There are many debts that western Christendom owes to the Anglican Church. One of them, you may be surprised to learn, is for the arrangement of the books and chapters of our Bibles. Historians assert that the first person to divide the Bible into defined chapters was Stephen Langton (c. 1150 - July 9, 1228). Langton, among other things, was the Archbishop of Canterbury. Thus we owe it to one of the Church of England’s Archbishops that the portion of the Gospel we read earlier today, concerning Jesus as the good shepherd, is in the 10th chapter.
It could not have been an easy task to make these chapter divisions, and I’m sure that Langton himself would have puzzled over where to make the best breaks. The words of Jesus concerning the shepherding of his flock are lengthy and seem to deserve a place of their own, but we have to admit the fact that the division between ch. 9 and ch. 10 is a problem. If we go back to the end of ch. 9 and then read on into 10, we realise that Jesus has not finished telling the Pharisees what he thought of them. By the time we get down to v. 21 of chapter 10, we recognise we are still in the flow of the narrative concerning the healing of the man born blind in chapter 9. We read there of how some of the people listening to Jesus talk about his being the good shepherd said, “These are not the words of him that hath a devil. Can a devil open the eyes of the blind?” The story of chapter 9 really continues on to 10:21.
I am reviewing the issue of the chapter division because it helps us to understand Jesus’ parable. Since we are aware that Jesus is still addressing the Pharisees in chapter 10, we can understand that the bad guys in the parable are the Pharisees themselves. Jesus is calling the Pharisees thieves, robbers, strangers and hirelings. Again, Jesus pulls no punches.
But though this passage is, foremost, another one of those places where Jesus takes the Jewish leaders to task, his revelation of Himself is so beautiful that, in my experience, the passage is usually lifted out of its narrative context and valued as a revelation of the loving, sacrificial care of Jesus for His Church. Thus a passage of rebuke to Jesus’ enemies is famous as a passage of comfort for Jesus’ disciples.
Now, there is no question that this passage does indeed bring comfort to individual Christians concerning Christ’s care for them. In that sense, it is a good New Testament parallel to the very personal and intimate Psalm 23 in the Old Testament. However, it is intriguing to note that, if we take the long view of history regarding the use of chapter 10 in the Church, we find that it is the one passage above all others in the Bible used by the Church Fathers and later writers to show the difference between good and bad ministers.[1] It has been considered a passage about offices in the Church rather than personal care of individuals. This perspective makes sense in light of the fact that it contains words of rebuke by Jesus to officers in the Jewish Church. Thus, as N. T. Wright points out in one of his recent commentaries, the better Old Testament parallel to John 10 would, instead of Psalm 23, be Ezekiel 34. Jesus is contrasting his care of the flock of God as the Good Shepherd to the selfish and destructive way the flock has been treated by men who have held positions as bad shepherds.
In the Anglican Church, the man ordained to the office of presbyter carries three titles. He is a priest, a pastor, and a rector. The first two are biblical terms: priest being a shortened form of presbyter and pastor relating to the duty of shepherding. As one man has written: “Broadly speaking, at all administrations of the Holy Communion, whenever pronouncing an absolution, whenever repelling any from the Holy Communion, whenever he gives the Church’s benediction, the minister appears chiefly in his priestly capacity. When he preaches, visits the sick, looks after the welfare of his people – temporal and spiritual – he appears chiefly as a pastor.” The word “Rector” comes from the Latin verb meaning “to rule,” and is used in our culture in various ways to designate someone responsible for an institution. In the Anglican tradition, a Rector is someone in charge of a parish, usually with its own building, and supported by that parish, whereas a Vicar is supported by the Diocese. Thus a Vicar could be considered the head of a mission church. Again, quoting my reference: “When [the priest] exercises his authority in matters appertaining to the parish as an ecclesiastical and civil corporation – such as calling and presiding at vestry meetings, appointing guild officers, etc. – he appears as the rector…” [2]
We thus observe that the office of presbyter follows the Trinitarian pattern. And, like the Trinity, one cannot completely distinguish the parts from the whole. A priest is to try to keep all his duties in balance. He is in charge of the business of the Church, he is the celebrant in the worship of the Church, and he is the shepherd of the local flock of God. All these duties affect one another. If the business of the church is sloppy and the worship poorly managed, the spiritual care of the flock will be adversely affected, and vice versa.
