The historian of the Acts of the Apostles, after the narration of the
preceding occurrence, makes no farther allusion to Peter; devoting
himself wholly to the account of the far more extensive labors of Paul
and his companions, so that for the remaining records of Peter’s life,
reference must be had to other sources. These sources, however, are but
few, and the results of investigations into them must be very brief.
From some passages in the first part of Paul’s epistle to the Galatians,
in which he gives an account of his previous intercourse with the
twelve apostles, having mentioned his own visit to Jerusalem and its
results, as just described above, he speaks of Peter as coming down to
Antioch, soon after, where his conduct, in some particulars, was such
as to meet the very decided reprehension of Paul. On his first arrival
in that Gentile city, Peter, in accordance with the liberal views
taught him by the revelation at Joppa and Caesarea, mingled, without
scruple, among all classes of believers in Christ, claiming their
hospitalities and all the pleasures of social intercourse, making
no distinction between those of Jewish and of heathen origin. But
in a short time, a company of persons came down from Jerusalem, sent
particularly by James, no doubt with a reference to some especial
observations on the behavior of the chief apostle, to see how it
accorded with the Jerusalem standard of demeanor towards those, whom,
by the Mosaic law, he must consider improper persons for the familiar
intercourse of a Jew. Peter, probably knowing that they were disposed
to notice his conduct critically on these matters of ceremonial
punctilio, prudently determined to quiet these censors by avoiding all
occasion for any collision with their prejudices. Before their arrival,
he had mingled freely with the Grecian and Syrian members of the
Christian community, eating with them, and conforming to their customs
as far as was convenient for unrestrained social intercourse. But he
now withdrew himself from their society, and kept himself much more
retired than when free from critical observation. The sharp-eyed Paul,
on noticing this sudden change in Peter’s habits, immediately attacked
him with his characteristic boldness, charging him with unworthy
dissimulation, in thus accommodating his behavior to the whims of these
sticklers for Judaical strictness of manners. The common supposition
has been, that Peter was here wholly in the wrong, and Paul wholly in
the right: a conclusion by no means justified by what is known of the
facts, and of the characters of the persons concerned. Peter was a much
older man than Paul, and much more disposed by his cooler blood, to
prudent and careful measures. His long personal intercourse with Jesus
himself, also gave him a great advantage over Paul, in judging of what
would be the conduct in such a case most conformable to the spirit of
his divine Master; nor was his behavior marked by anything discordant
with real honesty. The precept of Christ was, “Be _wise_ as serpents;”
and a mere desire to avoid offending an over-scrupulous brother in a
trifling matter, implied no more wariness than that divine maxim
inculcated, and was, moreover, in the spirit of what Paul himself
enjoined in very similar cases, in advising to avoid “offending a
brother by eating meat which had been offered in sacrifice to idols.”
There is no scriptural authority to favor the opinion that Peter
ever acknowledged he was wrong; for all that Paul says is――“I rebuked
him,”――but he does not say what effect it had on one who was an older
and wiser man than his reprover, and quite as likely to be guided by
the spirit of truth. It is probable, however, that Peter had something
to say for himself; since it is quite discordant with all common ideas,
to suppose that a great apostle would, in the face of those who looked
up to him as a source of eternal truth, act a part which implied an
unjustifiable practical falsehood. After all, the difference seems to
have been on a point of very trifling importance, connected merely with
the ceremonials of familiar intercourse, between individuals of nations
widely different in manners, habits, prejudices, and the whole tenor of
their feelings, as far as country, language and education, would affect
them; and a fair consideration of the whole difficulty, by modern
ethical standards, will do much to justify Peter in a course designed
to avoid unnecessary occasions of quarrel, until the slow operations
of time should have worn away all these national prejudices,――the rigid
sticklers quietly accommodating themselves to the neglect of ceremonies,
which experience would prove perfectly impracticable among those
professing the free faith of Christ.