A Sermon on Galatians 2:11-21 for the Feast of Saints Peter and Paul. Delivered by Pastor Caleb Strutz.

Today’s feast of saints Peter and Paul is one of the earliest saint’s days on our calendar, we can trace its observance back to the early 300s. It’s possible that Peter and Paul were both martyred in Rome on this day, June 29, 67 AD, but it’s more likely that we celebrate them on this day because on June 29, 258, their remains were removed from the catacombs and placed into two great basilicas dedicated to them in Rome. But regardless of how or why they came to be celebrated on this day, it is a little strange that these two monumental figures in the life of the church share a single day. But it’s incredibly fitting that they do. As we look at one of the more unsavory interactions between these two great apostles, and as we celebrate them both today, we are drawn to see unity in the faith. This is a unity that endures in spite of conflict and a unity that is found in Christ.

Some scholars and historians who don’t really believe in the Bible anyways like to pit Peter and Paul against each other, and they’ll point to texts like these, where there’s this clash between Peter’s ministry as the apostle to the Jews and Paul’s ministry as the apostle to the Gentiles. There’s a lot that goes into this event, and it’s worth examining this conflict to see what’s really going on.

So this conflict takes place in the city of Antioch, which was one of the earliest Christian congregations that was composed of both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 11:19-26). Antioch became the “mother church” for the Gentiles as Jerusalem was for the Jews.

One of the earliest controversies in the early church was whether or not Gentiles would have to, in a sense, become Jewish in order to become Christian. The Jerusalem Council in Acts 15 correctly discerned that that wasn’t the case. Christ had fulfilled all the Old Testament laws. You didn’t need to follow those laws in order to be a Christian because salvation is founded on Christ alone. Peter and James and Paul and all the apostles agreed that this is the case. Now, to our text.

When Peter comes to Antioch, where there’s a strong Gentile Christian presence, he acts accordingly and eats with Gentiles, something that the stricter segments of Judaism would frown on. Peter was correctly making use of his Christian freedom. When ministering to Jews, he would follow their customs, but he knew that that wasn’t mandatory.

But then, some people from James, from Jerusalem come. And all of a sudden, Peter starts acting differently. Whereas before, he would eat with the Gentiles, now he is separating himself and following Jewish custom and only eating with the Jews.

Peter and Paul and James had all agreed that you didn’t need to do that anymore. But Peter is afraid. What if word gets out? What if people back in Jerusalem hear that he’s living like a Gentile? Wouldn’t that damage his reputation? Wouldn’t that hurt his chances of ministering to them and telling them about Jesus? So he reverts to following the law.

Now this might not seem like a big deal, but think of the impact that this would have had among the Gentile Christians. Peter, an apostle, one of Jesus’ best friends, doesn’t want to spend time with you anymore. He’s off with this other group where they do things differently and won’t associate with you. And in order to be a part of that group, in order to really be a Christian, you have to follow all of these Jewish laws. This isn’t just a case of Peter sitting at a different lunch table with his new friends from out of town. It touches at the heart of the Christian faith: what do I need to do to be a Christian? What do I need to do to be saved? Is it trusting in Christ and His work? Or is it that plus all this other stuff I have to do?

Now, the relationship between Jew and Gentile in the early church is pretty complicated and there’s a lot of nuances and different things that make it hard to map on to any of the issues that we face today. So while we could talk about ethnic barriers or differences between cradle Lutherans and converts, none of those things would be entirely accurate. Instead, I think the larger thing that we can take away from this conflict between Peter and Paul is how it’s addressed.

When Paul arrived in Antioch and saw what was going on, Paul “withstood him to his face,” confronted Peter in person. Paul saw that what he was doing was wrong and was hurting others, too, and he loved him enough to confront him about it.

Here’s where we can learn a lesson. How often, when we have a problem with someone, are they the last person we talk to, instead of the first? We don’t want to be confrontational, we want to avoid hard conversations, so we talk about people behind their backs and let that disagreement fester.

