What’s My Pastor’s Job? - 3

Thus far we’ve examined the Old and New Testament terms most often associated with determining the role of the pastoral office. Some of my colleagues will undoubtedly assert that the pastor’s primary role is that of shepherd, or more specifically under-shepherd, of God’s flock. It is quite common to associate the literal shepherding nuances underscoring the base biblical terminology to the local church office. Quite often, the ascription of the shepherd imagery upon the pastoral office emphasizes predominantly pastoral care – attending to the mental, physical, emotional, and even spiritual needs of the church. The pastor is then viewed as the under-shepherd to the flock whose primary role involves a metaphorical application of literal shepherding duties (e.g. shepherds feed sheep / pastors provide spiritual food).

If a truly exegetical job description for the pastoral office is to be attained, then a discussion related to the shepherding imagery used in the Bible must be undertaken. Does the biblical shepherding imagery substantiate a primarily pastoral care role for the ecclesiastical office, or does it emphasize something other than the literal shepherding nuance?

The Old Testament Shepherding Motif

The Old Testament uses shepherd terminology in both a literal and metaphorical sense. The lexical examination of the term h['r', / shepherd demonstrated that, when used of someone other than a literal herder of livestock, the term is used consistently in a metaphorical sense. The shepherding motif used throughout Israel’s history to describe both civil and religious officials reveals much about how the ancient Jews applied the motif.

Moses

The metaphorical use of the term h['r' / shepherd in the overall Old Testament usage was examined in a previous post. However, some like to turn to Moses as a key player in understanding the primary role of the New Testament pastoral office. Though very little technical shepherding imagery is ever used of Moses, his importance in defining this imagery derives from how modern writers have aligned Moses to the shepherding motif. Because Moses has been used illustratively throughout various works to demonstrate the relationship that should exist between a pastor and his people, his primary role among national Israel is of import in defining the shepherding imagery of the Old Testament.

God gave a clear call and commission to Moses in Exodus 3:2-10. It is important to note that the Jews of Moses’ day functioned under a patriarchal system not wholly dissimilar to how families and clans functioned in the days of Job, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. During that dispensation, patriarchs of families, clans, and tribes fulfilled the pastoral needs of those under their care. When God commissioned Moses to go to Israel, He did not commission Moses to provide pastoral care for the people - to meet their emotional, spiritual, and physical needs – but to lead Israel out of slavery. That Moses’ commission was primarily leadership oriented is further supported by the fact that God sent him first to the elders of Israel who, by this time, had assumed a leadership role among the people (Ex. 3:16). Furthermore, God Himself said He would do the work of shepherding Israel by providing for their physical, emotional, and spiritual needs (Ex. 3:17ff), a task not given to Moses.

The overwhelming majority of Moses’ interactions with, and on behalf of, the Jews have a clear-cut leadership orientation. That Moses intended to become the leader his countrymen needed is evident in his killing of the Egyptian task-master and subsequent attempt to mediate a disagreement among two Jewish men (Ex. 2:11-14). ). After killing the Egyptian slave-master, Moses went out the next day to settle a dispute between two of his fellow Jews. During his interchange with them, he is asked by the men who it was that made him their ruler and judge (Ex. 2:14). These Jews clearly recognized that Moses had assumed a leadership stance over them by executing their Egyptian master and subsequently interfering in their disputes.

After leading the Jews out of slavery and into the Sinai, God’s purpose for Moses transformed from deliverer to mediator. His primary role was to transform the Jews from a group of interrelated tribes into a cohesive nation. Thus, Moses’ primary role among the Exodus Jews was as their leader. Several facets of Moses’ interaction with Israel in this role should be noted. Moses functioned primarily as the Jews’ lawgiver and mediator before God. He served as their judge and teacher of the statutes of God (Ex. 18:16). He organized a system of shared leadership by establishing a system of judges which he oversaw (Ex. 18:24-26). According to God’s direct revelation, Moses became the mediator and leader who organized the people for travel, organized their worship, prepared and led them in war with their enemies, and chastened them when they violated God’s commands.

The Monarchy

David, the great psalmist and king of Israel, began as a shepherd. Some like to look to the kings of Israel to ascertain pastoral duties for the local church office. Though no Israelite king is ever explicitly called shepherd, and none claimed the title for himself, it was common practice among non-Israelite nations to refer to their kings as shepherd {77}. As has already been demonstrated, the term h['r'  / shepherd carries a consistently used metaphorical nuance directly related to those who hold leadership positions. The question, then, becomes what aspect of the shepherding motif is emphasized when applied to Israel’s leaders during the monarchial period?

