luke--who, as Dr. Bruce remarks always spares the\nTwelve--says nothing about any further interference of Peter in the\nconversation.\n\nIt is to Mark that we must turn this time for the clearest account of\nwhat took place.  Peter, at any rate, never spares himself in his\nnarrations.  In chapter viii. 31, Mark tells us that after Peter's\navowal, \"Thou art the Christ,\" Jesus began to teach them that \"The Son\nof Man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the elders and the\nchief priests and the scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise\nagain.\"  It is noteworthy that in this Gospel Peter says not a word\nabout the extraordinary blessing and promise bestowed upon himself in\nconsequence of his acknowledgment of the Messiahship of Jesus.  He\ndoes, however, faithfully and humbly tell us of the severe rebuff he\nreceived for his presumption.  He was very sorry to hear Jesus predict\nHis own sufferings and death.  Such a fate did not at all accord with\nPeter's idea of the destiny of the Christ.  He could not understand it,\nand we may suppose he loved Jesus too much to be willing that He should\nsuffer anything at all, either of humiliation, rejection or failure.\nHe was not prepared, either, to believe that his own new primacy over\nthe Apostles was to result in nothing better than tragedy and defeat.\nHe clung, as we shall observe, for a long time to the notion of worldly\nhonour and advancement.  Such rewards he conceived to be in the natural\norder of things; they were the result of his preconception of the\nfunctions of the Christ of God.\n\nPerhaps, too, Peter felt somewhat elated and self-important on account\nof the words which Jesus had just applied to him, and pluming himself\nupon his exceptional privilege he undertook the duty of reproving his\nMaster.  For, Mark tells us, \"Peter took Him and began to rebuke Him.\"\nA severe reprimand followed.  \"Jesus turned about, and, seeing His\ndisciples, rebuked Peter, and saith, Get thee behind Me, Satan, for\nthou mindest not the things of God but the things of men.\"  Matthew\nadds that Jesus also said, \"Thou art a stumbling-block unto Me.\"  Luke\nkindly omits all reference to the painful moment.  Thus, in the course\nof a few moments, Peter achieved a great spiritual success and was\nguilty of an unspiritual blunder--he was exalted and humiliated,\ncommended and reproved.  In after days he remembered with peculiar\ndistinctness his lack of the true spirit at this hour, and by Mark's\nagency, therefore, faithfully reproduced for the Church of Christ the\nrecord of his well-deserved abasement.  All three Synoptists conclude\ntheir account of this scene by repeating the great saying of Jesus: \"If\nany man would come after Me let him deny himself and take up his cross\nand follow Me.  For whosoever would save his life shall lose it, and\nwhosoever shall lose his life for My sake and the Gospel's shall save\nit.  For what doth it profit a man to gain the whole world and forfeit\nhis life?  For what should a man give in exchange for his life?\"  Most\nof us find this lesson as difficult to learn as apparently Peter did.\n\nThe singular eminence of the religion of Jesus depends upon a right\napprehension of the principle just illustrated.  The Christian life is\nand must be a _Via Crucis_, yet at the same time is the way that\nleadeth unto life.  The principle of dying to live as enunciated by\nChrist differs from that of even the greatest of His predecessors in\nthe recognition that true gladness is conditioned by self-crucifixion.\nHuman nature has been slow to learn the lesson.  The great renunciation\nof Gautama Buddha, for example, consisted in the repression of\nindividuality and the destruction of the natural desires.  The effect\nof his system was negative; the higher life was to be one of\nself-suppression, a very different thing, surely, from\nself-crucifixion.  Gautama placed the ideal in ceasing to live; Christ,\non the other hand, taught His followers to live more deeply, truly and\ngrandly than before.  To follow Jesus, now as always, means to feel\nmore and not less, to add to the sum of our interests, and not to take\nfrom them, to raise the standard of our hopes, not to depress it.  Like\nGautama, He calls for a renunciation, but that renunciation is the\ngateway into larger life.  The solemn gladness of Christian experience\nfinds its parallel in no other teaching that the world has ever\nreceived.  How can we be surprised that ascetics and hedonists within\nthe bosom of the Christian Church itself have so frequently and\nlamentably mistaken the spirit of their Master's teaching?  The ideal\nof Thomas a Kempis, in spite of its beauty, is no more that of Jesus\nthan was the ideal of Gautama.  How slowly men come to learn that peace\nand tribulation, joy and suffering, gladness and the Cross, are not\nincompatible, but the very conditions of each other!\n\nBefore we visit Peter with our censures because of his unmistakable\nreluctance to accept Christ's vision of the cross let us give heed to\nourselves.  The same mistakes may take very different form.  With many\nof us the ideal of human felicity which we call Christian is\nessentially Pagan.  Our very thanksgivings show it.  We are grateful to\nGod for troubles averted, happiness preserved, fortune assured; we\ntacitly assume that the opposite of these things would have been an\nevil.  We praise the goodness of God in shielding us from the untoward\nand calamitous, and though it may seem hardly worth while to say it,\nsome naturally amiable characters with a bias toward holy things have\nlost their faith and lost their sweetness at one and the same time with\nthe arrival of sorrow.  Far be it from me to insist that men should\ncease to thank God for the sweetness and the joy of life, but if we lay\nthe stress here and refuse to take the cross when it is presented to us\nwe have shut ourselves off from the attainment of that highest good,\nwhich is to know the fellowship of the sufferings of Christ.  \"Strait\nis the gate and narrow is the way that leadeth unto life, and few there\nbe that find it.\"  If the clear truth of the necessary connection\nbetween the assumption of the cross and the attainment of true\nblessedness were to be grasped by those who seek to follow Christ,\nthere would be fewer of the sad failures so frequently apparent amongst\nthose who are disappointed with the result of their faith in God.\n\n\n  I do believe, what you call trust\n  Was self-delusion at the best: for, see!\n  So long as God would kindly pioneer\n  A path for you, and screen you from the world,\n  Procure you full exemption from man's lot,\n  Man's common hopes and fears, on the mere pretext\n  Of your engagement in His service--yield you\n  A limitless licence, make you God, in fact,\n  And turn your slave--you were content to say\n  Most courtly praises!  What is it, at last,\n  But selfishness without example?  None\n  Could trace God's will so plain as you, while yours\n  Remained implied in it; but now you fail,\n  And we, who prate about that Will, are fools!