Paul doesn’t record the fallout of this conversation, but he doesn’t have to. He knows that Peter knows better, that what he’s doing isn’t really what he believes. And we know for a fact from Peter’s epistles that they were reconciled, as he writes about “our beloved brother Paul” (2 Pet 3:15).

I think that this is another growth area for us. When someone loves you enough to offer correction, are you willing to take it? When we are confronted with our sin, how often do we double down or make excuses? When relationships are hurt by our actions, we blame the person who made a big deal about it even when the fault lies with me.

We struggle and fail and sin when it comes to offering and receiving correction, with addressing the sin of others and being confronted with our own, with preserving unity in the face of conflict.

But when Paul confronts Peter, notice what he does. He doesn’t pull up receipts and specifics with every thing Peter has done wrong, he doesn’t attack his character or question his faith. Rather, he appeals to the sufficiency of Christ.

Peter knew in his heart that the works of the law weren’t required for salvation. But his actions were giving a different impression. So Paul, in his rebuke of Peter, beautifully illustrates the heart of the Christian faith.

“Man is not justified by the works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ.” What we do or have failed to do doesn’t enter the equation. If it did, we would all stand condemned, “for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified.” It is only through the work of Christ, only through His death on the cross, that we are justified, declared righteous in God’s sight.

Never mind the specifics of the law of Moses, we fail to keep His moral law, we fail to live in love and harmony with one another. But despite our differences, despite our failings, despite our sin, we are unified in Christ. Though our sin would separate us from God, we are reconciled to Him in Jesus. Though conflict would drive a wedge between believers, we are unified as members of His Body.

We see this unity expressed most clearly in the Lord’s Supper. There’s the horizontal unity of us eating and drinking together. Any disagreements we have are left behind when we approach the altar. By sharing the sacrament, we express that we are completely unified in faith. But more importantly, there is the vertical unity. That our Lord invites us to eat and drink at His meal, at His table. He takes away our sins, unifying us to Him. And by giving us His Body under the bread, He makes us His Body, the Church, and brings us together, unites us to Him and to one another.

So we’ve seen the obstacles to unity that conflict can cause, we’ve seen how we often fail when it comes to managing conflict, and we’ve seen how healing and unity is found in Christ. So what positive lessons can we learn from Peter and Paul?

We’ve touched on this briefly, but, to say it again, part of the picture is how we address conflict. Peter writes in his first epistle, “love will cover a multitude of sins” (4:8). Conflict management doesn’t mean jumping down each other’s throats over the slightest things. But it does mean that when there is a serious issue, it needs to be addressed.

In Peter’s case, it was a very public thing that was causing public offense and needed to be addressed publicly. Most of our problems with one another better fit the situation Jesus outlines in Matthew 18, where first you address it in private and if that doesn’t yield any fruit, then you involve other people (15-17). But the motivating concerns are what they were for Paul: love for your brother and love for the truth.

And if someone comes to you bringing correction or even just less serious feedback, avoid the natural response of defensiveness. See that they are concerned enough about the situation and about you to bring it up.

Unity is maintained and preserved not by backbiting or ignoring problems, but having those tough conversations when they need to happen and bringing everything back to what Christ has done for us and letting that be the foundation for everything.

Maybe now you can see why I really wanted to observe the feast of Peter and Paul today. Not just because it’s cool to celebrate these feast days, although there is a lot of value in them and there is a bigger conversation to be had, and certainly not because I wanted to wear the fancy red stole again. But by looking at Peter and Paul, we see how to deal with conflict and how to fix mistakes. I’m not going to be the perfect pastor. Peter messed up, and I certainly can’t claim to be any better than him. And part of my job is to lovingly address you if you find yourself caught in some sin. This goes both ways. But also by looking at Peter and Paul, we are reminded of the unity that we have in the faith and in Christ. This is a unity that is bigger than any individual or any personality, bigger than whatever things we might get caught up in. We are the body of Christ united around and under our Head who loved us and gave Himself up for us. Amen.