If we do focus on his shepherding, however, then John 10 is an important passage to consider as to how the priest should pastor his flock. We learn first of all, that he is himself to be in the Church and in his office because he has entered through the door, which is Christ. Our country today is replete with examples of the horrible damage that can be done within and without the Church by men who enter the priesthood for some other reason than as a part of their own discipleship of Christ. It is no wonder that their ministry is not a gospel ministry, for they themselves have not obeyed the gospel and entered the Church through submission to and faith in the Lord Jesus. They have some other agenda than the gospel and so they bypass the gospel door.
A man who is a priest and has entered in the right way into the sheepfold must recognise that he is only in his position because of the call of Christ and that he holds that position only for the sake of Christ. No office is to be held in such a way that people start to think the priest is the door to the kingdom! Christ is always and only the door through which all who will be saved must pass.
Along that same line, the sheep are to hear the voice of the Good Shepherd. In all the pastor’s counsel and preaching, the Word of God is to be proclaimed, not his own ideas and opinions. His heart’s longing is that the sheep will hear the voice of the Good Shepherd and follow Him. The pastor’s ministry is one of calling people to hear the call of Jesus to His pasture.
In a negative vein, we learn from this passage that pastors must guard against self-serving aims, especially of personal gain in some fashion. He is not to be in the Church, walking around pocketing things – be they material or immaterial – for his own possession, when they belong to the Church’s Lord. Christ has bought the Church – she belongs to Him, and everything identified with her. The Church is full of treasures – the most valuable things in the universe. Her praise, for example, belongs to Jesus, not to the pastor, whatever he may do well that may receive some form of praise from people. It’s easy for a pastor to steal glory from Christ and so he must beware, lest he be a thief in the sheepfold.
Again, negatively, the pastor is not to be a hireling. Usually, in history, it is dangerous being a true disciple of Jesus. One’s life may even be threatened. In Jesus’ parable, we have the hirelings who are not willing to risk life and limb to care for the sheep. When danger comes, and the wolf is heard to howl, they hop off their haunches and head for the hills. But not Jesus. He sincerely cares for his flock. Indeed – and here we get into the truly holy precincts of this passage – He has purposefully come to lay down his life for the sheep. The sheep are in danger. There is a wolf ready to devour her, known as Satan, or the devil – and all his followers occupying the seats of rule in the Church of that day. The only way the sheep can be saved is if he, not merely face the threat of death, but purposefully see to it that he is killed for their sake.
If anyone would shepherd the flock of Jesus, for Jesus, he too must have this sincere care for his people. As Paul described Timothy, “I have no one like-minded who will sincerely care for your condition,” so must the pastor of the parish be. He may not literally lay down his physical life, but he must be ready, day-by-day, to see his own daily cross, which he bears with all other Christians, to be the opportunity to deny himself in some way, often costly, that the sheep may have what they need for their spiritual welfare. He is not to be a pastor for the pay, as a hireling, but to sincerely care for the flock in Jesus’ place, whatever the pain to himself may be.
In sum, the good pastor will be someone who follows the shepherding example of Jesus. As the apostle Paul says, “Who is sufficient for these things?” How I, and all pastors seeking to serve the Good Shepherd well, do earnestly covet your prayers for us.
Thankfully, the ultimate purity, health, and glory of the Church is not based upon how well our pastors serve us. The Church is under the care of the Good Shepherd, the Lord Jesus Christ. The sheep were given to Him by the Father. He laid down His life for the sheep, as commanded by the Father. All who have been given to Him will come to Him and He will keep them until that last day, when, as He has also been commanded by the Father, He will raise them from the dead. And then shall the flock appear to the glory of the faithfulness and sacrificial love of the Good Shepherd. There will be one flock, cleansed as white as wool by the Blood of the Lamb, and there will be One Shepherd, and, in that day, the universe will begin to learn what a Good Shepherd He has been.
