A homily by Fr.
Gene Tucker, given at Trinity
Church, Mt. Vernon, Illinois; Sunday, April 29, 2012
“JESUS THE GOOD SHEPHERD”
(Homily text: John
10: 11 - 18)
“I am the
good shepherd.”
Of all of
the sayings of Jesus, perhaps this is one of the most familiar. The image of Jesus as shepherd is borne out
by the paintings that decorate our walls, ones that show Him leading a flock of
sheep, or perhaps carrying a lamb around His shoulders.
Indeed, the
Old Testament is full of shepherd images….We read Psalm 23 together this
morning, which begins with the familiar phrase, “The Lord is my shepherd.” Jesus’ discourse, heard this morning, draws
heavily on shepherd-imagery which is found in Ezekiel, chapter 34.
Even today in the Holy Land, the paths which sheep and shepherd have worn into the hillsides are seen nearly everywhere, some of them dating back centuries.
Let’s go
beyond the familiar images that well-known Psalms and our paintings depict to
take a closer look at what it means to be a shepherd. What could Jesus mean by describing Himself
as the “good shepherd”?
The first
place to begin is with the regard with which shepherds were looked upon in
ancient times….being a shepherd wasn’t a glamorous occupation. In fact, if a person was a shepherd, it
probably meant that they were somewhere near the bottom rungs of society. (I don’t want to compare the occupation of
being a shepherd to any contemporary occupation, for fear of branding that
particular occupation in a negative way.)
So the image is one of lowliness of status, somewhere near servant or
slave in biblical times.
The second
thing we ought to observe is that the sheep and the shepherd have a mutual relationship. Simply put, without sheep, there is no
need for a shepherd. Without a shepherd,
the flock would not exist. The one’s
existence depends on the other’s existence.
The first comment, the one about the shepherd’s existence (and
livelihood) being dependent on the flock’s existence, is easy to see. The other aspect of the relationship, that of
the flock’s very existence being dependent on the shepherd’s guidance and
leadership, may not be so easy to see:
the reason for the sheep’s dependence on the shepherd is because sheep
are really dumb animals. They can follow a shepherd, but they are incapable of
leading anything, including themselves.
They are prone to getting into trouble, wandering off, and becoming prey
for wild animals.
Next, we could
observe the tools of the trade that the shepherd makes use of…earlier on in
chapter ten, Jesus has compared His leadership of the flock to that of a sheep
pen, an enclosure that would have made it more difficult for wild animals to
come and attack the flock at night. Now,
the image of the shepherd carries with it the necessary tool of the shepherd’s
crook….Next time Bishop Martins is with us, notice that the crozier (crook) that he carries has a
hooked end on the one end, and a pointed end on the other. The crook has the ability to snare and bring
back to safely a wayward sheep….perhaps Jesus is alluding to the need to
maintain the unity of the flock, a unity which would come from the shepherd’s
ability to corral wandering animals, to bring them back into the main body of
the flock…the hooked end of the crook would come in handy in such cases. The pointed end can be used to prod a
recalcitrant animal into motion. A
shepherd not only pulls the wandering sheep back, but prods them into movement
for their own good and safety.
So we can
see that the shepherd and the sheep have a direct and personal relationship,
one with the other. (This is an
important aspect of the Fourth Gospel’s understanding of the direct and
personal relationship between Jesus Christ and the individual believer….each
share in a direct, personal and loving relationship.)
Perhaps now
we are ready to change our focus just a little.
Having considered the nature of sheep and shepherding, let’s turn our
attention to the matter of the importance of the gospel writer’s concerns in
recording Jesus’ comments, as they were related to the early Christian
congregation(s) that John was writing to … of course, by extension, John is also
writing to us.
The point
here is that every one of the four gospel accounts, Matthew, Mark, Luke and
John, operate on two levels:
·
The
immediate circumstances of Jesus’ original actions/teachings/miracles,
·
The circumstances of the early Christian
congregation to whom the gospel writer is writing.
The eminent
New Testament scholar Raymond Brown makes this point quite clearly in his book
“The Churches the Apostles Left Behind”, which has been the focus of our
Tuesday evening Midweek Study Series recently.
Brown’s point is that we can learn a lot about the situation that Jesus
faced, and we can learn a lot about the situation the early Church also faced,
as the gospel writer chooses to include in the written record of Jesus’
responses to the original situation circumstances that were similar in some way
among the early Christian congregation.
Put another way, the gospel writer might have in mind a thought which
goes something like this: “Jesus faced a
situation very much like the one we are facing, so perhaps I ought to record
what Jesus said/did about that.”
I think
we’re on pretty solid ground in coming to this conclusion.