The author of 2 Samuel presents 2 Samuel 5:2 as the clearest ascription of the shepherding imagery to a specific king, “In the past, while Saul was king over us, you were the one who led Israel on their military campaigns. And the LORD said to you, 'You will shepherd my people Israel, and you will become their ruler'" (2 Sam. 5:2). The author of 2 Samuel clearly associates shepherding with leadership; an association he, himself, repeats in Psalm 78:72. The use of the shepherding motif cannot be limited solely to David. With reference to all of Israel’s leaders from the Mosaic period to the monarchial period, God states to Nathan the prophet, “Wherever I have moved with all the Israelites, did I ever say to any of their rulers whom I commanded to shepherd my people Israel, ‘Why have you not built me a house of cedar?’” (2 Sam. 7:7). What is the emphasis in the ascription of the shepherding imagery in these instances? It has been suggested that a more stringent application of shepherding practices such as feeding, caring for, and being tenderly related to people as a literal shepherd would interact with his flock is the intended meaning behind the shepherding imagery. When the ascription specifically given to David is examined, a different emphasis becomes evident. Once again, 2 Samuel 5:2 is recognition by Israel that God had chosen David to become king in Saul’s stead. The employment of the shepherding motif emphasizes their desire that David be a benevolent leader. The same can be said of the rulers mentioned in 2 Samuel 7:7. That shepherding imagery was employed of them is an emphasis on their benevolence in leadership, not to their provision of pastoral care for the people.

Such was the use of the imagery by ancient near eastern (ANE) kings predating Israel’s employment of the motif. Kings of the monarchial era of Old Testament literature recognized that their people readily associated the shepherd’s task to lead, feed, and watch over his flock. Thus, it became an appropriate metaphor for benevolent leadership within Israel during this period. The employment of the shepherding motif in the monarchial period emphasizes the benevolence of the ruler as he exercises his leadership role.

The Exile

The use of the shepherding imagery extended past the monarchial period, with its emphasis on benevolence, into the exilic and post-exilic periods of Old Testament history. Jeremiah employs shepherd imagery in relation to Israel’s civil and religious leaders; demonstrating their unfaithfulness to God in the exercise of their offices (Jer. 25:34-35).  He states repeatedly that the shepherds of Israel have led them astray and caused them to scatter into the hillside like a flock that has dispersed (Jer. 50:6). This sentiment is echoed in Ezekiel’s and Zechariah’s use of the shepherding imagery in relation to Israel’s leadership (cf. Ezek. 34:2-10; Zech. 10:3; 11:3-8). The use of the shepherding imagery in the prophetic literature of the exilic and post-exilic period is not dissimilar from its use in the monarchial period {80}. The leadership of Israel had spoiled their own people; ceasing to be benevolent in their leadership (Ezek. 34:2-10; Zech. 10:3; 11:3-8). Furthermore, they had failed in their responsibility to protect and lead the people (Jer. 25:34-35; 50:6).

Summary

Moses is known in Israel as the great lawgiver, not the great shepherd. The fact that Moses functioned primarily as Israel’s leader and that he, in obedience to God’s revelation, delegated the fulfillment of Israel’s pastoral needs to the priestly caste, does not diminish his love and concern for the pastoral care of Israel (cf. Num. 11). Rather, it does illustrate that Moses’ primary role was leadership oriented. Should the shepherding imagery be applied to Moses, overlooking his predominantly leadership function would be a mistake.

During the monarchial period and beyond, the shepherding motif is consistently used to refer to Israel’s leadership, both civil and religious. Leadership specific terms are consistently tied to shepherding terms; implying that the men in view were primarily leaders. The shepherding motif in these latter Old Testament periods seems to emphasize the leader’s responsibility to lead benevolently. The emphasis in the exilic and post-exilic periods does involve the failure of Israel’s leaders to meet the peoples’ spiritual and physical needs. In that sense, pastoral care can be drawn illustratively from this era in its use of the motif.

It should be remembered that the shepherding motif is being applied to those who have a primary responsibility to lead. That leadership involved a modicum of pastoral care, especially as it is used in the exilic and post-exilic era. The shepherding motif of the Old Testament is not largely used to emphasize the primacy of the pastoral care responsibility of leaders, but rather to illustrate that leaders are to lead in a benevolent manner; taking into consideration the holistic needs of their followers.

The New Testament Shepherd Motif

The Old Testament uses a shepherding motif to address Israel’s leadership metaphorically and illustratively.  The New Testament becomes more precise in its application of shepherding imagery in direct relation to the pastoral office. While the motif is not widely used among New Testament authors, several specific occurrences bear significance to defining the primary role of the pastoral office.

