Was Peter indeed "long on words and short on courage" as often alleged in association with Jesus' arrest? Hardly. For starters, the timorous do not engage an armed mob single handedly (John 18:10). What then was involved?
Having earlier pronounced Peter "a man of revelation" in consequence of his "Great Confession," Jesus then commissioned him leader of the Church that would soon follow: "You are Peter ('rock') and upon this [large] rock I will build my Church... and I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven" (Matt. 16:17-19). Given the intense and ongoing rivalry among the Twelve, one can only imagine the other Disciples' response.
Nor had Jesus' intent been lost on the subject himself. In a less than inspired endeavor to exercise the authority of leader-designate, Peter drew Christ's stinging rebuke for so lacking in discernment as to render himself an offensive surrogate of Satan (Matt. 16:21-23). Following the build-up Jesus had just given him, such constituted a devastating humiliation, particularly in the presence of the other Disciples.
Seemingly without reason, Jesus continued to "cut Peter down." Seeking, at the Last Supper, to spare Christ the lowly task of servanthood, Peter is offered the option of agreement or expulsion - so forcing a rather inglorious retreat (John 13:3-9). Yet again, following Jesus' unsettling disclosure of impending treason from within the Twelve, Peter's pledge of loyalty is not only rejected, but his stated willingness to die with Christ if necessary pronounced an untruth (Luke 22:33-34). At this point, Peter's ego is taking a beating.
Removing to Gethsemane, Jesus struggles and his Disciples seek to cope with growing uncertainty. The apprehension becomes palpable as an armed mob intent on Jesus' apprehension approaches. Unhesitatingly, Peter steps forward. Despite having been openly branded as lacking in truth and loyalty, Peter will show whether or not he will die for Christ. With slashing sword he charges the mob. There is no surer way of dying on the spot.
It is one thing to be humbled in the presence of friends; it is quite another to be humiliated before one's enemies. Rebuking Peter before them all, Jesus then heals the casualty of his onslaught (Matt. 26:51-54; Luke 22:51; John 18:10-22). Not only has Peter's willingness to make the supreme sacrifice for Christ been spurned; he has obviously been "set up" - Jesus himself having instructed the Twelve to arm themselves prior to departing for the Garden (Luke 22:36-38). Disbelieving and increasingly distraught, Peter leaves.
Arriving at the High Priest's court where Jesus is to be arraigned, Peter is incredulous at Jesus' refusal to defend himself or to salvage the cause for which the Twelve, including Peter, have forsaken all (Matt. 4:20; Mark 10:28). It is enough. Angry and embittered, Peter calls it "quits." We all know the story.
Yet Peter was not abandoned. While he would see it only in retrospect, Jesus had predicted Peter's lapse together with the stipulation that upon his restoration, he would yet assume the role of leadership - here defined in terms of "strengthening the brethren" (Luke 22:32). Later, upon having specifically requested to meet with Peter (Mark 16:7), Jesus not only renewed the call originally issued some three and one half years prior to "follow me" (Matt. 4:19; John 21:19), but again confirmed Peter's call to leadership in terms of "feed[ing] my lambs and my sheep" (John 21:15-17).
What had it all been about? Simply that it had been necessary to first "break" Peter in such a way that he might effectively become that for which, and to which, Christ had called him. It had been a hard lesson. Yet today, the Body of which Peter prematurely sought to assume leadership in the Upper Room - together with Paul's subsequent apostleship in terms of expanding the faith among the Gentiles - is the Church of which you and I are now members.
Burl Ratzsch
