How would Jesus's apostles differ from Peter Robinson's DUP apostles if Jesus had to use d'Hondt?

This of course is a daft question. But not daft enough to stop me from answering it in considerable length.

The proposition is however wrong in its first assumption, Peter Robinson is not Jesus, that’s Ian Paisley. Peter is St Peter, taking over from Jesus. However since St Peter was the first Pope this new hypothesis now raises an important question: is the Pope catholic?

I will choose to ignore this substantial contradiction in my argument and move on to Jesus and d’Hondt ministers...

First choice, EASY! HEALTH! Jesus would not have been a massive scared chicken. Apart from that, his priorities were quiet clear – healing the sick was his modus operandi. He had more heals than Martina Anderson’s wardrobe. The sick, the weak, the poor... in fact he’d probably have appointed himself Minister for Health, not Edwin Poots.

Would he have chosen Finance? No. He chucked the money men right out of the temple. No Finance for Jesus.

What else would he have chosen? Probably Agriculture, he was a big fan of the fishermen. Education? Yeah, why not, he loved the teaching and the parables and the kids. He might have chosen Environment, but probably wouldn’t have put a climate change doubting Thomas in charge.

So there we go, totally different outcome.

Anything else? Yes, no Skodas. Ministerial donkeys.