shepherd the flock of God which [is] among you, exercising oversight, not by necessity, but willingly; not for base gain, but readily;
Peter writes to elders as one of them. He gives them a single task: care for God's people the way a shepherd cares for sheep. Three questions follow. What does shepherding involve? Whose flock is it? And what motive drives the work?
Older translations use the word "feed" here. Commentators say the command covers much more than that.
The elders are exhorted to shepherd the flock of God. Shepherding is more than feeding; it implies guidance, and every form of care that is needed by the sheep. The Lord clearly wants His people to be visited and cared for. When He was on earth, He felt deep compassion as He saw the sad state of His earthly people, "like sheep without a shepherd" (Matthew 9:36). Sadly, there is still so little of this shepherd care, and that shows how low and weak the condition of God's people is.
The same Greek word appears in John 21:16, where the Lord speaks to Peter. That link carries a warning about how people talk about a congregation.
The Greek word used here is the same one we find in John 21:16, and it really means "shepherd" — shepherd the flock of God. It is not to be done for shameful gain, for profit, for money. Believers here are called "the flock of God." Preachers and pastors often call the people they preach to "my flock" or "my people." That language is not scriptural, and we should avoid it. God's children do not belong to anybody but the Lord.
The man writing this had denied the Lord three times. Christ restored him with these very words.
Peter's heart may well have leapt as he wrote the early verses of 1 Peter 2, which recalled the moment when the Saviour gave him his new name. Did it not also swell with deepest gratitude and humble praise as he now wrote to elders, remembering the grace that restored him in front of his brothers — the man who had denied Him three times? Feed My lambs; tend (or, shepherd) My sheep; feed My sheep (John 21:15, 17, 18)... To him then and there He entrusted what was dearest to Himself, His lambs and His sheep, to tend and feed His flock. In the same love Peter in his measure appeals to elders as a fellow-elder.
Two words settle everything else in the verse: the flock is God's. One commentator makes that conviction the first test of fitness for the work.
They have to bear in mind first that the flock is God's. If a man does not carry the sense in his soul that it is God's flock, I do not think he is fit to be an elder, or to hold any other office of spiritual trust. He stands far from the right ground for being a blessing to what, after all, is God's flock.
God still lets men feed what belongs to Him, and that permission answers any claim of ownership.
Moreover it was the flock of God which they were to feed. What a solemn as well as sweet thought! How impossible it is for anyone to think of it as his own flock, once he has grasped that it is the flock of God, and that God allows us to feed it!
Oversight means guarding the flock against real dangers, and it will not always be welcome.
He calls the elders to pastoral ministry: "shepherd the flock of God that is among you" (v.2). He knows that this work can be hard (he himself was a "fellow elder"). Shepherding the flock involves protecting it from various dangers (cf. Acts 20:28-30). This needs constant watchfulness. Exercising "oversight," as Peter also calls this ministry, is not always welcome, because sometimes people have to be corrected and urged on.
after_note: DELETE
Peter names two wrong motives: pressure and profit. Both were foreseen.
It is most important that the "elder" uses his spiritual authority in the right way and spirit. That is why three things are set out in verses 2 and 3. He is to take up his service willingly, readily, and as himself a model to the flock. The Holy Spirit who inspired these words foresaw how strong the pull would be to take up such work — either from compulsion, or from love of gain, or from a desire for power and influence.
The other side of the verse is gladness in the work itself.
"Not for shameful gain, but eagerly" — this is a spontaneous, blessed desire to serve Christ and care for His people. And what is more blessed than being allowed, in any measure, to care for Christ's people?
- Whose — The flock is God's, never the elder's. Forget that, and a man is not fit for spiritual trust.
- What — Shepherding is wider than feeding: guidance, visiting, protection, and every care the sheep need.
- How — Oversight means constant watching for real danger. It includes correction, which is never welcome.
- Why — Not from pressure and not for money, but willingly and gladly. The work is a privilege, not a burden.
- Who — Peter himself was restored with the words "shepherd My sheep." He hands on what is dearest to Christ.
not as lording it over your possessions, but being models for the flock.
Peter's warning to the elders is blunt: the shepherd is not the owner. Behind the phrase "those in your charge" lies a Greek word that later split the church into two classes.
The older King James wording, "neither as being lords over God's heritage," adds a word that is not in the text. The italics in that version give it away.
The elders are told to shepherd the flock of God which was among them... They must remember first that the flock is God's. If a man does not carry that sense in his soul, I do not think he is fit to be an elder, or to hold any other office of spiritual trust... Notice that "God's" is printed in italics. We can say without hesitation that the phrase does not mean God's heritage at all. It means something completely different. The true sense is this — "Nor as lording it over your possessions." The elders are not to treat the flock as if it belonged to them.
One Greek word in this verse explains how the church came to be divided into two ranks.
The Greek word for heritage in this text just quoted is klēros, from which the English word, clergy, is derived. The Bible clergy consisted of ALL Christians, and the laity (Greek, laos, the people) were the heathen outside the Christian circle. The clergy have stolen a word that belongs to all God's people. They claim it as the name of a class, which Scripture never authorized. And they have handed the rest of God's people a title, laity, which once described the heathen world outside.