\n  In short, God's service is established here\n  As He determines fit, and not your way,\n  And this you cannot brook.[2]\n\n\nPeter's remonstrance here is but an example of a very common human\nfeeling in regard to the things of Christ.  It exhibited a certain\nimmaturity of character and crudeness of perception such as, in spite\nof his genuine affection for his Master, disqualified him at this stage\nfrom understanding Him.\n\n\n\n[1] Matt. xvi. 16, Mark viii. 29, Luke ix. 20.\n\n[2] Browning, \"Paracelsus.\"\n\n\n\n\nV.\n\nSimon Peter Witnesses the Transfiguration.\n\nAt the close of the conversation referred to above our Lord stated,\n\"There be some here of them that stand by which shall in no wise taste\nof death till they see the kingdom of God come with power.\"  About a\nweek after this promise--Mark says \"six days\" and Luke \"about eight\ndays\"--\"Jesus took with Him Peter and James and John, and went with\nthem to a high mountain apart by themselves, and was transfigured\nbefore them.\"  Matthew (chapter xvii.) says that \"His face did shine as\nthe sun and his garments became white as the light.\"  Luke beautifully\nstates that \"as he was _praying_ the fashion of His countenance was\naltered and His raiment became white and dazzling.  And behold there\ntalked with Him two men, which were Moses and Elijah, who appeared in\nglory, and spake of His decease which He was about to accomplish at\nJerusalem.\"  The three Apostles were in some danger of missing the\nvision, for, as happened afterwards in the hour of His agony, they\nslept, or at least were \"heavy with sleep.\"  However, as Luke\ncontinues, \"when they were fully awake they saw His glory, and the two\nmen who stood with Him.\"  The three Galileans were awed by the sight,\nand Peter in his perturbation broke out with an offer to build three\ntabernacles.  Mark says, \"He wist not what to answer, for they became\nsore afraid.\"  Matthew writes that, \"While He was yet speaking, behold,\na bright cloud overshadowed them; and behold, a voice out of the cloud,\nsaying, This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye Him.\nAnd when the disciples heard it, they fell on their face, and were sore\nafraid.  And Jesus came and touched them, and said, Arise, and be not\nafraid.  And lifting up their eyes, they saw no one, save Jesus only.\"\nIn the Second Epistle of Peter (i. 16-18), we have a further account,\npurporting, indeed, to be the direct statement of Peter himself, in\nregard to this extraordinary vision.  He says, \"For we did not follow\ncunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and\ncoming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of His\nmajesty.  For He received from God the Father honour and glory, when\nthere came such a voice to Him from the excellent glory, This is my\nbeloved Son, in whom I am well pleased: and this voice we ourselves\nheard come out of heaven, when we were with Him in the holy mount.\"\n\nAs they came down from the mountain Jesus \"charged them to tell no man\nuntil that He should be risen from the dead.\"  And according to Mark,\n\"they kept the saying, questioning among themselves what the rising\nagain from the dead should mean.\"  It is evident that even at this\npoint Peter had found himself unable to realise that his Master was\nreally to be crucified and slain.\n\nWe cannot but regret that the immediate effect of this glorious vision\nupon Peter and James and John seems to have been a tendency to\narrogance and ambition.  We have now hints about a division in the\nApostolic circle between the adherents of Peter and those of James and\nJohn.  Peter and the sons of Zebedee now become rivals for supremacy;\nthey had together been witnesses of the Transfiguration--a supposed\nforetaste of the earthly glory of their Master which was presently to\nappear.  Mark is our chief authority for this supposition, and we may\ntrust that in his account we have Peter's recollection of the true\nsequence of scenes and incidents.  After his record of Jesus's prophecy\nin regard to His own death he continues, \"And they came to Capernaum.\nAnd when he was in the house He asked them, What were ye reasoning in\nthe way?  But they held their peace: for they had disputed one with\nanother in the way, who was the greatest.  And He sat down and called\nthe twelve; and He saith unto them, If any man would be first, he shall\nbe last of all and servant of all.  And he took a little child, and set\nhim in the midst of them: and taking him in His arms, He said unto\nthem, Whosoever shall receive one of such little children in My name,\nreceiveth Me; and whosoever receiveth Me receiveth not Me, but Him that\nsent Me.\"  Luke in fewer words confirms this story; Matthew makes a\nvery brief reference to it, saying nothing of the dispute.\n\nMark and Luke add a reference to another incident which gives us a\nsidelight upon the then state of mind of him who came to be the\n\"beloved disciple.\"  \"John said unto Him, Master, we saw one casting\nout devils in Thy name, and we forbade him, because he followeth not\nwith us.  But Jesus said unto him, Forbid him not, for he that is not\nagainst you is for you.\" (Mark ix. 38-40, Luke ix. 49-50.)  Luke\nsubjoins a further statement about the two sons of Zebedee which, in\ncompany with the one just mentioned, leads us to imply that the three\nmost favoured Apostles were at this time in a state of mind in which\narrogance, ambition and intolerance kept company.  Jesus and His\nfollowers had been refused hospitality in a Samaritan village, and\nJames and John asked to be allowed to emulate Elijah and call down fire\nfrom heaven to consume them.  Their Master at once rebuked them, adding\nregretfully (for He must have seen very plainly how matters were going\nin His circle), \"Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of.  For the\nSon of Man came not to destroy men's lives, but to save them.\"  Mark\n(x. 35-45) relates another incident of a similar kind in which James\nand John made a bid for precedence, requesting on the strength of their\nintimacy with Him that it might be given them to sit, the one on His\nright hand, and the other on His left, in His Kingdom.  Jesus rightly\nreplied, \"Ye know not what ye ask.\"  Matthew (xx. 20) says that the\nmother of the sons of Zebedee preferred their request, and that the ten\n\"were moved with indignation concerning the two brethren.\"  Jesus was\nvery patient with them.  Looking beyond their foolish desire He\nprophesied that they should indeed drink of His cup and be baptized\nwith His baptism, and closed with a general exhortation to the twelve\nto lay aside ambition, saying, \"Whosoever would be great among you\nshall be your minister: and whosoever would be first among you shall be\nservant of all.  For verily the Son of Man came not to be ministered\nunto, but to minister, and to give His life a ransom for many.\"  (Mark\nx. 43-45.)\n\nPoor human nature!  The only evident effect so far of the high\nprivilege accorded to the three foremost apostles has been to beget\nrivalry and jealousy between them.  