In the somewhat common ascription of cowardice to Peter at the time of Jesus' arrest ("long on words and short on courage" as it is sometimes put), might it be that we have rendered him a considerable injustice? The answer is yes. For starters, the timorous do not engage an armed mob single handedly (John 18:10).
In so doing we have additionally missed the point of what actually took place at this time in terms of the apostle's relationship to Christ - an insight sometimes useful in defining our own struggles and times of testing. What then was the issue in relation to Peter's spiritual lapse?
Having earlier pronounced Peter a "man of revelation" in consequence of his "Great Confession," Jesus, in his following play on words, then commissioned him leader of the Church that would soon follow: "You are Peter [i.e.,'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 rivalry among the Twelve, one can only imagine the other Disciple's 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 highly sought-after status just accorded him (hence the Twelve's endless wrangling over order and precedence - "who's the greatest," etc.) such upbraiding constituted a devastating humiliation, particularly in the presence of the other Disciples.
Seemingly without reason, Jesus continued to "cut Peter down." Seeking to spare Christ the lowly role of servanthood in washing their feet at the Last Supper, Peter is offered the option of agreement or expulsion - so forcing his rather inglorious retreat (John 13:3-9).
Yet again, following Jesus' disclosure of impending treason within the apostolic circle, Peter's pledge of loyalty is not only rejected but his stated willingness, if necessary, to die with Christ is designated an untruth. At this point Peter's ego is taking a beating.
Removing to Gethsemane, Jesus struggles and his Disciples seek to cope with a growing sense of uncertainty. The apprehension becomes palpable as an armed mob intent on taking Jesus approaches. Despite having been openly branded a liar, Peter will now 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 18:10-11). Disbelieving and increasing distraught, Peter leaves.
Arriving at the High Priest's court where Jesus is being arraigned, Peter is incredulous at Christ's refusal to defend himself or to salvage the cause for which the Twelve, himself included, have forsaken all (Matt. 4:20-22; Mark 10:28). It is enough. Angry and embittered, Peter calls it "quits." We all know the story.
Yet Peter was not abandoned. Although he would understand it all only in retrospect, Jesus had predicted his failure along with the stated stipulation that upon his restoration, Peter would yet assume the role of leadership - here defined in terms of "strengthening the brethren" (Luke 22:32) and feeding Christ's sheep and lambs (John 21:15-17; "tend my lambs... tend my sheep," NASB).
What had it all been about? Simply that it had been necessary to first "break" Peter in such a way that he might effectively fulfill the role to which he had been called. It had been a difficult time and experience. Yet today, that Body of which Peter would assume leadership at Pentecost is the Church to which all true believers - ourselves included - now belong.
Burl Ratzsch
