Reflections...

A sermon preached at Kowloon Union Church on 27 August 2023, by Peter Youngblood. The scripture readings that day were Roman 12:1-8 and Matthew 16: 13-20.

Foundations Stones

In seminary, I shared an apartment with four of my classmates. We were all good friends, and we liked to joke with each other. I’ll give you an example. One day, they just started calling me “Dwayne” for some reason. This confused me, but out of politeness, I just let it slide at first. It thought perhaps it was some weird inside joke that I simply didn’t get. But they kept doing it for a few weeks, and so I finally broke down and asked: “Uh, guys, why are y’all calling me Dwayne.

And here was their explanation: The name “Peter” comes from St. Peter the Apostle, formerly known as Simon, son of Jonah. In our Scripture today, Jesus gives Simon this new nickname. If we’re being accurate, he would have called him Cephas, Aramaic for rock or stone. But Matthew wrote in Greek, and so used the Greek word petra, to which he added a masculine ending, making it Petros. And this the origin of the English name Peter. 

St. Peter is a rock. Do know who else is a rock? This guy: Dwayne Johnson, better known as the “the Rock.” So, you can see my friends’ logic. My name means rock, which also happens to be the screen name of one of the most popular movie stars in the world. His real, legal name is Dwayne, so why not call me Dwayne too?  It was a joke, but not really a very “inside” one—we’d all been taking classes in New Testament Greek together, so I really should have been able figure that one out for myself. But I can be quite clueless sometimes. So clueless, in fact, that I’m not sure I deserve to share the name given to the person appointed to be the foundation stone of the Church.  

There is disagreement among Christians about what exactly Simon-Peter’s role was meant to be. Catholics maintain that Jesus had made him the paramount leader of the church, the first in the line of Popes. Protestants do not share this view. We don’t agree that there should be a singular, powerful head of the Church—aside from Christ, of course. And the Scripture is also a little ambiguous. While Matthew strongly implies that by “rock” Jesus means a “leadership” role, the story of the naming isn’t found in the other Gospels. But this doesn’t mean Jesus didn’t say it or something like it. Matthew could have taken it from another reputable source, and there is also other evidence throughout the New Testament that Simon-Peter was a chief organizer and spokesman for the Apostles. 

We can say that while Simon-Peter was certainly not the only leader among the first Christians, it’s probable that he was the first one who carried a higher measure of authority than the others. And what is undeniable is that he played a major role in shaping the early Christian community. So even if his leadership role has been exaggerated, his name still carries a lot of weight in Christianity. 

I should clarify that I wasn’t really named after Saint Peter. I was named after my grandfather, who—funnily enough—was also not originally a Peter. “Pete” was his nickname. Now, my mother has claimed that—had it not been for her steadfast refusal—I might have been given my granddad’s legal, birth name. And I am grateful for that. Had she not done so, I would have been a Lloyd Cornelius. It’s a bit eccentric and probable cause for primary school teasing.

Now, even though I was named for my grandfather, and not the saint, his was still a big name to live up to. I never knew “Pete” Youngblood the first, but it seemed like everyone else had. He was what you called a “pillar” of the community. He was a shrewd businessman who made a small fortune selling Chevrolet cars and gasoline, but he was also very generous, proudly giving back to the town, to charities, and to our local Methodist Church.

So, whether it’s Pete the Saint or Pete the car dealer, I can’t help but compare myself to these great Christian Peters who came before me and think—hmm—what have I done that’s been so great? I think many of us do this—we measure ourselves against the character and accomplishments of people in the past.

However, these great men and women we idolize were far, far from perfect. My granddad may have been a nice guy most of the time, but he was also—I have been told—the worst, meanest drunk in town. His alcoholism was so bad, that my father never touched a drink. Pete Youngblood was a deeply flawed person, yet somehow that didn’t keep him from being regarded as a pillar of the community.

Simon-Peter is characterized by a similar contradiction. He’s called a saint, but the reality is very different. Let’s assume that Matthew’s account of things is correct, and that Jesus unambiguously appointed him to be his successor. How did he earn this responsibility? Was it because of his great faith? Oh, I don’t know about that. As most of us know, Simon-Peter was not always so steadfast. Earlier, in Matthew 14, Jesus made an example of him, as a man of “little faith,” when he tried and failed to walk on water. Ok, maybe that was a bit unfair of Jesus—I mean, who could do that besides him? But we also can’t forget that the same Peter that declares Jesus to be the Christ is the same Peter who will later deny ever having known him. And not just once, but three times!

So, if it’s not faith, then maybe it’s something else that qualifies him for the job. Maybe it’s his wisdom. Jesus’ remark about binding and loosing in verse nineteen is a rabbinical reference to teaching with authority. Thus, the chief Christian leader is really meant to be the chief Christian teacher, responsible for passing along the teachings of Christ to the next generation. So, is Simon-Peter intelligent enough for that position? Even if he was weak in his faith, he did know that Jesus was the Christ, and not Elijah or Jeremiah as many others had thought. 