The Sons of Thunder display an\nintolerance and self-seeking which excite the anger of the others;\nPeter, we may be sure, included, since Peter was the person whose\nprimacy was threatened.  Peter had not yet reached the point of willing\nself-abnegation--far from it, as we shall presently see.  Our Lord's\nobject-lesson by means of a little child has, as yet, no result in the\ncharacter of the \"Prince of the Apostles.\"  He was not prepared to\nexhibit the spirit of a little child, or to conform his own disposition\nto the heart of a little child.  He was, as yet, unable to conceive how\nthe first could be last, or how the master of all could be servant of\nall.  The favour shown to him by his Divine Master has hitherto served\nbut to raise him in his own estimation.  From this point we shall see\nthat only through the experiences of humiliation and failure was Peter\nable to attain to the true idea of Christian service.\n\nThe point at which we have now arrived is one of the most instructive\nin the New Testament record of our Lord's view of true manhood.  It is\nfrequently supposed that personal ambition is an essential to the\nprogress of society.  Great thinkers, before and after Christ, have\nagreed in recognising that this particular passion has been an\ninstrument in the advancement of society, and hence has served a useful\npurpose.  Before Christ the only alternative to this view seems to have\nbeen that of the duty of quiescence, and long after Christ the same\ntheory has been very commonly held.  As examples of the former view the\nreader has only to call to mind the sentiment of Homer's immortal epic,\nor the odes of Pindar, in order to see that ambition was regarded as\nthe motor quality of heroism.  Where this selfish passion was regarded\nas an evil and renounced in favour of a supposedly higher theory of\nlife, the result nearly always took the form of asceticism or\nwithdrawal from active service in the world.  No _via media_ was\nthought of as possible between thorough-going ambition and the\n\n  ... fugitive and cloistered virtue,\n\nwhich has exhibited to the world so different an ideal.  In dreamy,\nmystical, Oriental cults we see this latter tendency carried to its\nextreme.  Almost invariably the renunciation of ambition as an\nincentive to human action has meant the disuse of many noble human\npowers and gifts.  So much has this been the case that even in our own\nday, with the Christian ideal in our possession, ambition has been\nregarded as an indispensable ingredient in most strenuous human efforts\nput forth on behalf of humanity.  Edmund Burke classifies sympathy,\nimitation and ambition together as motors in the progress of the\ncommunity.[1]  Professor Lecky, in his great work, \"The History of\nEuropean Morals,\" seems to regard it as indispensable to a vigorous\nnational life.  This great thinker, accustomed to habits of exact\nobservation, is, no doubt, right in the assumption that this position\nreceives abundant confirmation in the field of history; but have we so\n\"learned Christ\"?\n\nThe fact is that in giving to the world a higher ethical ideal in\nregard to the sanction of service Jesus must have well understood the\ndifficulties that lay before Him.  Perhaps this is why He was so\npatient with the selfish hopes of His followers in regard to their\npersonal preferment.  He must have known that the whole trend of\nhistory was against the new teaching.  It is easy for us now to say\nthat the intrusion of self-interest in any good work vitiates its value\nto a great extent; but must we not reflect that we owe this conception\nto Christ?  Society is now saturated with the ethical teaching of the\nMan of Nazareth.  We are confronted with the observation that in its\nmoral tendencies Society is moving toward an ideal which was exhibited\nto the world nearly nineteen hundred years ago.  We are not reaching\nforward to an indeterminate something in the region of morals, we are\nmoving toward a standard exhibited in a life.  Further, it is easy for\nus, reading the New Testament, to hastily judge and condemn the\nobtuseness and unspirituality of the little band that surrounded Jesus.\nThe arrogance of Peter and the selfish intrigues of the sons of Zebedee\nmove us to impatience.  How much worthier and kinder the attitude of\nour Divine Master!  He knew that a moral revolution could not be\neffected in an hour.  His object was to train the men who should\ntransform the world.  If He could possibly influence the twelve men\nwhom His Father had given Him so that they could know what they ought\nto feel and do, He could afford to be content.  The gates of Hades\nshould not prevail against the advancing Gospel.\n\nWhat, then, was His ideal?  It was nothing less than complete\nrenunciation of all self-interest without any diminution of energy and\neffort in service for the good of the world.  Jesus repudiated ambition\nin any form as the dynamic of human aspiration and endeavour.  He\nrequired from His disciples the completest self-renunciation, combined\nwith enthusiastic self-devotion to the duty of making the world better.\nTo give up self was not to give up service, it was simply the\nsubstitution of a higher motive for a lower.  This explains in a\nmeasure why Christianity came to replace the Stoic and Epicurean\nphilosophies.  Stoicism is exhibited at its best, perhaps, in the nobly\nactive life of the greatest of the Antonines.  Its ideal was rigid\ndevotion to duty, that of Christ was service inspired by love.\nAmbition is a mode of self service, yet if we may so expand the meaning\nas to make it include the Christian principle we might say that in the\nplace of ambition for the sake of self Christianity substitutes\nambition for the sake of God.  In each case it is love for a person\nthat supplies the motive for the highest human endeavours.  But how\nincomparably grander and stronger is the Christian principle than that\nwhich it replaced!  All useful or desirable things that men are\naccustomed to do for themselves Christianity requires them to do for\nGod.  When the apostles finally came to understand this new commandment\ntheir Gospel became a resistless force, and whenever since their day\nthe Church has succeeded in doing the same Christianity has arisen in\nnewness of life.\n\n\n\n[1] Essay on the Sublime and Beautiful.  Sect. xii.\n\n\n\n\nVI.\n\nPeter Thinks His Sacrifice Complete.\n\nHis Consequent Expectations.\n\nIn the three synoptical Gospels we have an account of a remarkable\nconversation between Peter and his Lord in regard to the reward\npromised to those who took service in the Kingdom of God.  The occasion\nwas one of special interest.  A rich young ruler came to Jesus to ask\nthe momentous question, \"What shall I do to inherit eternal life?\"  The\ndisciples appear to have been much impressed by the incident--Peter,\nperhaps, most of all, for in Mark's Gospel we have the best account of\nthe matter.  