1. Peter was married. His mother-in-law is mentioned in Matt 8, Mark 1 and Luke 4. His wife is never mentioned; neither are any children. Tradition says he had a daughter, but there is no scriptural or historical evidence to support this. He had a brother, Andrew, and he and Andrew were fishermen. Beyond this, we know nothing of his life before his encounter with Jesus of Nazareth.
2. All four gospels describe his call to discipleship. Matthew, Mark and Luke describe him being called by Christ before any other Apostle (Matt 4, Mark 1, Luke 4). But, in John, two other apostles are called first. One is not named; tradition suggests that it is John himself. The other is Andrew, Peter's brother. Andrew then brings Peter to see Jesus.
3. In Matthew, Mark and Luke it is Peter who first identifies Jesus as the Messiah (Mark 8:27-33; Matt 16:13-23; Luke 9:18-21). In John's gospel, John the Baptist and Andrew both name Christ as the Messiah before Peter has even met Christ.
4. Peter is one of the three disciples to witness the transfiguration of Christ (Luke 9; Matt 17; Mark 9). He is the only Apostle who speaks during the episode. But what he says adds little to the event, and indeed seems to bring it to an end. Here, and on several other occasions in scripture, Peter's role as spokesman arises not because he has discerned something that the others have not, but simply because he is quick to speak.
5. Peter is impetuous, but also fearful; he assures Christ of his willingness to die for him but, when Christ is arrested, denies knowing him (Luke 22:54-62; Matt 26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72).
   
   John doesn't mention the promise to die for Christ, but he does mention the denial of Christ (John 18:25-27). He shows Peter's impetuousness in another way. All four gospels describe how, when the troops arrive to arrest Christ, one person draws his sword and attacks the arresting party. Matthew, Mark and Luke don't name the person, but John names him as Peter. This was an act of both courage and foolishness. The arresting party was accompanied by two hundred Roman troops. Violent resistance would have been fatal as well as futile.
6. After the Crucifixion, Peter retains his leadership of the Apostles. In Mark's account (Mark 16), the women who discover the empty tomb are directed by the angel to "go and tell his disciples and Peter" that Christ has risen. Mark says that they were too afraid to do this, but Luke (Luke 24) says that they did tell the Apostles, and that Peter went to the tomb to see for himself. By now, he is learning not to be impetuous; Luke says that he simply "went home" after seeing the empty tomb.
   
   John gives a fuller account (John 20). When the women tell what they have seen, Peter and "the disciple whom Jesus loved" (probably John himself) go to see. The other disciple gets to the tomb first, but does not go in; he waits for Peter — another indication of Peter's leadership role. So it is Peter who goes in first, and sees the empty tomb; the other disciple then goes in, sees "and believes". But, again, we are not told what Peter's state of mind was.
7. Peter is again presented as the leader in Acts. He leads the Apostles in choosing a successor for Judas Iscariot. It is he who preaches at Pentecost, who works signs in Jesus' name, and who defends the Christian community before the Temple leadership. He leads the church to the difficult decisions of accepting Gentile members, and not requiring them to observe Jewish law.
8. Paul recognised Peter's leadership. Like the evangelists, he puts Peter at the head of the list of disciples (1 Cor 15), and when he goes to Jerusalem after his own conversion his object is "to confer with Peter" (Gal 1).
9. Whenever the twelve Apostles are listed, Peter's name always comes first (Mark 3:16-19; Matt 10:2-4; Luke 6:13-16; Acts 1:13). Sometimes an inner group of disciples is mentioned — Peter, James and John. Again, Peter is always named first (Matt 17:1; Mark 5:37; Matt 26:37; Mark 14:33).
10. The Scriptures do not record what became of Peter. In Acts 12 he is arrested on the orders of Herod. This must have been not later than AD 44, when Herod died. Peter escapes, and then leaves Jerusalem for "another place". At this point he disappears from the scriptural record. The three epistles to which his name is attached were probably not written by him.
    
    Tradition and scholarship agree that the "other place" where Peter went was Antioch. In Antioch he is still venerated as the first bishop and founder of the church there. While this may not be strictly historically correct - there was a church at Antioch before Peter ever went there - it is likely that he lived there for a considerable time, and built up the church there.
    
    There is little evidence that he ever went to Rome; certainly no scriptural evidence. If he did, it was probably late in life, he may not have intended the move to be permanent, and he probably died (tradition says he was martyred) in one of Nero's anti-Christian crackdowns between AD 64 and AD 69.

Scripture is written with hindsight. The Evangelists describing Peter's call by Christ already knew that he was later to become the leader of the church, and no doubt this influenced how they presented him, what details they chose to include, and what to omit. Hence his role in identifying Jesus as the Messiah, testifying to the Transfiguration, etc.

But some other details do not reflect so well on him — most obviously, his habit of thinking before speaking, and the contrast between his protestations of loyalty and his cowardice, when put to the test. And in John we also have an interesting contrast between his denial of Jesus, when questioned, and his willingness to risk his life for Jesus at the time of the arrest. We also see a contrast between the early speak-first-and-think-later Peter of the gospels and the confident, articulate Peter of Acts.

For me, these details ring true; they make Peter a credible human being, with conflicts and contradictions and growth like the rest of us, instead of an idealised saintly figure.

Email this article to a friend	Post your feedback in our forum

What are your thoughts on this commentary? You can contribute to the discussion in our forum.

Peregrinus can be contacted at:
Peregrinus <peregrinus@catholica.com.au>

©2006 Peregrinus

[Peregrinus' Archive]