John 21:15-17

The conversation between Peter and Jesus, recorded only in John’s Gospel, has been the subject of wide and varied interpretation. Debate has occurred with reference to the meanings of the terms translated love and feed. An understanding of the latter terms is warranted here. John uses the term bo,skw (bosko - feed) in verses 15 and 17, while using poimai,nw (poimaino – shepherd, rule) in verse 16. Some make the distinction that bo,skw (bosko) merely emphasizes the leading of sheep to grazing land where they may feed, while poimai,nw (poinaimo) implies the total guardianship over the flock which a shepherd exercises. However, it is more hermeneutically consistent to view their uses as nothing more than a stylistic variation here. The technical distinctions between the terms may be viable to a point, but these terms are being used synonymously in this context to form a general description of the pastoral office, rather than placing the emphasis on their individual distinctions.

This does not remove the quandary. In what sense is Jesus using the shepherding motif with Peter? It is universally accepted that Jesus is restoring Peter after the disciple’s denial. But to what was Jesus restoring Peter? Jesus was undoubtedly using the shepherding motif in much the same way as the exilic and post-exilic prophets did. Putting the imagery in the form of an imperative, Jesus is restoring a once unfaithful shepherd to his abandoned position of leadership and recommissioning him to faithfulness. Jesus was restoring Peter to a leadership position among the apostolic band, and, by extension, the collective Church. 

1 Peter 5:1-4

How Peter understood the shepherding imagery used by Jesus in John 21:15-17, can be seen in how Peter, himself, used it in his first epistle. Using the dead metaphor of the shepherd,  Peter commands the elders, a group he places himself among, to shepherd the particular flock of God they are among. It is important to note that Peter begins by clearly identifying his readers; using the term presbu,teroj / elder – examined in a previous post. The use of presbu,teroj / elder is an obvious reference to those holding an official position of leadership within the church. Peter commands the elders to shepherd the flock. Here, Peter uses a dead metaphor and somewhat vague term; a term which needed clarifying.

The use of the verb poima,nate (poimanate – shepherd) describes the action Peter wants the elders to engage in as a whole, without noting any specific internal workings of the action. Generally speaking, Peter merely commands the elders to shepherd the flock. How, then, were the elders to shepherd the flock? Peter clarifies what he means by shepherding when he uses the participle evpiskopou/ntej (episkopountes) a verbal related to the noun evpi,skopoj / overseer; meaning “to oversee” or “exercise oversight.” Peter uses the participle to express the means whereby the command to shepherd was to be accomplished, followed by three adjectives expressing the manner in which the oversight was to occur (cf. 2b-3a).

From this passage, it becomes clear that Peter understood the shepherding motif as a primarily leadership role.  He begins by addressing a specific group of identified leaders within the church, and defines the shepherding metaphor he employs as overseeing. Thus, for Peter, shepherding the flock meant exercising oversight; functioning primarily in the leadership role commensurate with the elder office.

Acts 20:28

Luke’s record of Paul’s parting admonition to the Ephesian elders is greatly helpful in determining Pauline thought regarding the application of the shepherding motif to the pastoral office. The broader context of Paul’s speech involves his return to Jerusalem to fulfill his vow to God. Along the way, Paul stops in Ephesus to impart some final instructions to the believers there. In so doing, he calls for the presbu,teroi / elders of the Ephesian church (Acts 20:17) to attend to his words. Thus, the immediate audience of Paul’s speech is the leadership of the church. After instructing them in several things, Paul commands them to continually be on guard for themselves and all the flock of God. Paul uses the term poi,mnion (poimnion), meaning sheep or flock; a term related to poimh,n / pastor, commonly associated with the pastoral office. In this address, Paul does not refer to the elders specifically as shepherds, but does tell them to watch over or guard the flock; clearly employing the shepherding motif.

The Apostle includes an intervening statement in the phrase, “among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers.” Paul uses the term evpi,skopoj / overseers at this point, thus aligning the elder and overseer office as one. The commission given to these elder-overseers, i.e. leaders, is seen in the imperative which opens the verse; prose,cete e`autoi/j kai. panti. tw/| poimni,w, “pay attention to/keep your mind on yourselves and the flock”. What these elder-overseers were to do was to pay attention to themselves and the flock. What is the logical result of obeying Paul’s command? Paul employs a verb which means “to shepherd” to express the natural consequences, or result, of obedience to the imperative. The natural result of paying attention to themselves and the flock was to be its shepherding. If the elder-overseers were attentive to themselves and the flock, then the flock would be appropriately shepherded.

