Peter

Peter was the rock, the one on whom Jesus would build his church; he was a leader among the disciples, one of only three to witness the Transfiguration; he was the one who declared that Jesus was the Christ. (See Matthew 16:13 – 17:13). Peter was also the one who got it wrong: he was rebuked by Jesus (Matthew 16:23), and he denied that he knew Jesus (Matthew 26:69-75). He had been warned that he would do this, but had not really believed that he would or could; he had fallen asleep, rather than praying for strength, an understandable reaction to stressful circumstances, but one that may have influenced future events. But he had said that he would never fall away, and he tried to remain true to his word. He followed Jesus to the High Priest’s house, rather than running away with the other disciples. In all fairness to Peter, that must have taken some courage, and a certain amount of willingness to follow wherever Jesus went. Was he alone, afraid and trying to hide in the darkness? When put in the spotlight, he denied he knew Jesus; once that first denial had happened, he may have felt that he had to continue. Two more denials followed, before the cock crowed. That brought one incident back into Peter’s mind: Jesus’ earlier warning, that Peter would do exactly as he had just done – deny Jesus three times before the cock crows. Peter leaves, weeping bitterly. (See Matthew 26).

I wonder how crucial those tears were? How healing? Peter knew that he let down his master, that he had failed. But it was not the end; Peter went back to the other disciples, rather than hiding away, or going back to Galilee. We know he was with them when the news of Jesus’ resurrection came through; news that was surprising to Peter and the others. Despite Jesus’ earlier words, they had not anticipated this. Peter’s relationship with Jesus needed some restoring; it may be the reason for the threefold question at the end of John’s gospel (John 21:15-19). But the relationship was not broken by Peter’s denial of him; those tears, the regret and sorrow which caused them, may well have been partly why. Peter’s knowledge of his failure, his awareness that he had done exactly what he had declared he would never do; the fact that he did not try to hide, deny or run away from his actions: all this brought him to a place of healing where he could continue to follow Jesus along with the other disciples.

What Peter told them about that night, we do not know, but I have also suspected that he would have been totally honest. They would have wanted to know; I do not think Peter would have been able to creep in and say nothing. The others had all failed as well; Peter, as the rock, may well have had some role in keeping them together, in re-building them. Admitting his own failure would have been part of that. Those tears, that time spent weeping may well have wept away some of the bitterness and shame he may have had at his behaviour. It would have helped bring him to a place of acceptance, at least as far as he could come at that time. All the disciples would have been distressed and upset; they do not seem to have seen Jesus’ death coming, despite his warnings. Peter may have had a crucial role to play in all this. In John’s gospel, it is to Peter and the disciple whom Jesus loved that Mary Magdalene goes with the message of Jesus resurrection (John 20:1-10).

But he could so easily have behaved differently. He could have become angry, protesting that he had done nothing wrong, it was all he could do in the circumstances, alone as he was; he could have claimed that it was appropriate for him to ensure that he, too, was not captured, so that some of Jesus’ message might continue; he could have given it all up as a bad job, isolated himself from the others, and returned home to Galilee, spending the rest of his life as a fisherman, telling tales of the time he spent with the false messiah Jesus; he could simply have pretended it did not happen, and gone back to the others with news of what had happened so far. None of that would have led to a good outcome; none of that would have enabled Peter’s relationship with Jesus to be restored. Only that sudden knowledge as the cock crowed, and Peter’s own distress at his actions brought him to the place where he could continue in God’s way.

But what of us? How do we respond to our own failings? Can we acknowledge them, or do we pretend they have very little impact? Do we come before God in true repentance, or is it just an exercise? Do we, can we, apologise, or are we incapable – or, even, say sorry in such a way that makes it clear it is the other person’s fault, not our own? Can we come before God in tears at our failure? Whether we cry actual tears or not, is not vital; it is the inner attitude that counts. The one that comes before God (and others) saying ‘I’m sorry, I messed up, please forgive me’. Simply, honestly, acknowledging that we have (and will) fail, and asking forgiveness. The problem is, so often failing is linked to shame, and it is that which can prevent a true recognition of what we have done wrong. It can lead to an over or under-reaction; either shame piles on the guilt, and makes us feel much worse; or we hide it and minimalize what we have done/are doing. Shame is not easily dealt with, and it is worth seeking help if it is a problem. What is worth remembering is that Peter was called the rock, and it is on him that Jesus would build his church. Now, underneath all that, Jesus is the rock, steady and unfailing, a sure foundation. But remember next time you fail, or when your neighbour fails: Peter was the rock, but he was a rock that failed. Those failure did not make him a weaker foundation for Jesus’ church; no, it made him stronger. Jesus knew what he was doing when he called flawed Peter to be his disciple. It was Peter’s very weaknesses that made him a strong foundation (see 2 Corinthians 12:8-10, for an example using a different apostle)