Amen.
It could not have been an easy task to make these chapter divisions, and I’m sure that Langton himself would have puzzled over where to make the best breaks. The words of Jesus concerning the shepherding of his flock are lengthy and seem to deserve a place of their own, but we have to admit the fact that the division between ch. 9 and ch. 10 is a problem. If we go back to the end of ch. 9 and then read on into 10, we realise that Jesus has not finished telling the Pharisees what he thought of them. By the time we get down to v. 21 of chapter 10, we recognise we are still in the flow of the narrative concerning the healing of the man born blind in chapter 9. We read there of how some of the people listening to Jesus talk about his being the good shepherd said, “These are not the words of him that hath a devil. Can a devil open the eyes of the blind?” The story of chapter 9 really continues on to 10:21.
I am reviewing the issue of the chapter division because it helps us to understand Jesus’ parable. Since we are aware that Jesus is still addressing the Pharisees in chapter 10, we can understand that the bad guys in the parable are the Pharisees themselves. Jesus is calling the Pharisees thieves, robbers, strangers and hirelings. Again, Jesus pulls no punches.
But though this passage is, foremost, another one of those places where Jesus takes the Jewish leaders to task, his revelation of Himself is so beautiful that, in my experience, the passage is usually lifted out of its narrative context and valued as a revelation of the loving, sacrificial care of Jesus for His Church. Thus a passage of rebuke to Jesus’ enemies is famous as a passage of comfort for Jesus’ disciples.
Now, there is no question that this passage does indeed bring comfort to individual Christians concerning Christ’s care for them. In that sense, it is a good New Testament parallel to the very personal and intimate Psalm 23 in the Old Testament. However, it is intriguing to note that, if we take the long view of history regarding the use of chapter 10 in the Church, we find that it is the one passage above all others in the Bible used by the Church Fathers and later writers to show the difference between good and bad ministers.[1] It has been considered a passage about offices in the Church rather than personal care of individuals. This perspective makes sense in light of the fact that it contains words of rebuke by Jesus to officers in the Jewish Church. Thus, as N. T. Wright points out in one of his recent commentaries, the better Old Testament parallel to John 10 would, instead of Psalm 23, be Ezekiel 34. Jesus is contrasting his care of the flock of God as the Good Shepherd to the selfish and destructive way the flock has been treated by men who have held positions as bad shepherds.
In the Anglican Church, the man ordained to the office of presbyter carries three titles. He is a priest, a pastor, and a rector. The first two are biblical terms: priest being a shortened form of presbyter and pastor relating to the duty of shepherding. As one man has written: “Broadly speaking, at all administrations of the Holy Communion, whenever pronouncing an absolution, whenever repelling any from the Holy Communion, whenever he gives the Church’s benediction, the minister appears chiefly in his priestly capacity. When he preaches, visits the sick, looks after the welfare of his people – temporal and spiritual – he appears chiefly as a pastor.” The word “Rector” comes from the Latin verb meaning “to rule,” and is used in our culture in various ways to designate someone responsible for an institution. In the Anglican tradition, a Rector is someone in charge of a parish, usually with its own building, and supported by that parish, whereas a Vicar is supported by the Diocese. Thus a Vicar could be considered the head of a mission church. Again, quoting my reference: “When [the priest] exercises his authority in matters appertaining to the parish as an ecclesiastical and civil corporation – such as calling and presiding at vestry meetings, appointing guild officers, etc. – he appears as the rector…” [2]
We thus observe that the office of presbyter follows the Trinitarian pattern. And, like the Trinity, one cannot completely distinguish the parts from the whole. A priest is to try to keep all his duties in balance. He is in charge of the business of the Church, he is the celebrant in the worship of the Church, and he is the shepherd of the local flock of God. All these duties affect one another. If the business of the church is sloppy and the worship poorly managed, the spiritual care of the flock will be adversely affected, and vice versa.