Jesus, he says, was attracted by the simplicity, humility\nand earnestness of one who certainly ran the risk of incurring odium by\nstooping to ask advice of the new Teacher.  Peter has preserved for us\nin one vivid sentence something of the very aspect of the Master in His\nfinal reply, \"_Jesus, looking upon him, loved him, and said unto him,\n'One thing thou lackest; go, sell whatsoever thou hast and give to the\npoor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven, and come, follow me._'\"\nThis test was too much for the seeker; he turned and \"went away\nsorrowful, for he was one that had great possessions.\"  In the\ndiscourse that followed, the Master, doubtless in a vein of mingled\nsadness and solemnity, observed, \"How hardly shall they that have\nriches enter into the Kingdom of God!\"  Peter accepting his Master's\nwords in their most literal sense, in the light of the foregoing\nincident, spoke out in his impulsive way, \"Lord, we have left all and\nfollowed Thee.  What, then, shall we have?\"\n\nTwo things in regard to this question have a certain significance for\nus.  The first, Peter's inadequate sense of the extent of the\nrenunciation he had made, and secondly, our Lord's patient and wise\nreply.  Peter evidently considered his renunciation and that of his\ncompanions to have been complete.  They had abandoned their fishing\nnets, and to a certain extent their homes.  They had done so on the\nunderstanding that He who summoned them was the promised Messiah and\nfuture King of Israel, and therefore would be able in the future to\ncompensate all who associated themselves with Him to their own loss.\nWe must not suppose that this was the leading motive which attracted\nSimon and the sons of Zebedee to the new Prophet, but it is very clear\nthat after they had been associated with Jesus for some time ambitious\nhopes for place and power began to take possession of their hearts.  Of\nthis we have already considered an example.  Up to the present they had\nmisapprehended the deepest principle of the Master's teaching; they\nfelt that abandonment of their accustomed pursuits and possessions\nmerited a present and material reward not to be long delayed.  Hence\nPeter's question--a question which no doubt related to the expectations\nof his companions also.  The idea of a renunciation of _themselves_, a\nspiritual renunciation, had not yet become clear to them.  From our\npoint of view it is surprising that they should so long have\nmisunderstood.\n\nHad He to whom the inquiry was addressed been as most of us are, Peter\nwould have received another sharp rebuke.  How different is Jesus's\nanswer on this occasion from the stern, \"Get thee behind me, Satan!\" of\na little while before!  The difference is due to the fact that, in this\ncase, Peter spoke of his own renunciation, while in the former case he\nhad ventured to interfere with his Master's.  Jesus therefore replied\nwith a patience and kindness that were possible only to one who saw far\nbeyond the moment.  \"There is no man,\" said He, \"that hath left house\nor brethren or sisters or mother or father or children or lands for My\nsake, and for the Gospel's sake, but he shall receive a hundredfold now\nin this time, houses and brethren and sisters and mothers and children\nand lands with persecutions; and in the world to come eternal life.\nBut many that are first shall be last, and the last first.\"  Some have\nobjected to the tenor of this reply, arguing that it held out false\nhopes to those who heard it, and that to promise such a reward was in\nany case to lower somewhat the ideal of service.  When, however, we\nlook forward to the noble fulfilment of the promise we cannot but think\nthe spirit of it altogether worthy of Jesus.  It is a continuance of\nthe superhuman insight which had led Him to assert on His first meeting\nwith Simon, \"Thou shalt be called _Rock_.\"  If Mark's Gospel is really\nPeter's memoirs it is probable that the story of this promise was\ncommitted to writing long after Peter had begun to recognise its\nmeaning.  He who afterwards at the Beautiful Gate of the Temple\naddressed the cripple who asked for money was a nobler Peter than the\none who now sought a similar gift for himself.  \"Silver and gold have I\nnone, but such as I have give I unto thee.  In the name of Jesus Christ\nof Nazareth, rise up and walk.\"  \"_Such as I have!_\"  Who would not\ndesire to share in a possession so rich?  Silver and gold, social and\npolitical prominence, had faded into nothingness in the presence of the\nprivilege of speaking \"in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth.\"\n\n\n  A mortal, sin's familiar friend, doth here\n  Avow that he will give all earth's reward,\n  But to believe and humbly teach the faith,\n  In suffering and poverty and shame,\n  Only believing he is not unloved.[1]\n\n\n\n[1] R. Browning, Pauline.\n\n\n\n\nVII.\n\nThe Scene in the Upper Room.\n\nAs our Lord's earthly ministry draws to a close the spiritual history\nof the first Apostles reaches a crisis.  The scene in the Upper Room\nhas for us a special interest in this connection.  It is recorded in\nall the four Gospels in such a manner as to establish its importance\nand historicity.  As usual Peter's own account is the most vivid, but\nLuke supplies us with a sentence from which we learn more of the state\nof affairs than is given by the other three.  This is exceptional, for\nLuke, as a rule, idealises the Apostles.  He tells us that \"there arose\nalso a contention among them which of them is accounted to be\ngreatest.\"  We see then that even into the Upper Room and to the last\nSupper had penetrated the jealousies, rivalries and ambitions of these\nfew men who were afterwards to become heroes of the Cross.  We only\nassociate the upper room with thoughts of peace and sacredness, but\nhere is another side of the matter.  It may well be that the little\nmeeting ended in solemnity and quietness, but it can hardly have begun\nso.  The stamp of truth seems to rest on John's account of what took\nplace, simply because it expresses so naturally Jesus's method of\ndealing with the contention which Luke says was in existence.  He rose\nfrom the table and performed for His followers the ceremony their\njealousy of one another had made them omit.  The foot-washing may have\nhad a direct reference to the future practice of mutual service, but it\nhad also an immediate significance.  The disciples refused to wash one\nanother's feet, and the Lord and Master of them all undertook the duty\nHimself.  Perhaps the change of feeling induced by this simple and\nlowly act made possible the beautiful utterances which only John has\npreserved for us (John xiii.-xvii.).\n\nIn the forefront of this discourse, however, Jesus exchanged a few\nsentences of special emphasis with Peter.  \"Simon, Simon,\" He declared,\n\"behold, Satan, asked to have you that he might sift you as wheat; but\nI made supplication for thee, that thy faith fail not; and do thou,\nwhen once thou hast turned again, stablish thy brethren.\"  This\nstatement of tender solicitude must have been called forth by His\nknowledge of the contention which had been taking place.  