THE first fish which Andrew took on his single line was his own brother Simon, whose conversion led to events which have largely influenced the whole world ever since. Of course, we know that, whilst by one large class of people Simon Peter is regarded as a demi-god, by another he is chiefly remembered for his numerous mistakes. But in some respects these mistakes were fortunate for us; they at least proved that he was no demi-god; and it is as possible to make too much of them as too little. It would be very foolish to ignore the ardent valor and devoted self-sacrifice of Peter's life because of his inconsistencies, however serious.
“Mistakes”! said a bank manager to us lately, “Why, we have a branch at W—, and they have never made a mistake there yet “... “But,” he continued meditatively, “we're going to close it. You see, they have never done a stroke of business.” And I think we may be sure that, if there are anywhere to be found those who have never made mistakes, then it is because they have never accomplished anything worth mentioning, and in that case their whole life is one vast mistake.
When Simon was brought to the Messiah, his new Master, considering it necessary to give him a surname, selected the last one probably that we should have thought of, Peter,' a stone; For He, Who sees the things that are not, could see that this man who was naturally impulsive, erratic, and inconsistent, would become by divine grace a solid and substantial rampart in the church against all kinds of evil and hostility. His high and burning devotion and love to his Master, carried him loyally through the most appalling difficulties and dangers, always inflexible and invincible, except on the one occasion when the man who could brave the most ghastly forms of death for his principles was frightened at the taunt of a servant girl. “Let him that thinketh he standeth, take heed lest he fall.” Peter had not got his own example before his eyes to warn him; we have, and have no excuse. Yesterday's grace is not sufficient for today's trials and to-morrow's temptations. Yesterday Elijah stood calm and strong before raging multitudes on Carmel: to-day he flees for his life. And before a woman too, like Peter! But for all that we must not forget yesterday's services because of to-day's failures.
Certainly his Master did not. Though He knew all that was in man, and in this man too, failing and uncertain, He appointed him to the most honorable position in the Apostolate. He made him
“The pilot of the Galilean lake:
Two massy keys he bore of metals twain,
The golden opes, the iron shuts amain.”
The keys were committed to him, not to build the church with of course (churches cannot be built with keys), but to open the gates of the “kingdom of heaven;” which we see him doing in Acts 2. when he was the first to let in the Jews to the realm of salvation; and afterward in Acts 10. when he admitted the Gentiles.
This choosing of Peter to admit the Gentiles was very wise, because, of all the apostles, he was the most intensely national in his sympathies. Like most men of strong impulsive enthusiasm, he was apt to be bigoted at times; and we find that at a subsequent period he allowed his bigoted nationality to mislead him into a gross and serious inconsistency on this point. He refused companionship and fellowship to the Gentile Christians. This was distinctly a schismatic action, and, if sanctioned, would in its ultimate tendency have soon broken the church to pieces; but no one even seems to have dreamed of such severity of discipline as to propose Peter's excommunication. His fellow-apostle Paul “withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.” Happily we are not dealt with according to the ultimate tendency of every offense that we commit, but for the action itself and the motive accompanying it. There is no record of Peter's having been subjected to any ecclesiastical discipline at all, not even the formal public rebuke; and the only reference made to the incident is a seemingly casual but divinely wise mention to the Galatians when they were in danger of traveling on the same lines.
Peter however took Paul's opposition in a very gracious spirit; and we must remember that he was the senior apostle and Paul the youngest. He writes afterward of his “beloved brother Paul” and of “the wisdom given unto him.” He speaks highly of his Epistles, though he admits there are some things in them hard to be understood. But it were foolish and criminal to reject them on that account. Those who do so, are “unlearned and unstable.” There is no exposition of technical things which does not present difficulties even to the adepts. And this is quite as true in science as religion. I remember that Mr. Darwin says in his preface to “The Origin of Species,” that he cannot understand parts of Professor Owen's writings, and draws consolation from the fact that there are others who cannot understand nor reconcile them either.
We can see how wisely the choice was made of a man for the active leader of aggressive Christianity. Those virtues, most needed for such an enterprise, Peter undoubtedly possessed to a very high degree—ardor, courage, and hope. His life and Epistles are throughout characterized by these qualities, especially hope. The German Weiss names him the “Apostle of Hope.” His faults are such as we find in men of like nature called to like service, the faults which come from zeal and excessive impetuosity. Luther, who was of a very similar nature and mission, had very similar failings, which “Protestants” are content to ignore, as “Catholics,” ignore Peter's. An aggressive leader is usually impetuous. Luther had little sympathy with the balanced sobriety of mind which Erasmus or Melancthon possessed. “I like not such brains which can dispute on both sides, and yet conclude nothing certain,” he says. Thus too the Swiss champion, Wer gar zu viel bedenkt, wird wenig leisten. Peter rushes into the holy sepulcher itself, whilst John stands reverently at the threshold.
Luther was hurried into many a mistake—and injustice. Erasmus, he says, holds “ungodly false doctrine.” Melancthon is a sheep. “The pope and his crew are like great thieves.” In the Swiss and Saxon controversy over the sacraments, he was obstinately wrong-headed and violent against the learned courteous Zuinglius. “Bullinger, you err,” he storms, “you know neither yourself, nor what you hold. I mark well your tricks and fallacies. Zuinglius and CEcolampadius likewise proceeded too far in this your ungodly meaning,” &c., &c. His Tischreden is often very inconsequent, and his interpretations of some passages of scripture quite grotesque; but shall we because of these things forget his wondrous services to God and man, his valor and his devotion, his masculine strength and woman-like tenderness? In later times he felt his need of patience. “I must have patience with the pope; I must have patience with heretics and seducers; I must have patience with the roaring courtiers; I must have patience with my servants; I must have patience with Kate my wife.” (I fancy that, if “my Lord Kate,” as he used to call her, happened to read that part she would probably supply him with still further occasions for exercising his patience.)
Peter certainly closed his life in martyrdom and by crucifixion; but whether, as alleged, he was crucified at Rome with his head downwards, there is very little evidence. He was most probably never at Rome at all; and that story of his leaving the city at the approach of danger, and meeting his divine Master going toward it, to Whom he addressed the inquiry, Donrine, quo vadis? is neither true nor yet very well invented, albeit the words are written up on the Appian Way to this day.