But we can’t really give much credit to him for knowing this. First, by this point, it was already common knowledge among the disciples that Jesus was the Son of God, at least according to Matthew’s account. Second—and most importantly—such divine knowledge is not something we attain with our own wisdom. It’s gift from God, revealed to us by and through Jesus Christ himself.

Honestly, Simon-Peter does not seem especially wise. In fact, sometimes he was just as dense and clueless as I could be. You’ll probably be hearing more about this next Sunday, but in the very next part of Matthew 16, Peter rejects the prophesy that Jesus would be killed and resurrected. He thinks it’s nonsense. But it’s not nonsense, and Jesus rebukes him for his ignorance. That Simon-Peter. Such a blockhead! 

So here we have a guy who consistently loses faith or gets things completely wrong. Yet, despite these flaws—which were very apparent—Jesus Christ, still gave him an important responsibility. Why was that? Isn’t Jesus supposed to be a good judge of character? 

Well maybe it wasn’t despite Peter’s flaws, but because of them, that he was chosen for the job. When you think about it, Peter’s imperfections meant that he could accurately represent other Christians. He had faults and made mistakes, just like us. 

Now, I do believe that people with great authority, like a bishop or President, should be held to higher standards. It’s big a problem if we ignore or even glorify things like faithlessness or ignorance in our leaders and teachers. But no one is perfect. What is important is that we recognize our faults and mistakes and learn from them, growing into stronger, better people. 

Simon-Peter does not stay faithless or ignorant. He is among the first to encounter the resurrected Christ, an encounter that restores his faith and helps him to understand the meaning of what Jesus had taught. And so, he is forgiven and redeemed, and energized to help build the Church. As the late Jesuit father Daniel Harrington wrote, this makes Peter an example for all Christians, because—through Christ—he confronts his own weakness and sinfulness and becomes stronger for it. He goes from being very “rocky”—that is, shaky—in his faith to being a truly solid, stable foundation stone for the new Church. Jesus did not name Peter rock because he had already earned the title. Rather he called him rock so that he could live up to the name, overcoming his own weaknesses and becoming a true foundation stone for the community of Christ.

And there’s one other very important thing I need to add—something you’ve probably already figured out I was getting to. It’s not just one foundation stone—it’s many stones. Here I take some inspiration from the theme of this summer’s Vacation Bible School, Concrete and Cranes. Like any building, physical churches must be built on some kind of foundation made of wood, steel, or—of course—rock. I think concrete is the most common material these days, but that’s still rocks, just very, very tiny ones. 

The spiritual church is also built on a foundation, but this one is made up of people. When Jesus selects Peter as his rock, he’s selecting only the first of many building blocks of the Church. Christ is the cornerstone, as St. Paul says in Ephesians, and Peter is among the Apostles and Prophets who make up the rest of the first layer of the foundation. 

But the rest of us are also building stones. We are the bricks and the mortar of the spiritual Church. And by “the spiritual Church,” I mean both our individual spiritual community as well as the community of all Christians. 

He uses a different metaphor, but Paul says something very similar in the Letter to the Romans. We are members—that is, limbs and organs—that make up the Body of Christ. We all have own unique gifts, received from God. Some of us are called to be leaders in the traditional sense of the word, like pastors and council members, while others show leadership and contribute in other ways.

Every Christian, every person has moments of faithlessness or ignorance like Simon-Peter. When don’t just bring our gifts, but our faults. But a truly supportive community does not lash out with harsh criticisms or insults. We don’t drive away those who inconvenience or annoy us. Instead, like physical bricks, we should support each other when something is off. We should respond not with anger, but with patience and compassion, as Paul advises. Yes, sometimes some of us need to be confronted when we screw up, but such confrontation must always be guided by love. After all, God’s unconditional love for us, expressed through the sacrificial gift of Christ, is the ultimate foundation of our religion. It is what holds everything together.

Receiving this divine love from Christ is what heals and redeems Simon-Peter. In accepting his flaws, and accepting God’s forgiveness, he showed his worthiness as a leader of the early Church. 

I too, have felt the healing, redeeming love of Christ, as I have been blessed to be a part of the KUC community. You all took me in, a homeless United Methodist, and helped me triumph over my own flaws and weaknesses. You even encouraged me—with a reasonably moderate degree of pressure—to take leadership roles. In showing me great compassion, and giving me opportunities to share my gifts, this community has given me new strength and helped me find my Christian voice.

I am sad to leave Hong Kong and this church next month, but I am heartened by the clear, unambiguous fact that I am leaving as a better person than I was when I arrived. This is because I have been graced with your love and support. 

Yes, I will miss this space, and y’all—the people in it. But I remind myself, again, that the true church, the spiritual church is flexible. Its foundations are written on the heart, not poured into the ground. The joy I that I have experienced, the wisdom I have gained, and all the love that I have felt here is not something I leave behind, but something that I take with me.

Amen.