TIL. Perer’s Rerenrance. 1. Hxtenuating circumstances. We may just notice, very briefly, in connection with Peter’s repentance, certain extenuations of his sin. His sin, largely the outcome of his own impulsive nature, came on him with the suddenness and strength of an unexpected impulse. There had been no premeditation, no deliberate plan, and no deceitful design, as in the case of Judas. His plans and purposes had all been of the very opposite character; his determination and resolutions had all tended in the very contrary direction. He did not remain in his sin, nor ever afterwards repeat it, The sin was exceeding great and the guilt enormous, but it would have been still more so had he continued it, or persevered in it, or subsequently returned to it. Satan took him by surprise, as though asleep or off his guard; but once roused from the lethargy into which he had fallen, or brought back to the post which he had abandoned, he never again wandered from the path of duty or sank in sin. 2. How he was recalled to duty. Two circumstances were the means externally, or the occasions of reminding Peter of his sin and recalling him to duty. But, while all the evangelists record Peter’s sin, St. Mark alone records the second crowing of the cock, which was one of the two circumstances referred to; and St. Luke alone records our Lord’s look at Peter, saying, “And the Lord turned, and looked upon Peter.” The first crowing of the cock had passed unheeded. St. Mark, who gives us such an exact transcript of Peter’s fall and feelings, probably from Peter’s own lips, informs us that it was not till the second or regular morning cockcrow that Peter was brought to the recollection of his Lord’s warning and his own sin. It was then he awoke as from a troubled dream or terrible nightmare; while much about the same time our Lord, either from the open front of the chamber in which the trial had been proceeding, or as he passed across the courtyard from the apartments of Annas to the palace of Caiaphas, turned towards Peter and looked him into repentance. 3. His repentance. The same evidence of repentance is found in the words, “ He went out, and wept bitterly” (%aae, he continued weeping aloud; not éddepve, he shed tears). The participle (érardy) attached to this verb is variously rendered. The most usual and probable meaning assigned to it is that of our version, “ When he thought thereon,” that is, cast (his mind) on it. Some explain it, “ He began to weep,” as in the margin of the Revised Version, as well as of the Authorized Version ; others, “ He flung his mantle over his head ;” others, again, “ He flung himself forth [¢.e. on the ground] and wept.” Further, it is understood by others in the sense of abundantly, that is, “He wept abundantly,” also in the margin of Authorized Version; while a more interesting explanation, if well founded, is, “ He cast his eyes on him and wept,” as if Peter reciprocated his Lord’s look, and consequent compunction of soul vented itself, not in a transient outburst, but in a long-continued, copious flood of tears. Thus, while the Evangelist Luke records the look of Christ on Peter, the Evangelist Mark, if this rendering be at all tenable, records the corresponding look of Peter on Christ; so that, when eye met eye, Peter was overpowered by strong emotion, and gave way to his deep grief by bitter (mu«pas, St. Matthew and St. Luke) weeping. 4. Real repentance distinguished from remorse, It is very important to distinguish true repentance from mere regret or remorse; while a contrast of the case of Peter with that of Judas will materially help us to see and clearly comprehend the difference. Certain elements are common to both, and these we must eliminate before we can rightly distinguish them. On the part of Judas there was sorrow of the intensest kind—remorse of the most distressing nature; there was the fullest and most ingenuously candid confession; there was also the strongest possible desire to make any and all the reparation that was possible. All these elements are found in true repentance; but as they are found also in the remorse of Judas, they are common alike to genuine repentance and mere remorse. The first material point of difference is that the sorrow of the true penitent is caused by the sight of sin in ¢¢se//, apart alto- gether from its consequences ; the sorrow of remorse is occasioned chiefly, if not entirely, by those consequences. Judas did not foresee the terrible consequences of his sin; he
20
BOz THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TU ST. MARK. [oa, xtv. 1—72,