This begs the question. In what sense does Paul employ the shepherding motif? Since Paul’s societal and educational upbringing would have undoubtedly kept him away from much of the agricultural world, his use of the shepherding motif is unusual. Paul was speaking to a largely mixed crowd at Ephesus, including a number of Jews among the predominantly Gentile church. Given Paul’s personal Jewish/Roman influences, along with the mixed congregation at Ephesus, it makes most sense that Paul would employ the shepherding motif in a generalized way rather than rely on its specific agrarian nuance.

Another question arises at this point. In what sense would Paul’s listeners have understood his use of shepherding imagery? Throughout much of the remainder of the speech (Acts 20:29-31) Paul continues to employ the shepherding metaphor by warning the Ephesian elder-overseers against external and internal attacks; using imagery regarding savage wolves who would not spare the flock. He concludes the admonitory portion of the speech by commanding the elder-overseers to be awake, watchful, or vigilant. The continuance of the motif, concluding with the imperative to stay awake, lends a protection emphasis here to Paul’s use of the shepherding motif. Paul was emphasizing the elder-overseer’s role to protect the church as a shepherd would protect the flock from predators and false shepherds. Paul’s Miletus speech was not intended to be a discourse regarding the primary role of the pastoral office. However, viewing his use of the shepherding motif in the speech in a more generalized way allows one aspect of the pastoral role, protection, to be highlighted without the need to elaborate on the overall role of the office. Because Paul does not expound on the total duties of the pastoral office here, it can be assumed the Ephesian elder-overseers understood the overall role in relation to its leadership orientation expressed in the shepherding imagery, but needed an admonitory reminder in the realm of protecting the church.

Ephesians 4:11-13

The text most commonly identified with the pastoral office is Ephesians 4:11-13. Most pastors and congregants alike turn to this text as the definitive job description of the pastoral office. Contextually, Paul was describing the gifts given to the Church by Christ (Eph. 4:8); never intending to expound on their particular roles and responsibilities. His lack of exposition regarding the specific duties of each of these gifted individuals presupposes the church as a whole, and the Ephesian church in particular, already understood the scope and duties of the offices listed herein. Exactly how Paul’s use of the shepherding motif in this text fits into the overall New Testament usage of the shepherding motif is difficult to ascertain.

Ephesians 4:11 is the only text where the nominative poime,naj / pastor is ascribed directly to an office of the church. It does not seem that Paul is using the term titularly in this context. The syntax Paul employs supports the separation of the pastoral and teaching gifts in this context away from pastor-teacher and toward pastor and teacher as two separate gifted functions within the church. Furthermore, the New Testament elsewhere identifies teachers as a stand-alone gift, distinct from elders, overseers, and pastors (Rom. 12:7; 1 Cor. 12:28-29; Heb. 5:12; Jas. 3:1). Pauline theology has previously equated pastors with the office of elder-overseer (Acts 20:17, 28). Presumably, then, not all teachers were elders. Yet, Paul told Timothy that all who desire the office of overseer were to be skillful teachers (1 Tim. 3:2). Therefore, it is legitimate to see pastors as a subset of teachers. In other words, not all teachers are pastors, but all pastors are teachers.

How does the truth that all pastors were to be teachers relate to Paul’s use of the shepherding motif? As has already been demonstrated, it was not uncommon for shepherding terminology to be used of religious officials. It seems Paul was using the shepherding motif to refer to teaching-shepherds in much the same way the Old Testament used the motif to describe priests and prophets (cf. Jer. 25:34-35; Ezek. 34:2-10; Zech. 10:3; 11:3-8, et al.). Thus, the shepherding terminology used in Ephesians 4:11 is a generic reference to the fact that pastors are to be teachers, and should be viewed in much the same way as Acts 20:17-28; identifying one facet of the role of the pastoral office without elaboration.

While this text is vital to the development of an understanding of the pastor’s general role and responsibility, it is by no means singularly definitive. Several items of import must be remembered when summarizing this text. The context of Paul’s argument addresses the gifting by Christ to the Church upon completion of His salvific work and is not intended to be a declaration of the duties of church leaders. The purpose statement noted in verse 12, “to prepare God’s people for works of service,” is equally applicable to the all of the gifts listed in verse 11. Therefore, all of these gifts, and the individuals who possess them, share the responsibility for preparing the people of God for ministry; it is not a responsibility exclusively born by the pastor.

Conclusion

In ascertaining an exegetically based job description for the local church pastor, the examination of the shepherding imagery in both Testaments clearly lends itself to the primacy of a leadership orientation over against the primacy of pastoral care.