The Good Shepherd

 I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. 

                                          - John 10:11 

            The image of Christ as the Good Shepherd is one of the most beloved among Christians. We like to think of ourselves as Jesus’ pet lamb, safe in his arms or riding securely on his shoulders.  During this Holy Week, as we consider what it means that Jesus is both the Good Shepherd who lays down his life for his sheep, and the Lamb of God, I want to consider what the Good Shepherd might show us about how to reflect the image of God to our fellow creatures, placed in our care at creation.  

The image of Lord as shepherd is a thread that runs through both the Old Testament and the New,[1] calling to mind one who is tends to the welfare of those in his flock.  It is an image of concern, compassion, and attentiveness. 

 Here are just a few examples:

• Psalm 23: The Lord is my shepherd, I shall not want.
• Isaiah 40:11: He tends his flock like a shepherd: He gathers the lambs in his arms and carries them close to his heart; he gently leads those that have young.
• 1 Peter 2:25: For you were like sheep going astray, but now you have returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls.
• 1 Peter 5:2, 4:  Be shepherds of God’s flock that is under your care, watching over them  . . . And when the Chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the crown of glory that will never fade away.
• Hebrew 13:20: Now may the God of peace who brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, the great shepherd of the sheep, by the blood of the eternal covenant, equip you with everything good for doing his will . . .

One of the most extensive uses of this imagery is in John 10:1-21.  Here, Jesus calls himself The Good Shepherd, who lays down his life for his flock.  This is a beautiful, complex, and deeply theological passage, and I do not intend here to attempt an extensive investigation of its rich meaning.  However, while Jesus is certainly not giving a lecture on animal husbandry here, I want to explore briefly why this image works so well and what it might teach us about God’s expectations for our treatment of animals in our care.    

            Very briefly, in this passage, Jesus uses the image of the sheep and shepherd to underscore a common Johannine theme: we must learn to recognize who Jesus really is.  To do this, we must “see” him, we must “abide” with him, and we must “follow” him.[2]  In this passage, he stresses the relationship between the good shepherd, who cares for his sheep, and the sheep, who know and follow their shepherd, but who will not follow others.  He distinguishes between the shepherd, who put the welfare of his sheep ahead of his own, the hired hands, who will look after the sheep, but will abandon them if things get rough, and the thieves and robbers, who come only to harm the sheep.  Central to his point is that the relationship between sheep and shepherd is one of intimacy and reciprocity, of knowing and being known. 

            Gail O’Day addresses how the image is used in the Old Testament:

… the reference point for what constitutes a model shepherd is set by the image of God as the good shepherd in Ezekiel 34.  According to Ezek. 34:11-16, God the good shepherd cares for the sheep, rescuing them, feeding them, and tending to the weak, the injured, and the lost.  . . .  The image of the hired hand in vv. 12-13 has many echoes of the bad shepherd in Ezek. 34:5-6, 8-10.  It also recalls descriptions of the bad shepherd in Jer. 23:1-3 and Zech. 11:15.  The common denominator in these OT portraits of the bad shepherd and the picture of the hired hand is the shepherd’s primary concern for his own well-being at the expense of the flock’s well-being. . . .  This picture of the hired hand’s lack of concern for the sheep (v. 13) stands in marked contrast to the picture of the good shepherd, who cares for the sheep to the point of laying down his life for them.[3]

            The image of God/Jesus as shepherd worked for the original hearers of scripture, and for those listening to Jesus in the passage from John, because it resonated with what those hearers knew: they knew the care a good shepherd must have for his flock.  Indeed, in part of the passage, we are told that Jesus’ hearers are confused, and do not understand the point Jesus is trying to make (v. 6), until Jesus explained that he was talking about his own care for those who follow him.  Albert Kirk and Robert Obach suggest this is because the facts that Jesus had stated were so commonplace and well recognized in Jesus’ time as to be entirely unremarkable: “It would be as if one of our own contemporaries told this story: ‘A man parked his car in a downtown garage.  When morning came, he presented the parking ticket to the attendant, paid the fee and drove his car away.’”[4]  

For the people of Jesus’ time it was taken as a given that a good shepherd needed to take care of his sheep, even to the point of, if necessary, putting himself in harm’s way to protect them.[5]  They knew that a shepherd needed to spend time with sheep and get to know them so that those sheep would trust him and follow him.  In short, these images made sense to the original hearers of scripture, both in the Johannine community and in ancient Israel, because they knew how to tell a good shepherd from a bad one. 

            This is not to suggest, of course, that ancient peoples cared for their herds out of their love for animals.  Like any analogy, the point cannot be pressed too far.  Clearly, the ancients had herds of animals in order to feed and clothe themselves, to sell at the market, and to sacrifice in religious rituals.  Nevertheless, they knew that, in the meantime, it was in their own interest to look after the sheep’s interest.  There was an understanding that in order for the animals to provide the shepherds with what the shepherds needed, the shepherds needed to give the sheep what the sheep needed - care. 

