Christian Leadership: Learning from the life of Apostle Peter as a role of leader (2)

 

Christian Leadership: Learning from the life of Apostle Peter as a role of leader (2)
 

 Peter and the Ethics of the society

              The advice of Peter on Ethics may be set down as follow:

i) The Christian life is centered in hope, and sustained by faith in a God whose purpose are known in Christ. This is Peter’s standing point and the cardinal principle of his theology, both doctrinal and practical. ii) The call to self-control is meant to issue in a display of the qualities of Christian living which will make it attractive to others in a pagan world of society around the believers. Even when they are unjustly provoked and harassed, Christians should be courteous and patient, slaves who are maltreated without cause would be especially open to the temptation to fight back. Iii) The Christians’ attitude to the ruling authorities is set down in I-Peter 2:13, with a warning directed against those who would commit anti-social acts. iv) Humility is a Christian grace, which is to characterize God’s people both in the outside world and in the church. In latter sphere this summons to lowliness eminently befits those who aspire to ecclesiastical office. For Church leaders need a reminder that their office is one of service not dictatorship. V) The summons to endurance fastens on a typical New Testament grace applicable specifically in a time of testing. If the terminology is somewhat different, clearly the admonitions to patience, persistence, and prayerful vigilance and common to this stratum of New Testament ethical teaching.

Remarkable qualities of Peter

             He was a spirit-filled man. He was in an attitude of spiritual readiness for emergency (1-Peter 3:15). He manifested the remarkable preparedness of speech and action because of the preparation of heart by the spirit (Prov.16:1). Some of his remarkable qualities were as follows:     

      A. Sympathy (Acts 3:4). “Fastening his eyes”. Thus the lame man was led to expectation. So, sympathy always will show itself, and influence others.

      B. Frankness (v.6). no money, imagine the disappointment of the mendicant.

      C. Boldness (v.9). His great claim for Jesus of Nazareth.

      D. Humility (v.12). “yet not I” (cf. I-Cor.15:10).

       E. Faithfulness (v.13-16). i) their sin is plainly declared. Fidelity is always truest kindness, ii) faithful in proclaiming God’s work (Acts 5:30-32), ‘God raised’, ‘God exalted’, ‘God gave’.

      F. Generosity (v.17). He made the best of their position.

      G. Tactfulness (v.22-26). i) He tries to win support by using their Scriptures. And the tone and substance of his address is loving and attractive. ii) He shows true conciliation even as he stands firm (Acts 5:30) “The God of our fathers”. He associates himself with them, he is no enemy of his nation, iii) he affords them opportunity of salvation even as he denounces their sin (Acts 5:31).

     H. Fearlessness (Acts 5:20). i) commanded by God, ii) manifested by apostles v.21, they went into the temple. Duties never conflict.

     I. Resoluteness (Acts 5:20). i) he stands as ‘witness of these things’ Acts 1:8), ii) he actually associates himself and the others with the Holy Ghost (v.32).

    J. Steadfastness. Although beaten by the authorities and ordered not to preach again,  see the real spirit of man, i) their feeling and its causes v.41,’exulting because counted worthy to suffer dishonour for the name, ii) their action and its nature, v.42, ‘ceased not to teach… Jesus as the Christ’.

 

Negative aspects in Peter’s life

        His failure

             i) Its characteristics; a) failure of faith (Jn.18:7), b) of love, c) of courage, the spirit was weak as well as the flesh.

            ii) Its causes; a) lack of forethought (their surprise), b) lack of clean ideas (about the cross, even though so often told), c) lack of knowledge of self (thought themselves strong), d) Lack of discipline (morally and spiritually raw).

           iii) Its cure; one thing needful – faith, i.e., trust in the master. a) faith gives forethought, b) faith leads to clear insight, c) faith brings knowledge of self, d) faith develops experience.

       His fall or denial

               Peter’s denial of his master was at once the climax of his sin and the occasion of a new start. It was therefore a pivot in his career. (Mat.26:58, 69-75; Mk.15:54, 67-72; Luke 22:31, 54-63, John 28:15-18, 25-27).

           The causes of the fall: i) Self-sufficiency- due to confidence and rashness (Prov.28:26). ii) Partial knowledge: no cross was contemplated by Peter. Christ’s teaching had been entirely ignored. iii) spiritual negligence: sleeping in Gethsemane, then following ‘afar off’ (John 28:17, 25). John, bold and fearless, went in and there was no need to ask the question of him. Peter remained behind and apart. He was ‘far off’ from Christ and from his fellow-disciple, and among his master’s enemies. This is always dangerous. iv) Lacks faith -(Luke 22:32) he had lost faith. “that thy faith fail not”, i.e, faith in his Master as Messiah and Son of God (Mt.16:16). This was at the root of everything.

            The immediate result of the fall: i) The restoration- its course; a) an incident (cock crowing), slight and ordinary God can use such. b) a look  (‘The Lord turned’). Consider what this conveyed; a reminder, reproof, sorrow, entreaty. c)  a memory- the past recalled  d) a thought- ‘ thought my own ways and turned’ (Ps.119:59; Luke 15:17). ii) The restoration- its reality; a) proof- sorrow, deep sorrow (bitterly), immediate departure (went out). b) contrast with Judas; Judas lost his faith, then cast away his love, and went over to the enemy as a traitor. Peter thought to save himself without hurting Christ; selfish, weak, and wicked, but not apostate. Judas thought of the consequence of his sin, and so came remorse leading to despair. Peter thought of the sin itself, and so was led to repentance and hope. ‘Satan tripped Peter, but trapped Judas’.