At first sight, both Peter and Paul appear to be surprising choices of Christ; it was not immediately obvious that any of these men had the temperament to carry through the work which was assigned to him. Peter was a crude, coarse-spoken Galilean; Paul went around 'breathing out threatening and slaughter against those who followed the Way', as the Acts tell us. Yet, after his dramatic conversion, Paul found himself strangely committed to serving a community and dying for it, losing himself in the life of the very Christ he set out to destroy. Our Lord's selection of men was not made after formal interview or examination; the choosing was much more personal. The personalities of his disciples deserve our constant study.
In devoting themselves to the cause, they experienced not just external opposition and hostility; they had to battle also against self-interest and, particularly in Paul's case, misrepresentation. Unlike the successors and followers of emperors, these two men found themselves appointed to tasks which have had results of lasting influence. Their work has not died out.
Of course Peter and Paul had their temptations and made human mistakes; but we have reason to believe that they grasped the point of their commissioning and ultimately were found faithful. Paul, with characteristic self-confidence, certainly believed that he had made it: "I have fought the good fight to the end; I have run the race to the finish; I have kept the faith." The church they served was apostolic, built upon persons of varying talent and different texture.
Peter's weaknesses are the most widely acknowledged of all the New Testament characters. This, I believe, is no coincidence. His character flaws are exposed, and then addressed. Consequently, they were used for God's glory and not for man's shame. A bad temper, for example, can be redeemed and used for the passionate championing of a worthy cause; Simon Peter's mistakes revealed the man to himself no less than to others. These failings marked the prelude to a life of personal triumphs. He may not have had the academic gifts of a Paul nor the even-tempered patience and affection of a John, but with his rude speech and rough ways he was chosen for leadership and responsibility.
To his Master who gave him his vocation with the words 'Thou art Peter,' he had been given courage and confidence to say beforehand 'Thou art the Christ'. There was plenty of crude material for God's grace to work upon here. There was a time when Peter, with all his potential for leadership, was clearly short of faith; he found it hard to believe. At other times, his courage and sense of trust seemed to know no limits; he took risks and plunged into deep waters out of sheer devotion. Again, in spite of much questioning and challenging, he would supply the penetrating answer, "You are the Christ," scarcely aware of its source or meaning.
A few Sundays ago, I reminded you here of how difficult a character Paul was. He is probably the most politically incorrect New Testament writer of them all. His ideas are at odds with the thinking of our own day on many matters. He wasn't very popular in his own day either. But personal popularity was not a priority with Paul. In fact we get the distinct impression that he cared very little for his own image, or for what people thought of him. In fact he was never fully trusted by many Christians. One trait he shared with Peter was that both were impetuous men, given to fierce outbursts of indignation. He tells us himself that, before his mysterious conversion, he persecuted the followers of the Way with great enthusiasm. Once a Jew, always a Jew, they reasoned.
Ironically, the most Jewish of the New Testament figures became known as the Apostle of the Gentiles. He was widely travelled but the crew of his boat was constantly changing. I would imagine that very few could live at close quarters with the intensity of Paul's personality.
With hindsight, we perceive that both these men became dedicated and saintly by the hard and testing way of suffering, sinning and slipping. Peter said 'never' at least three times; he declared that the killing of his Master and friend 'would never happen'; he protested at the thought of his Master doing him a service and showing him hospitality; Peter wanted to be the one to do the serving: 'You shall never wash my feet' He had to learn to receive with a good grace. Overconfident, overflowing with zeal, he had cried, before the awful moment of denial, 'I will never fall away'. There is a lesson for us on the festival day of a saint who became what at one time seemed most improbable, a leader unshakeable in the faith, restored, renewed and rock-like. Paul of course was to change his whole way of life at the promptings of the Lord. We should 'never' say never in these spiritual issues.
Home