The Pulpit Commentary — Mark — Volume 2 — Section 238

the rest may act the cowardly, unmanly part indicated, breaking and scattering like feeble sheep soon as the wolf is seen to approach, but not I. I will prove myself the rock-man, and stand my ground -in face of all danger, and in spite of all enemies, Thus Peter exalted himself at the expense of others; he also presumed too much on his own strength, and took too much credit for his own courage. Peter possessed physical courage, we have good reason to believe, but he lacked moral courage; nor do these two qualities always go hand in hand. There may be great physical courage with but little moral courage, and much moral courage where physical courage is defective. Peter was courageous enough—or rash enough, some might be disposed to say—to cut off the ear of a manservant of the high priest; but he was cowardly enough to quail before the glance of one of the maids of the high priest. He had physical courage enough to do the deed of violence, but not moral courage enough to tell the truth to an inquisitive, intermeddling, though perhaps light-hearted, thought- less girl: If we contrast the conduct and character of two comrade apostles, John and Peter, we shall find a confirmation of our view. As compared with Peter, John had less physical courage, for on a subsequent occasion, as we read, “ Peter therefore went forth, and that other disciple, and came to the sepulchre. So they ran both together: and the other disciple did outrun Peter, and came first to the sepulchre. ... Yet went he not in. Then cometh Simon Peter following him, and went into the sepulchre.” This is a very interesting and instructive statement. They both ran, in their eagerness and expectancy, to the rifled sepulchre; but John, being the younger and therefore swifter man, outran Peter, and reached the sepulchre before him. But there he paused; he had not the physical courage to enter that gloomy abode; a sudden awe arrested him. At length Peter came up, and as soon as he arrived at the place, without fear, or dread, or hesitancy, without stop, or stay, or a moment’s pause, he dashed in. “Then went in also that other disciple which came first to the sepulchre.” On this occasion Peter proved himself the physically bold, courageous man; while John, though younger and stronger probably, was the physically timid and hesitating. The scene shifts to the palace of the high priest; and these two apostolic men change places. John is now the bold, courageous man—morally so, for he “went in with Jesus into the palace of the high priest; but Peter stood at the door without.” John was known to the high priest, and known to him as a disciple of Jesus, and yet he went boldly into the palace, neither ashamed nor afraid to acknowledge his discipleship. Not only so, he spoke to the portress, and got Peter admitted. But now came Peter’s turn and time of weakness. Though John, a man of much less physical courage, had gone in boldly, and then gained admission for his companion, yet Peter, with far less moral courage, is frightened into sinful denial of his discipleship in the first instance by the brusque boldness of a somewhat pert maid. And yet, notwithstanding all this, a certain cause, or at least somewhat of an excuse, may be found for Peter’s moral cowardice, as com- pared with the moral courage of John at this juncture. Peter was conscious of a crime with which John had no complicity or connection—a crime that might shape itself into a constructive charge of an attempt at rescue. He had cut off the ear of Malchus, and so he may have dreaded the consequence of that act, or the more serious charge of interfering with the officers in the discharge of their appointed duty, in order to prevent the capture of his Master. These considerations may have increased the apprehensions of Peter, and added to the supposed danger of his position. The fact of discipleship of itself did not involve peril of any kind, and so John breathed more freely and moved about at large in the palace of the high priest without dread of danger. 2. A second cause leading to Peter’s sin. A second cause leading to Peter’s sin was unwatchfulness and neglect of prayer. When our Lord, in the Garden of Gethsemane, found the three disciples sleeping, he addressed himself specially to Peter, with the words, “Simon, sleepest thou ? couldest not thou watch one hour?” and then he spake words of warning to all: “ Watch ye and pray, lest ye enter into temptation.” A curious incident, in a certain respect the converse of this, though generally over- looked, deserves well, we think, to be noticed in this connection. In the warming just referred to, our Lord passed from the particular to the general, from the singular to the plural—from Simon to the associated apostles. In the warning revurded by St. Luke (xxii. 31, 82), and which introduces the passage of that Gospel parallel to ch. xiv. 37, 38, of the Gospel before us, our Lord passes in reverse order from the plural to the