Doubtless He\nwas filled with sorrow that Peter had not yet learned the lesson of\nhumility and self-forgetfulness.  He foresaw the failure, the\ncowardice, the denial, but He foresaw, too, the repentance, the\nrestoration, and the greater Peter whose strength should lie in his\nhumility and willingness to be led by the Spirit of God.  But at this\nmoment the very last person to see any need of such a change was Peter\nhimself.  Jesus went on to describe what in the time immediately\nfollowing would happen to the little band.  \"All ye,\" He said, \"shall\nbe offended in Me this night, for it is written, Ye shall smite the\nShepherd, and the sheep of the flock shall be scattered abroad.\"  Peter\ninstantly declared, \"Though all shall be offended in Thee I will never\nbe offended.\"  What feelings were contending in his mind at the moment\nwe can only conjecture.  Possibly he felt a little sore at the implied\nrebuke contained in the foot-washing and in the prophecy of the sifting\nwhich had followed it.  More probably, however, the simple affection\nwhich he really had for his Master impelled him to declare his loyalty.\n\"Exceeding vehemently,\" according to his own account, he persisted, \"If\nI must _die_ with Thee I will not deny Thee.\"  He felt it was possible\nthat Jesus might in the coming danger need to rely upon the services of\nan active and courageous friend like himself.  Doubtless he felt every\nword he said, but he also felt the importance of the assistance he\ncould render to Jesus.  It never occurred to him that Jesus had no need\nof his assistance.  Peter needed a sharp lesson, and ere long he had\nit.  The secret of true service consists in self-emptying.  He learned\nthe true spirit of his Master's teaching only after the utter and\npainful failure of his own self-confident promises.  For the present\nJesus's only reply was, \"Verily I say unto thee, that thou, to-day,\neven this night, before the cock crow twice shalt deny me thrice.\"\n\n\n\n\nVIII.\n\nGethsemane and After.\n\nThe testing time was not far distant.  Peter, filled with determination\nto show his loyalty and courage, seems to have carried away from the\nupper room one of two swords that had lain therein.  He believed\nhimself ready for emergencies, but failed at the very outset to give\nwhat his Master really needed.  Once again we find the story told best\nby Peter himself.  He, James and John were stationed by their Master's\ndesire a little nearer to His person than were the others.  Most\npathetically Jesus entreated their sympathy.  \"My soul is exceeding\nsorrowful even unto death.  Abide ye here and watch.\"  This, however,\nthey proved themselves unable to do.  Luke says they were \"sleeping for\nsorrow,\" and most likely this is in a measure true.  They could not\nhave been indifferent to their Master's trouble.  He had given them\nsufficient opportunity to observe His state of mind, and doubtless they\nhad done so, and were stirred with affectionate sympathy.  Nevertheless\nthis sympathy did not go so far as to enable them to share in His\nvigil.  Probably Peter considered himself as a guard to His person--the\nintensity of his Master's agony he could not understand.  His emphatic\npromise in the upper room, however, was being badly fulfilled.  Even if\nhe were no more than a guard to Christ's person he should have kept\nawake.  In his own account of the scene he places the emphasis on this\npoint: \"And He cometh and findeth them sleeping, and saith unto Peter,\nSimon, sleepest _thou_?  Couldest thou not watch _one hour_?  Watch and\npray, that ye enter not into temptation.\"  The implied reproach here\nhas reference almost certainly to the vehemence of Peter's promise of\nsuperior loyalty.  \"Though all shall be offended yet will not I.\"\nJesus gently reminded him of the promise, and signified that he had\nbegun badly in the way of keeping it.  The Master recognised, however,\nthe sincerity and simple affection of the Apostle in His concluding\nwords, \"The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.\"\n\nEven while Jesus was speaking the surprise came.  Judas and the rabble\nwith swords, staves and lanterns burst into the garden.  Instantly all\nwas confusion and alarm; only Jesus remained calm and self-possessed.\nJudas stepped forward and kissed Him; the disciples hurried to His\nside, Peter drew his sword, and without waiting for explanations struck\nat the foremost of the advancing band.  The act was one of sheer folly;\nit might have involved himself and his companions in one common ruin.\nSo far from saving Jesus it was Jesus who now saved him.  The Master\nturned hastily round and with quick gesture bade Peter restore the\nsword to its place, saying, \"They that take the sword shall perish with\nthe sword.\"  The statement no doubt had immediate reference to Peter's\nrashness.  Jesus saw that any of His disciples taken with arms in their\nhands would forfeit their lives.  The warning did not need to be\nrepeated; Peter's new-found courage had already deserted him.  The\nassailants seem to have been in similar case.  To save His disciples\nJesus confronted them, and as He advanced they retreated, stumbling\nover one another, till, as John relates, they fell to the ground.\n\n\"Whom seek ye?\" asked the victim of Pharisaic hate.  \"Jesus of\nNazareth,\" they replied.  \"I am He,\" was the rejoinder, and then, with\na thoughtfulness and love of which in this dreadful hour Jesus only\nseems to have been capable, He continued, \"If therefore ye seek Me let\nthese go their way.\"  For some moments the officers hesitated; the\nmajesty and dignity of Him whom they had come to seize cast a spell\nupon them; no one liked to be the first to arrest Him, and Jesus had to\ndeclare Himself a second time ere the leaders ventured to execute their\ncommission.  The moment this was done, however, \"all the disciples left\nHim.  and fled.\"\n\nSo far Peter's self-assertion had ended in failure, but further\nhumiliation was yet to come.  He could not bear to remain in ignorance\nof the fate of a Master whom he really and truly loved; so, checking\nhis flight, when he saw the procession move off he followed it at a\nsafe distance.  His friend and partner, John, who appears to have had\nfriends in the house of Caiaphas, obtained admission for him and he\nwaited therein, as Matthew says, \"to see the end.\"  All his bravery had\nnow deserted him; he was in a strange city where men of his province\nwere despised and ridiculed.  He was only a humble fisherman, and\nstricken with fear by finding himself in the power of authorities\necclesiastical and secular.  Humanly speaking, his next mistake was one\nthat might have been prophesied.  He was discovered and questioned; in\nhis bewilderment and terror all the coarseness of his old Galilean life\nreturned upon him, and, forgetful of everything but the desire of\nsaving himself, he denied his Master, with cursing and swearing.  Jesus\ndirected upon him a second reproach, this time a mute one.  