The safeguard against domineering is not a rule but a fact: the flock belongs to God.
The elders were to feed the flock of God with a ready mind, not because they were forced to. They were not to do it for gain, nor as men governing an inheritance of their own, but as examples to the flock... Moreover it was the flock of God which they were to feed. What a solemn as well as sweet thought! How impossible it is for anyone to think of it as his own flock, once he has grasped that it is God's flock, and that God allows us to feed it!
Kelly shows what this fact changes in ordinary church life, and what the opposite claim costs.
It is God's flock, not yours; and you are not to lord over it as if it were your own belongings. If it were your heritage, you would have certain rights... When this is fully weighed, it makes a wonderful change in the mind, tone, and temper. It changes both those who tend the flock and those they care for. For then they look to God, and no petty feeling about trespassing on another's rights remains... The truth is that the assumption of "my flock," or "yours", is the root of endless mischief.
If even a believer's own property really belongs to the Master, so does a congregation. And a trust calls for an account.
To the man of faith, the property that flesh counts our own is not really ours. It is the Master's goods, entrusted to his care. How much more, then, must elders beware of lording it over the charge allotted to them as if it were theirs? No, they are to become models of the flock. They must always remember that it is God's flock, and that they must give account to the Lord for how they guided His sheep, and for their own daily walk.
The positive half of the verse replaces one method of moving people with another.
They are warned not to lord it over God's heritage. They are not to drive the flock but to lead it as "examples to the flock."
Bellett sets service against patronage.
They prove what they teach, and they labour in the spirit of service, not of patronage. They are not lords of the heritage, but examples of the flock. They claim no dominion over the faith; they are helpers of the joy.
Writers note that the danger Peter names is what later history produced.
The Holy Spirit who inspired these words foresaw how strong the pull would be to take up such work. It might be from compulsion, or for love of gain, or from a desire for power and influence. Church history proves how much these words were needed. It tells us how the simple "elders" or "bishops" of the apostles' day were slowly turned into "princes of the church," who lorded it over God's people as though they were their own possessions.
- Ownership — The flock is God's, not the shepherd's. Every other instruction in the verse follows from that one fact.
- Wording — Older translators added the word "God's." The sense is "not lording it over your own possessions."
- Clergy — Kleros, the word here, gave us "clergy," yet Scripture uses it of all God's people, never of a separate class.
- Method — The elder does not drive the flock. He leads it, proving what he teaches by how he lives.
- Account — Nothing here is owned, only entrusted. Elders will answer to the Lord for how they guided His sheep.
And when the chief shepherd is manifested ye shall receive the unfading crown of glory.
Peter has just told the elders how to care for God's people. Now he tells them what makes the work worth it: a Shepherd who will appear, and a crown that never withers. So two questions follow — who is this "chief Shepherd," and what crown does He give?
The title points to a Shepherd with others working under Him. It is one of three shepherd titles the New Testament gives to Christ. Each belongs to a different stage of His work, and each has a matching psalm.
The New Testament shows three great aspects of the Lord's Shepherd-character, and they teach the same precious truths. He is the "Good Shepherd," who laid down His life for the sheep. (Compare John 10; Ps. 22) He is the "Great Shepherd" — risen from the dead, He takes charge of the sheep as they travel through "that great and terrible wilderness." (Compare Heb. 13; Ps. 23) He is the "Chief Shepherd," who will give a crown of glory to all His under-shepherds at His appearing and kingdom. (Compare 1 Peter 5; Ps. 24)
Right now the Shepherd is out of sight, and so is much of the work done for Him. One day everyone will see Him, and that is the encouragement.
The chief shepherd was still hidden (cf. 1:8), but one day He will be revealed, He will be seen! Then the elders, too, would receive a crown, an "unfading crown of glory". This should give them courage for all the efforts and trouble they took in carrying out their task.
Peter promises this reward to those who feed a flock that was never theirs. One thought kills any sense of ownership.
The elders were to pour loving care on the flock, for the sake of Christ, the chief Shepherd, and for the good of souls. And it was the flock of God that they were to feed. What a solemn and sweet thought! No one can think of it as his own flock once he has grasped that it is God's flock, and that God lets us feed it!
The word for crown here is not a royal diadem. It is the winner's wreath from the games, and those wreaths were leaves.
Greek writers use stephanos for the wreath given to a conqueror, the prize given to a winning athlete in the Greek games, and the crown given to a citizen for public service. The wreath consisted of leaves: wild thyme at the Olympic games, laurel at the Pythian, parsley at the Nemean, ivy at the Isthmian. Such crowns did not last. On the winners' heads they looked fresh and green while the shouting lasted, but within a few hours they began to fade. So the Apostle Peter writes, in contrast, of a crown (stephanos) of glory that does NOT fade away.
Scripture names several crowns, and the wording is not random. Peter has already been writing about suffering, and the crown he names matches it.
