The duty of feeding the flock generally rests on the shepherd. The shepherd leads and provides for the sheep, ensuring their safety and welfare. Following His resurrection and before leaving the earth, Jesus explicitly commanded Peter to tend to His sheep. To underscore the importance, Jesus reiterated this command to Peter three times (John 21:15-17). It is crucial to examine this significant directive objectively. The goal is to ascertain who should now be responsible for feeding the flock in Peter’s absence. Was this directive meant solely for Peter? And in the current times, when Peter is no longer present to fulfil this role, who takes on this responsibility?
There are various interpretations of this directive. Some reflect on Peter’s declaration to Jesus, recognizing Him as the Christ, the Son of the living God. After that, Jesus proclaimed that upon this rock—signifying Peter’s revelation—He intended to establish His Church. Thus, it is believed that Jesus’ instruction to Peter in that dialogue was grounded on the proclamation found in Matthew 16:17-18. Nevertheless, Jesus knew that the mission of the Church would reach beyond the original disciples, as reflected in His prayer for all believers.
“I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word; that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. And the glory which You gave Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one: I in them, and You in Me; that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that You have sent Me, and have loved them as You have loved Me.
“Father, I desire that they also whom You gave Me may be with Me where I am, that they may behold My glory which You have given Me; for You loved Me before the foundation of the world. O, righteous Father! The world has not known You, but I have known You, and these have known that You sent Me. And I have declared to them Your name and will declare it, that the love with which You loved Me may be in them, and I in them” (John 17:20-26 NKJV).
The highlighted prayer does not appear to favour any individual’s responsibility over another’s. It sets forth a single condition based on faith in Him, as proclaimed by His disciples. The prayer’s intent is for unity in Jesus and His Father. Reflecting on the dialogue between Jesus and Peter, it is observed that Peter was questioned thrice about his love for Jesus. This preceded the directive to tend to the flock. Hence, it is reasonable to infer that the mandate to shepherd the flock is entrusted to those who hold the love for Jesus (John 21:15-17).
It is a given that, among faithful believers, individuals would exhibit a diverse array of personal characteristics, mirroring those seen in the early disciples. Peter, James, and John seemed to have been the closest to Jesus, suggesting they might have been more devoted than the rest. While John suggests in various parts of Scripture that he was the most beloved, there is no evidence to support this claim. The nature of Jesus does not align with favouritism; rather, it could be that John may have resonated with His teachings more deeply than others.
If the level of devotion shown by individual characters were the guide, the instruction to feed the flock would likely have been given to John rather than Peter. There are numerous instances where Jesus showed disappointment in Peter’s actions. Thus, there is no need for speculation on matters not directly addressed by Jesus, such as who was most trusted. The question of loving Jesus as he expected could be relevant to any disciple, including those coming after the original apostles. Therefore, anyone who loves Jesus is mandated to feed the flock.
Guided by the spiritual gifts detailed in 1 Corinthians 12 and Romans 12, anyone devoted to Jesus is called to feed the flock. For example, if one is blessed with financial resources, they are charged with financially supporting the flock. Similarly, if one has the gift of singing uplifting music that edifies others, this too, serves as a means to nurture the flock. This principle extends to various other gifts such as teaching and encouraging others.
In 1 Corinthians 12, Paul effectively depicts the Church as the body of Christ, consisting of many members, each with distinct roles. A talented singer devoted to Christ would offer the finest musical performance for the congregation, just as a preacher aims to deliver the best sermon. The true measure for any believer is their love for Jesus. Every service performed to the best of one’s ability ought to be motivated by love for Christ. Thus, understanding the significance of Christ’s love becomes essential. What does it mean to love Christ?
Loving Christ should not be confused with the sentimental pleasure of exhibiting sensational behaviour that doesn’t truly benefit others. For example, there might be nothing inherently wrong with the gift of speaking in tongues. However, issues may arise when tongues are spoken without interpretation. Although I must clarify that this is my personal view, as someone not endowed with this gift. Some individuals may be edified by speaking in tongues, but this doesn’t imply that I am among those who do.
This is just as there may be truth in that not many people benefit from my writings on this website. Although only a few have expressed significant benefits from the content displayed on this website, it is evident that if Jesus’ work was intended to benefit all equally, he would not have been crucified. The Apostle Paul encapsulated this idea by stating that love is the greatest gift of all.
“Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I have become sounding brass or a clanging cymbal. And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, but have not love, it profits me nothing.
“Love suffers long and is kind; love does not envy; love does not parade itself, is not puffed up; does not behave rudely, does not seek its own, is not provoked, thinks no evil; does not rejoice in iniquity, but rejoices in the truth; bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.
“Love never fails. But whether there are prophecies, they will fail; whether there are tongues, they will cease; whether there is knowledge, it will vanish away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part. But when that which is perfect has come, then that which is in part will be done away” (1 Corinthians 13:1-10 NKJV).
A common error is expecting to be nourished constantly without reciprocating, which goes against the principle of Christ’s love. This includes honouring Jesus’ name without extending that love to others. John asserted that anyone who professes love for God yet holds animosity towards their kin is being untruthful (1 John 4:20). Proclaiming love for Jesus, whom one has not seen while neglecting a brother or sister linked to him is illogical. Jesus is as present in the modern world as He was, in the first century. Furthermore, Jesus can be found in the lives of those, some may consider undeserving of love, just as he went unrecognized by those who crucified him.