He \"turned\nand looked upon Peter,\" but that look was enough.  It brought him to\nhis senses, laid bare his miserable failure, ingratitude, cowardice and\nbroken promises.  He saw how completely he had fallen beneath himself\nby over-confidence in himself.  The Peter of that moment was not the\nreal Peter, after all.  He did love his Master, and had run the risk of\narrest and death to get near Him again, but his humiliation was\ncomplete and his self-abasement intense.  \"He went out and wept\nbitterly.\"  Shall we say that the experience of the next few days was\nthe greatest crisis in his career?  From this depth of humiliation he\nrose qualified to become an ambassador and a saviour.\n\n\n\n\nIX.\n\nThe Power of the Resurrection.\n\nWe know nothing of Peter's history during the anguished hours that\nintervened between the Crucifixion and the Resurrection, but we may\nbelieve that his shame and contrition continued until Jesus Himself\nbreathed in his ear words of forgiveness and hope.  We may infer\nindirectly that Peter must have been humbled by the recollection of his\nown self-confident boasting in the presence of the other apostles, for\nwe find him still in association with them.  The little company seems\nto have held together to mourn their lost Master and to assist each\nother with a common sympathy.  That Peter must have been with them is\nclear from the fact that he was mentioned by name to the women who\nvisited the tomb on the first day of the week.  \"Go, tell His disciples\n_and Peter_, He goeth before you into Galilee.\"  When we consider that\nPeter still associated with those who had listened to his\nself-confident assumption of superiority to themselves we can discern\nsomething more than remorse in his demeanour.  There is evidence of a\nnew humility, and yet at the same time a continuance of tender\naffection for the Lord whom he fully believed he should never see again.\n\nThere is one incident in which Jesus was concerned after the\nResurrection of which there is no record--there could be none.  It is\nthe first interview between Jesus and Peter after the Resurrection.\nThe disciples in the upper room were informed that the Lord had\nappeared unto Simon.  What took place at that first meeting we can\nnever imagine; it must have been a season of such sacredness and\nsolemnity that Peter would not be likely to say much about it to his\nbrethren.  The loving thoughtfulness of Jesus bade Him seek out His\nhumiliated and sorrow-stricken follower that He might assure him of\nforgiveness and restoration.  Very intense and holy must their\nintercourse have been.  From this moment Peter became a great and noble\ncharacter; his discipline has not been for nothing, his self-seeking is\nat an end; ambition has no place in his mind for the future; arrogance\nand self-confidence thenceforth must have given place to a lowliness\nborn of the remembrance of his cowardice and wretched failure.  When in\nafter days he wrote for the guidance of the saints he was writing from\nthe depths of his own experience: \"Yea, all of you gird yourselves with\nhumility to serve one another, for God resisteth the proud, but giveth\ngrace to the humble\" (1 Peter v. 5).\n\nThe appearance of genuineness rests upon this New Testament story.  In\nits idyllic simplicity and faithfulness to the facts of human nature it\nstands in marked contrast to the spurious and unauthorised legends\nabout Jesus and His Apostles with which the sub-apostolic age abounded.\nThe Church has not lost much, in all probability, by the oblivion in\nwhich these lesser gospels have been buried.  To unearth them now\nwould, no doubt, be of service in throwing light upon critical problems\nin regard to the existing New Testament texts, but they could add\nnothing to the sweet and natural accounts of the spiritual history of\nthe men who guided the early Church.  We know Peter better from the\npages of the four Gospels than we do from legendary accounts.\nIndirectly this faithfulness of the evangelic records is of great\nassistance in establishing their historicity.  Nothing is concealed, or\ntoned down, that we ought to know, nothing that would tend to represent\nthe Apostles as superhuman or exceptional in their lofty character is\nthrust upon our notice; we are permitted to see Peter as he really was,\na man made noble by the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ.\n\nWhat he was, we are.  Ambition, self-seeking, self-confidence, have\nthroughout the history of Christendom been the most serious defects of\nthe strongest characters.  Sometimes these vices have been displayed\nupon a grand scale, oftener their scope has been petty and mean.  The\nsins of the Catholic Church, as painted by a Bernard or a Catherine of\nSiena, are to be found in many a little Bethel in the Protestant\nEngland of our day.  Simony is not unknown amongst the ministers of\nChrist, even in the ranks of Non-conformity.  Not unfrequently these\nsinful tendencies are to be found allied with a true and earnest desire\nto serve the Master.  All the same, they are a serious hindrance, not\nonly to Christian character, but to the effect of Christian service;\nthe spirit in which a man does his work has the profoundest influence\nupon the good result of that work.  Where a man is sincere in his wish\nto do good, and yet at the same time in any degree the victim of his\nown self-confidence or self-seeking, he is sooner or later brought to\nthe point where he must choose between his wish and his practice.  In\nnearly every case the necessity for this choice is revealed to him by a\nsharp discipline.  Peter's case is repeated again and again in the\nlives of the servants of God.  It is hard to dislodge self from its\nvantage-ground in the region of human motives.  It would be hard to\nfind a church in which selfishness or jealousy had neither place nor\ninfluence, and it is uncommonly difficult, even for a good and true\nman, not to feel elated by admiration or depressed by being surpassed.\nBut surely the cure for this kind of feeling is included in the very\nnature of Christian service.  There is absolutely no relation between\nmoral excellence and worldly recognition of it.  We have conceded\nsomething to the world when we stop to think of its applause as an\nobject of desire.  It is easier to go without such applause and to\nlabour in obscurity than it is to remain unaffected by it once it has\nbeen bestowed.  Still harder is it for a man to retire from a position\nand a duty in which he has done nobly and well, and then to see his\nbishopric taken by another.  Sooner or later this experience falls to\nthe lot of most of God's heroes; it were well, therefore, that they\nshould recognise it in advance, count the cost, know their own minds,\nand render unnecessary the sharp discipline which accompanies\nself-discovery.  When God means to use us, as He meant to use Peter, He\nnever spares us.  Jesus could not afford to allow Peter to go his own\nway, and therefore it was that the prince of the Apostles became an\ninstrument for good, yet so as by fire.