            Moreover, the fact that Creator of all repeatedly takes this image on Himself should suggest to us that there is weight behind it.  God has an opinion on what qualifies a “good” animal caretaker.  It is a bad thing when shepherds neglect their responsibilities; when they do, the result is suffering. 

            Contrast this with today’s world where animals -- with the comparatively tiny exception of some of our own precious house pets -- are treated as commodities rather than living creatures who might recognize a particular person, form a bond of trust, or know pain and fear in any remotely significant way.  Whether in factory farms, entertainment venues such as circuses or rodeos, fur farms, laboratories, canned hunts, puppy mills, or even swimming in the sea (or entertainment tank), we consider animals as resources to be harvested or otherwise manipulated for human benefit or amusement.  The concept of care is replaced altogether with a concept of management exclusively for human - and sometimes personal - gain.  We are not good shepherds.  Indeed, we have moved well past being hired hands, caring for the animals until a conflict arises, and are most often clearly in the territory of thieves and robbers who come only to destroy. 

            James Boice comments, apparently without noticing the irony of his remarks:

Think of the characteristics of sheep.  For one thing, they are all different.  In our time, we are so oriented to mass-produced products and, even in ranching, to such large herds that we seldom think of differences.  To us a sheep is a sheep, a cow is a cow, a dog is a dog . . .  yes, even a person is person.  But sheep are different from each other, people are different from each other; and the Good Shepherd recognizes those differences. In fact, it is by their differences that He knows them.  If they were all alike, they would be indistinguishable.

I find that thought immensely comforting, for it means that I do not have be precisely like someone else.[6]

         Sheep are different. So are cows and chickens and pigs and elephants and whales and foxes and every other creature of God.  They are individuals, not commodities.  The Good Shepherd recognizes those differences and loves them as individuals.  We, who were charged at creation with reflecting the image of God, the Good Shepherd, to the rest of creation, do not.  Indeed, in settings where consistency of coat or meat is valued, we do everything we can to ensure that each one looks and tastes just like every other one, regardless of the effect on the individual animals.   As Matthew Scully puts it, “Instead of redesigning the factory farm to suit the animal, they are redesigning the animal to suit the factory farm.” [7]  Yet we look to the Good Shepherd to recognize and value each of us in our individuality and carry us like his pet lamb. 
             The sheep recognizing the voice of their shepherd and trusting him enough to follow wherever he leads is a stark contrast to the terrified squeals of factory farmed pigs whenever they see any human being.  Indeed, Matthew Scully, describing his visit to a factory farm for pigs as part of his research for Dominion, writes, “I ask if I might step inside the hog parlor for a quick look, and opening the door I ignite a squealing panic that sweeps across the barn.  They draw back as if I am a wolf.”[8]

            It is hard to imagine Jesus casting himself in the role of the Good Factory Farmer or the Good Puppy Mill Operator.  And no wonder: these and similar roles so common today are focused wholly on exploitation.  They offer none of the care intrinsic to being a good shepherd.  Perhaps that should tell us something.

Photo credits:
1. Doorway: By Diana Ringo (Own work) [CC-BY-SA-3.0-at (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/at/deed.en)], via Wikimedia Commons
2. Painting: Jesus as the Good Shepherd from an early Christian catacomb, circa 200-300 C.E., public domain
3. Stained glass: By Dietrich (Own work) [CC-BY-SA-3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)], via Wikimedia Commons 

---

[1] See, e.g., O'Day, Gail R. "The Gospel of John: Introduction, Commentary, and Reflections." In The New Interpreter's Bible, Volume Nine, 491-865. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1995, p. 668 and Bultmann, Rudolf. The Gospel of John: A Commentary. Translated by G.R. Beasely-Murray. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1971, pp. 364-66, discussing Old Testament references to shepherds and sheep.

[2] See, e.g., John 1: 35-51.

[3] O’Day, pp. 669-670.

[4] Kirk, Albert and Obach, Robert E. A Commentary on the Gospel of John. New York: Paulist Press, 1979,, p. 140.

[5] O’Day, p. 670.

[6] Boice, James Montgomery. The Gospel of John: An Expositional Commentary Five Volumes in One. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1985, p. 648 (emphasis original).

[7] Scully, Matthew.  Dominion:  The Power of Man, The Suffering of Animals, And The Call To Mercy.  New York: St. Martin Griffin, p. 243.  See generally, Scully, pp. 235-43 (regarding genetic manipulation of pigs to suit modern tastes and corporate efficiency requirements).

[8] Scully, p. 259.