In denominational churches, it’s common to see pastors or bishops held in high esteem. Often, congregants are considered “laymen” and are expected to follow the bishop’s directives exclusively. This bishop might then arbitrarily promote or demote individuals, purporting to act on Christ’s behalf. Yet, this practice contradicts Christ’s teachings, which urge His disciples to remain humble, at all times. The scriptural reference used to support such administrative policies is according to Paul’s letter to his protégé, Timothy:
“This is a faithful saying: If a man desires the position of a bishop, he desires a good work. A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, of good behaviour, hospitable, able to teach; not given to wine, not violent, not greedy for money, but gentle, not quarrelsome, not covetous; one who rules his own house well, having his children in submission with all reverence (for if a man does not know how to rule his own house, how will he take care of the church of God?); not a novice, lest being puffed up with pride he fall into the same condemnation as the devil. Moreover, he must have a good testimony among those who are outside, lest he falls into reproach and the snare of the devil” (1 Timothy 3:1-7 NKJV).
There seems to be nothing amiss with Paul’s statement. However, he should have included a disclaimer since we cannot directly link his words to Jesus’ teachings in the cited Scripture. While everyone is entitled to their opinions, they should not be regarded as definitive, especially since Jesus declared Himself the sole authority on Christian matters (Matthew 23:8-12). It is beneficial to heed leaders, but not without verifying that their teachings align with those of Jesus. Paul himself advised his followers to emulate him only insofar as he emulated Christ (1 Corinthians 11:1).
Paul should not face negative judgment for potentially misleading Christians, as Jesus did not suggest that He must be obeyed in all He said. Christians should submit to authority figures, but emulating the Berean Jews who diligently ensured that the apostles’ teachings aligned with Scripture (Acts 17:10-11). It is incorrect to fault leaders for leading others astray. Instead, every Church member has to be responsible for confirming that teachings are consistent with Jesus’ teachings. One cannot claim to be a Christian without continually ensuring that the teachings of others are in harmony with the teachings of Jesus.
We have observed that a person given the responsibility of feeding the flock is the one who loves Christ. That person displays the love of Jesus by ensuring that the teachings of Jesus are not compromised. The phrase, “feed my flock” refers to ensuring that Jesus’ word is constantly used as the stable datum. Anything not said by Jesus should not be taken as food. It is important to listen to any person who proclaims to be Christian. The only test of whether such would be a true Christian would be his consistency with what Jesus taught.
Christians ought to view themselves as shepherds, constantly dedicated to nurturing Jesus’ flock. Leaders, within a Christian community, while embracing their guiding roles, should also view themselves as members of Jesus’ flock. Any element of service that edifies may act as nourishment, as long as it promotes growth in Christian love among diverse backgrounds. Recognizing that the community includes all Christians, each endowed with distinct responsibilities aligned with their spiritual gifts, is essential. A spiritually famished church consists of members who adhere to the Bishop’s guidance without critical thinking. The membership assumes everything is correct and neglects to verify the authenticity of the Bishop’s teachings.
For example, Paul would have valued someone who was vigilant, challenging him about his guidance to Timothy regarding the elders’ qualifications. Paul’s writings indicate that he did not intend to contradict the teachings of Jesus. A member who heeds the call to shepherd the flock, as Jesus advised, would be fulfilling this duty when seeking Paul’s clarification. Christianity entails assuming complete responsibility for the ministry’s outcomes. It is inconsistent to profess love for Jesus while passively observing the disregard of His teachings.
The perils of inaction are often observed in political realms. When a corrupt financial advisor recommends money printing, the State President might entertain the idea, swayed by populism. Meanwhile, informed citizens, interpreting silence as allegiance, might choose not to object, even though they understand the recklessness of this choice. Such inaction could quickly result in rampant inflation that impoverishes the country. However, should a handful of individuals muster the courage to highlight the dangers to the authorities, the impending damage could be greatly mitigated.
The poverty of a nation can frequently be linked to its citizens’ disregard for the activities of their political leaders. This indifference is commonly evident and can result in extensive poverty. Citizens often vote without contemplating the repercussions, and when conditions worsen, they fault the authorities without recognizing their own contribution to the situation. It is vital to take responsibility for one’s surroundings. Jesus likened such disregard to losing one’s saltiness or failing to shine as the light, as mentioned in Matthew 5:13-14.
Regarding the duty of tending to the flock, placing others ahead, as shepherds, before oneself is to be misguided. Recognizing oneself as a brother’s keeper is to acknowledge the responsibility of caring for the flock. The summons to nurture the flock should not be delegated to one individual but should be embraced by anyone who identifies as a Christian. Jesus emphasized that this duty is one of sacrifice, not to be approached lightly (John 21:18). While Jesus addressed Peter, every Christian ought to receive this as a personal call to action.
Andrew Masuku is the author of Dimensions of a New Civilization, laying down standards for uplifting Zimbabwe from the current state of economic depression into a model for other nations worldwide. A decaying tree provides an opportunity for a blossoming sprout. Written from a Christian perspective, the book is a product of inspiration, bringing relief to those having witnessed the strings of unworkable solutions––leading to the current economic and social decay. Most Zimbabweans should find the book as a long-awaited providential oasis of hope, in a simple conversational tone.
The Print copy is now available at Amazon.com for $13.99
Also available as an e-copy at Lulu.com for $6.99