If we do focus on his shepherding, however, then John 10 is an important passage to consider as to how the priest should pastor his flock. We learn first of all, that he is himself to be in the Church and in his office because he has entered through the door, which is Christ. Our country today is replete with examples of the horrible damage that can be done within and without the Church by men who enter the priesthood for some other reason than as a part of their own discipleship of Christ. It is no wonder that their ministry is not a gospel ministry, for they themselves have not obeyed the gospel and entered the Church through submission to and faith in the Lord Jesus. They have some other agenda than the gospel and so they bypass the gospel door.
A man who is a priest and has entered in the right way into the sheepfold must recognise that he is only in his position because of the call of Christ and that he holds that position only for the sake of Christ. No office is to be held in such a way that people start to think the priest is the door to the kingdom! Christ is always and only the door through which all who will be saved must pass.
Along that same line, the sheep are to hear the voice of the Good Shepherd. In all the pastor’s counsel and preaching, the Word of God is to be proclaimed, not his own ideas and opinions. His heart’s longing is that the sheep will hear the voice of the Good Shepherd and follow Him. The pastor’s ministry is one of calling people to hear the call of Jesus to His pasture.
In a negative vein, we learn from this passage that pastors must guard against self-serving aims, especially of personal gain in some fashion. He is not to be in the Church, walking around pocketing things – be they material or immaterial – for his own possession, when they belong to the Church’s Lord. Christ has bought the Church – she belongs to Him, and everything identified with her. The Church is full of treasures – the most valuable things in the universe. Her praise, for example, belongs to Jesus, not to the pastor, whatever he may do well that may receive some form of praise from people. It’s easy for a pastor to steal glory from Christ and so he must beware, lest he be a thief in the sheepfold.
Again, negatively, the pastor is not to be a hireling. Usually, in history, it is dangerous being a true disciple of Jesus. One’s life may even be threatened. In Jesus’ parable, we have the hirelings who are not willing to risk life and limb to care for the sheep. When danger comes, and the wolf is heard to howl, they hop off their haunches and head for the hills. But not Jesus. He sincerely cares for his flock. Indeed – and here we get into the truly holy precincts of this passage – He has purposefully come to lay down his life for the sheep. The sheep are in danger. There is a wolf ready to devour her, known as Satan, or the devil – and all his followers occupying the seats of rule in the Church of that day. The only way the sheep can be saved is if he, not merely face the threat of death, but purposefully see to it that he is killed for their sake.
If anyone would shepherd the flock of Jesus, for Jesus, he too must have this sincere care for his people. As Paul described Timothy, “I have no one like-minded who will sincerely care for your condition,” so must the pastor of the parish be. He may not literally lay down his physical life, but he must be ready, day-by-day, to see his own daily cross, which he bears with all other Christians, to be the opportunity to deny himself in some way, often costly, that the sheep may have what they need for their spiritual welfare. He is not to be a pastor for the pay, as a hireling, but to sincerely care for the flock in Jesus’ place, whatever the pain to himself may be.
In sum, the good pastor will be someone who follows the shepherding example of Jesus. As the apostle Paul says, “Who is sufficient for these things?” How I, and all pastors seeking to serve the Good Shepherd well, do earnestly covet your prayers for us.
Thankfully, the ultimate purity, health, and glory of the Church is not based upon how well our pastors serve us. The Church is under the care of the Good Shepherd, the Lord Jesus Christ. The sheep were given to Him by the Father. He laid down His life for the sheep, as commanded by the Father. All who have been given to Him will come to Him and He will keep them until that last day, when, as He has also been commanded by the Father, He will raise them from the dead. And then shall the flock appear to the glory of the faithfulness and sacrificial love of the Good Shepherd. There will be one flock, cleansed as white as wool by the Blood of the Lamb, and there will be One Shepherd, and, in that day, the universe will begin to learn what a Good Shepherd He has been.
Amen.
Comments