\n\n\n\n\nX.\n\nA New Commission.\n\nAlthough, however, our Lord had in such a beautiful and thoughtful way\nrestored His poor, self-abased disciple in private, Peter had still a\nnecessary discipline to undergo.  He had sinned in the presence of\nothers, it was necessary that others should know of the new\nunderstanding between his Master and himself.  Only John has preserved\nthe record of the conversation in which this new understanding was\ndeclared.  But Peter himself distinctly refers to it in his Second\nEpistle (i., 14).  John tells us in the last chapter of his Gospel that\nPeter and a few of the accustomed circle went fishing on the Lake of\nTiberias.  Peter's announcement, \"I go a fishing,\" has sometimes been\ntaken to imply that he had determined to renounce apostleship and\nreturn to his old life, that, in short, he was disappointed with the\nreward of following Jesus and disenchanted with the vision of a Kingdom\nof God.  \"I go a fishing,\" therefore, has been construed to mean \"I\nabandon these dreams; they have brought me no advantage; I will go back\nto my fisherman's boat and my fisherman's home.\"  It is difficult to\nsee what justification there is for this theory.  Peter was simply\ncontinuing habits he had never entirely renounced.  Neither he nor John\nhad any intention of dismissing all thought of Jesus or of abandoning\nHis service when they entered upon this particular fishing expedition.\nOn the contrary, it is probable that their minds, hearts and\nconversation were full of the marvels which had occurred since first\nthe vision of angels had informed them that Jesus was alive.  No doubt\nthey were full of expectancy in regard to the place and time of His\nnext appearance.  About daybreak, as they drew near to the shore, they\nperceived some one standing on the beach whom presently they made out\nto be the Lord.  John was the first to recognise Him, and told Peter,\nwho instantly leaped into the sea and went to Him.  Jesus had prepared\na meal for the hungry disciples, and waited till they had broken their\nfast before entering upon the serious subject which occupied His mind\nand, perhaps, Peter's.\n\nPossibly Peter had some knowledge of what Jesus intended to say, though\nnot of the form in which it was to be said.  In the previous and more\nprivate interview the Master had most likely signified to the disciple\nthat the protestations he had made in the presence of others in the\nupper room would have to be referred to again in the presence of some\nat least of those who had first heard them.  He could not, therefore,\nhave been surprised at the three questions now addressed to him.\n\"Simon, son of John,\" said the Master, \"lovest thou Me more than these\n([Greek: _agapao_])?\"  The now humbled Simon replied in lowly terms by\nappealing to Jesus's personal knowledge of him, and in particular,\nperhaps, to their previous private conversation.  \"Yea, Lord,\" said he,\n\"Thou knowest that I love Thee\" ([Greek: _philo_]).  The reference to\nthe upper room is distinctly seen both in question and answer.  In the\nformer case Simon had claimed for himself a superiority in devotion.\nHe had offered to his Master the loyalty of a soldier to his captain or\nof a friend to his friend.  He had assumed that his assistance was of\nimportance to Jesus; he had offered to devote himself as a patriot\nmight to his country, or a hero to a cause.  Of this Jesus now reminded\nhim by the use of a single word ([Greek: _agapas_]).  The English New\nTestament rendering of this passage fails to convey its full\nsignificance.  Peter surrendered his whole position; he had no\nintention of doing more than affirming what Christ already knew, that\neven in the midst of his boasting, desertion and denial, he had very\nreally and truly loved his Master with a deep and tender affection.\nThis he expressed in his careful answer by the use of the word [Greek:\n_philo_].[1]  In effect, he now offers the love that a child might give\nto a parent.  He is conscious he can confer no benefit upon Christ, nor\nbe of any service to Him beyond the powers of other people.  Very\nhumbly, therefore, he asserts that his heart is true.  He loves his\nMaster, and his Master knows it.\n\nThree times does Jesus put the same question, on each occasion\nfollowing up the answer by giving to Peter a new and glorious\ncommission.  He was to feed the lambs and tend the sheep.  As Peter had\ndenied Him three times so now he is interrogated three times concerning\nhis loyalty.  The third test was the closest.  Jesus takes up Peter's\nown word, and asks him \"[Greek: _phileis me_].\"  The narrative goes on\nto say that Peter was grieved because he was asked the third time\n\"Lovest thou Me?\"  Here we see, however, that the source of his sorrow\nwas that Jesus should appear to doubt his humble use of the humblest\nword he could find to express his unchanging affection for the Master\nwho had restored him to his better self.  Jesus had pressed the\nquestion home by adopting Peter's word, and the earnest reply which\nfollowed satisfied Him.  \"Yea, Lord,\" said poor Simon, \"Thou knowest\nall things; Thou knowest that I love Thee.\"  Then said Jesus, \"Feed my\nsheep.\"  Peter, though he hardly knew it, was now more ready for\nservice than he had ever been before.  Christ had accepted the service\nof one who now rated his own value so low.  From henceforth, indeed, he\nwas to be a fisher of men.  It had taken a long time to lead Peter to\nthis point, yet Jesus had foreseen it at their first meeting in\nBethabara beyond Jordan.  Very patiently had He trained him from the\nhour in which, with prophetic insight, He had said, \"I will make you\n_to become_ a fisher of men.\"  Now indeed He could set him to work.\nNow He could trust him with the sublime duty of being the rock on which\nthe new-born Church should rest.\n\n\n\n[1] In whatever language they were originally spoken there is a\npresumption amounting to certainty that the careful use of these words\nin the Greek of John's Gospel corresponded to the shade of meaning\nemployed both by Jesus and Peter.\n\n\n\n\nXI.\n\nThe Prince of the Apostles.\n\nJesus's closing words to Peter as we have them in the 21st of St. John\ncould only have been spoken to one who had advanced far beyond the\npoint at which ease, honour or riches were regarded as motives for\nservice in the Kingdom of God.  What a contrast between the Peter who\ninquired, \"What shall we have therefore?\" and the Peter to whom the\nsolemn assertion was made, \"Verily, verily, I say unto thee, when thou\nwast young thou girdedst thyself, and walkedst whither thou wouldest:\nbut when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and\nanother shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wouldest not.  Now\nthis He spake, signifying by what manner of death he should glorify\nGod.  And when He had spoken this, He saith unto him, Follow Me.\"  Here\nagain is a distinct reference to the \"Lo, we have left all and followed\nThee\" of an earlier day.  