Let’s see
how this two-fold vision works itself out in John’s gospel account:
·
Jesus
faced opposition from the ruling elite of the Jewish community during His
earthly ministry. The priests, the
Pharisees, and others opposed Him. Many
times, their actions showed that they were far more interested in following the
Law of Moses than they were in the welfare and condition of God’s people. Jesus’ comments about the regard for the Law
of Moses will illustrate the point: Speaking
about the laws regarding the Sabbath day, Jesus tells His opponents the Sabbath
was made for man, not man for the Sabbath (see Mark 2: 27). Moreover, many of the priestly caste used
their offices for personal financial gain, benefitting from the system of
animal sacrifices that took place only in the Temple in Jerusalem (this was,
perhaps, the basis of Jesus’ actions in cleansing the Temple, which had become
the first century version of “big business”.)
No wonder that Jesus observed the Jewish people of His day and was
concerned for their wellbeing, for He observed that they were like “sheep
without a shepherd” (Matthew 9: 36).
Perhaps it is for this reason that, earlier on in chapter ten, Jesus compares all the other “shepherds” to
being hirelings, who are not interested in the flock’s welfare, but only in
their own welfare.
· The early Church to whom John was writing was,
most likely, locked in dispute with surrounding Jewish communities. We know from history that the break between
Christianity and Judaism wasn’t complete until the Jewish Council of Jamnia,
which took place in the year 90 AD. So
Jesus’ words might well have resonated with this early community of believers,
who had been called out of Judaism, or out of pagan, Gentile ways into a new,
direct, and personal relationship with Jesus Christ. They might well have seen the leadership of
these others as being self-serving, shepherds who were leading their flocks in
the wrong direction.
No homily
would be complete without some suggestions of the ways in which Jesus’
teachings can be applied to us today.
For your own reflection, I offer the following possible applications:
·
A direct
and personal, one-on-one relationship with Jesus Christ: Central to John’s understanding of the
relationship between the Lord and those who have come to believe in Him is this
concern: The relationship is a personal,
one-on-one, direct relationship between Jesus and the individual. Each individual is responsible to the Lord for
following Him closely. (This point is
well made in Raymond Brown’s book, cited above.)
·
Like
sheep, we are prone to be wayward followers: The imagery of sheep is peppered throughout
the Old and New Testaments. Consider the
phrase “All we like sheep have gone astray, we have turned every one to his own
way” (Isaiah 53:6) (remember also that this text is used as a famous chorus in
Handel’s “Messiah”). The reality is this:
1. We cannot lead, only follow, and 2. we are prone to wanderings, and
are in need of the shepherd’s careful and constant attention.
·
Jesus
seeks to establish one flock: Much
attention and controversy has surrounded Jesus’ comment that He has “other
sheep that are not of this fold. I must
bring them also, and they will heed my voice.
So there shall be one flock, one shepherd.” Some have taken Jesus’ comments to mean that
“their church” alone is the true flock, and that all other churches which claim
to be Christian are not members of the “true flock”. Others, meanwhile, have taken the saying to
indicate that there are other religious communities (even non-Christian ones)
which are members of the “one flock”. I
believe, if we take into account the image of the shepherd as the leader and
maintainer of the flock, that what Jesus is referring to is the entire
community which follows Him….Put another way, all who hear Jesus’ voice and who
follow Him faithfully are members of the one flock, following the one
shepherd. Here I refer again to Raymond
Brown’s book, which makes the point that, using evidence which is garnered from
the New Testament itself, there were no less than about seven different sorts
of early Christian churches in the first century, each one possessed of a
unique theological focus, method of organization and which grappled with
particular weaknesses, while possessing unique strengths, as well. For us today, the wide panoply of Christian
churches bears witness to the ongoing diversity of belief and practice which is
to be found throughout the Christian community.
By God’s grace, our focus can include all those who seek to faithfully
follow the voice of the one shepherd, for the richness of theological focus and
practice which can be found across the spectrum of Christian life can inform
our own focus and practice. Surely,
there are things that we in our wonderful Anglican tradition can learn to our
betterment from observation and conversation with other Christian believers.
·
Pastoral
leadership of the flock: Ever think
about the ways in which the shepherd imagery shows up in the Church’s
life? For example, many Christians call
their ordained leader a pastor. Pastor means “shepherd”. We call the care given to those in some sort
of need pastoral care, which is
another shepherd image. Our Bishops are
called “chief pastors”, and they carry the aforementioned crook. Bishops are called to be the guardians of the
faith and the protector of the flocks committed to their care. (Priests share in this ministry by being
assistants to the Bishop.) Being a
guardian of the faith entails mounting a guard against false teaching, and
maintaining a defense against the corrosive ways of the pagan world. So those in ordained ministry are called to
maintain the unity of the flock, to protect it, and to lead it, acting in the
same ways that our Lord did.
May we, by
the grace and leading of the Holy Spirit (the Paraclete in John’s terminology)
be enabled to follow the voice of the shepherd, to respond to the retrieving of
the flock from its wayward ways, and to the gentle prodding of the shepherd
when the time comes to move in response to His leading.
AMEN.