Peter is now informed that he is to expect\nstripes, imprisonment, martyrdom.  He is to glorify God in sufferings\nand death.  He can be under no further misapprehension as to the\nmeaning of Christ's mission and work for and amongst men.  \"Follow Me!\"\nmeant more now than it had done the first time he heard it by the Lake\nof Galilee.  Calvary had supplied the interpretation.  Peter's new\ncommission began at the Cross.  Prominence in the Kingdom had been\ngiven to him, but that prominence was a prominence of suffering.  He\nwas to be first of all, not in ease, reputation or power, but first in\nthe difficulties, the dangers and trials of the little community he had\nnow to shepherd.  In the Second Epistle of Peter i. 14, there is a\npathetic confirmation in Peter's own words of the solemn charge\naddressed to him by the Lake of Tiberias: \"I think it right, as long as\nI am in this tabernacle, to stir you up by putting you in remembrance;\nknowing that the putting off of my tabernacle cometh swiftly, even as\nour Lord Jesus Christ signified unto me.  Yea, I will give diligence\nthat at every time ye may be able after my decease to call these things\nto remembrance.\"\n\nOne or two instances might here be cited as evidence of the new spirit\nwhich animated him who was now prince of the Apostles.  In John xxi.\n20-23 we have given to us in a few words the earliest instance of\nPeter's new-found desire of self-abnegation.  \"Peter, turning about,\nseeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following....  Peter therefore\nseeing him saith to Jesus, Lord, and what shall this man do?  Jesus\nsaith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to\nthee?  Follow thou Me.\"  Curiously enough, this incident has been\nvariously misinterpreted.  Peter has been accused of idle curiosity or\nof semi-discontent at the comparison of his own hard lot with the\nprobable happier fortune of the Apostle John.[1]  The reply of Jesus to\nthe inquiry has therefore been represented as a sharp and well-deserved\nrebuke.  It can hardly be that any of these explanations represent the\ntrue state of the case.  The truth would rather seem to be that Peter\nshrank from the new responsibility and prominence which had been\nassigned to him, and would willingly have become a follower of his old\nrival, now his companion and friend.  John was the disciple who\nunderstood his Master most nearly--the one \"whom Jesus loved.\"  He had\nbeen present with Peter on the Mount of Transfiguration, in Gethsemane\nand in the house of Caiaphas.  Peter in old days had been jealous of\nhim, and this jealousy had led to strife among the disciples.  He was\nin no mood to strive for preference now.  The disciple whom Jesus loved\nhad, he thought, a better right to tend the sheep and feed the lambs\nthan he had.  John was the only one who had not entirely abandoned his\nMaster; he had followed Him to the midnight trial, he had been present\nat the Crucifixion, and been the recipient of a pathetic commission\nthereat--namely, to take care of Jesus's mother.  Peter now felt that\nJohn was a worthier leader of the Apostolic Church than he himself\ncould hope to be.  No doubt the arrest of Jesus had drawn them more\nclosely together.  John had done him the service of obtaining his\nadmission to the house of Caiaphas.  He had remained with him most\nlikely in the dark hours before the resurrection morning; he\naccompanied him to the tomb; he was with him now.  How could Peter\nbetter exemplify his humility than by his unwillingness to take\nprecedence of a man whose true nobility and generosity he had now\nproved to the full?  Jesus's answer gave in very brief terms a forecast\nof John's function in the Kingdom, and re-emphasized for Peter the\nimportance of unquestioning obedience.  He said, in effect: John's\ncommission will not affect yours.  I have chosen.  Suppose that yours\nis to strive and lead, and his to stand and wait?  How will his\ncommission affect the faithful discharge of yours?\n\nHow thoroughly both Peter and John accepted the positions allocated to\nthem their immediate after history shows.  Peter led the van, John\nserved in silence.  Their friendship continued and expanded.  For the\nfuture we hear much of \"Peter and John.\"  These two began a new\nfriendship.  John shared in Peter's punishment; if Peter did the\nspeaking alone, John took the imprisonments with him.  As they had been\ntogether on the Mount of Transfiguration, together in Gethsemane,\ntogether in the hall of Caiaphas, so now they remained together in\nspirit until the day of Peter's martyrdom came.  (Acts iii. 1-iv.)\n\nIn a certain sense we have now reached the beginning rather than the\nend of the life and work of the Apostle Peter.  From the point at which\nmost of the particulars regarding his personality cease to be afforded\nin the New Testament commences the astonishing work of which he was in\na sense the leader and inspiration.  A few Galilean fishermen set to\nwork to turn the world upside down.  The vast and venerable fabric of\nthe Christian Church reposes upon such foundations as we have\nconsidered.  This revolution wrought in the history of the world is a\nmoral miracle.  The task essayed was stupendous.  Neither Peter nor his\ncompanions could have estimated its magnitude or foreseen its triumph.\nThat he himself should come to be regarded as the first and greatest of\nthe long line of sovereign pontiffs of the Roman Church we may be sure\nnever occurred to him.  He entered upon his task in faith, leaving\nresults to the great Master whom He served.  Compared with the great\nApostle of the Gentiles he was neither wise nor learned; he was but one\nof the weak things of earth chosen to confound the mighty.  The Holy\nSpirit rested upon him for service.  He was a willing instrument whom\nGod could use because self-seeking was entirely banished from his\nmotives and desires.  How this came to be so we have just seen.  It was\nJesus who made Peter what he was.  Jesus believed in him from the\nfirst, knew him better than he knew himself, and looked to the Peter\nthat was to be rather than the Simon that was.  Jesus dealt with him in\npatience and love such as fills us with wonderment.  Who but Jesus\nwould have thought it worth while to do it?  What He did for Simon the\nfisherman He is still able to do for all who yield themselves to Him.\nThere is nothing impossible with Christ.  The weakest and most sinful\namongst us is of infinite value to Him.  How many of us are saints in\nthe making!  May the story of His dealings with one life lead us all to\nthe same experience of faithful and loving obedience.  May it be ours\nto respond even through stumblings and failures to His gracious\ninvitation, \"Follow Me!\"  He will lead us from strength to strength, we\nshall learn of Him and find rest unto our souls.\n\n\n\n[1] Bruce, \"Training of the Twelve,\" p. 511.\n\n\n\n\nLONDON:\n\nW. SPEAIGHT AND SONS, PRINTERS,\n\nFETTER LANE, E.C.","title":"The Making of an Apostle","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":14973}