This service may not bring the servant into prominence down here, and it often meets with little appreciation from the Lord's people. But at the appearing of the Chief Shepherd it will receive the "unfading crown of glory". The Apostle has been speaking of "the sufferings of Christ" and of the glory that will be revealed. So he implies that a spirit of self-sacrifice, with the suffering that shepherding the flock must bring, will have a crown of glory as its reward. Other Scriptures speak of a crown of righteousness in answer to a walk of practical righteousness, but "glory" is always the answer to suffering and self-denial.
Commentators differ on how wide this promise reaches. One reads it as a reward for some, not for every believer:
He loves His flock. He has gone out of the scene, yet He is the chief Shepherd still. He puts it into the hearts of some to care for His flock, and He says He will not forget their service. Later on there will be for them a crown of glory that never fades. I do not believe that all get this crown.
Another sees the door standing open to anyone who takes up the care of others:
"When the chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the unfading crown of glory." I believe this is within the reach of all, if we seek to take care of one another and help one another. An unfading crown of glory! Think of such an end!
The crown is not where the honour stops. Those who wear it hand it back.
What will the saints of God do with their crowns? John can tell us. In his inspired vision he sees the twenty-four elders — who represent the church and Old Testament saints — fall down before Him who sits on the throne. They worship Him who lives for ever and ever. They cast their crowns before the throne and tell Him that He is worthy to receive glory and honour and power (Rev. 4:10-11).
- His flock — the sheep belong to God, not to the one who feeds them; no shepherd owns the flock he cares for.
- His work — He puts the care of His flock into the hearts of some, and He does not forget their service.
- His appearing — the Shepherd is out of sight now, and so is much of the work; the day He appears, the work appears too.
- His crown — a victor's wreath, not a royal diadem, and unlike the leaves of the games it never begins to wither.
- His glory — glory answers suffering and self-denial, and at the end the elders cast their crowns back before the throne of the One who is worthy.
Likewise [ye] younger, be subject to [the] elder, and all of you bind on humility towards one another; for God sets himself against [the] proud, but to [the] humble gives grace.
Peter has just charged the elders who shepherd the flock. Now he turns to the younger, and then to everyone. It ties two things together: an order of respect among believers, and a warning that pride sets God against a person.
Peter sets "elder" directly against "younger," and that contrast shapes the word. He is not describing men appointed to an office:
This seems to be confirmed by the way the elders are in one place contrasted with the "younger" (1 Peter 5:1, 5). What is in question is experience, and moral weight to guide.
The command rules out two opposite errors at once:
Here we have a rule far removed from letting everyone do as they please on the one hand, and with no reference to office on the other. It calls for that godly subjection to age and seriousness which nature itself requires and the Word of God always teaches.
Older English versions add "be subject one to another" before the call to humility. Commentators see a problem in that reading:
As read in the Authorised Version, the second command here seems to make the first one pointless. If everyone is to be subject to everyone else, there is no reason to urge the younger to submit to the elder. So it matters that the words "be subject" in the second sentence should be left out... It is morally fitting that the younger submit to the elder. It is also the duty of all believers, young or old, to cherish the spirit of humility and to seek in love to serve one another.
The word translated "clothe yourselves" hides a sharper picture:
"Clothed" is too vague here. The word is found nowhere else in the New Testament, and is rare anywhere else. The picture comes from the apron a slave tied on to do his work in earnest without soiling his clothes. The Lord, from a far different motive, stooped lower still when He tied a linen towel around Himself to wipe the feet of His own, which He washed clean from what defiled them.
Peter gives this command out of his own failure:
Peter had suffered for his self-confidence, and the root of it was pride of heart. He wanted to save the believers he wrote to, and us, from this folly... God looks for the features of His Son to be reproduced in us. If the love of the Lord touches our hearts, we will gladly serve one another with humility of heart.
Pride never stays private. It works its way into the life of a whole company:
Pride works in us to exalt ourselves and to seek a place of prominence among the people of God. That destroys true fellowship among Christians. The allowance of pride leads to strife and division, but humility binds the saints together. Humility would keep the elder saints from lording it over God's flock, and hold the younger in subjection to the elder.
Peter backs the command with a warning about God's own attitude:
What a solemn thing for the saint of God to get into a position in which God has to resist him! What a dreadful thing to have the Lord set against us because of pride allowed in the heart! God resists a proud person: but where is there room for pride in us who are the vilest of the vile?
Peter is quoting a line that runs through the Bible, and the danger it names is close at hand:
He also strengthens the call with the solemn warning that God sets Himself against haughty men, and gives grace to the humble — word for word the same quotation as in James 4:6. See Proverbs 3:34 and Romans 12:16. So this is a moral principle that runs both ways through Scripture. It is a lesson for every soul in the church, day by day, and no one can afford to overlook it. It is needed all the more because there is a ready danger of becoming haughty through a misapplied idea of position and duty, and of losing the grace God is so willing to give by failing to cherish that lowliness which is found perfectly only in Christ.
The verse ends with a promise, and lowliness is the condition attached to it:
Pride is most offensive to God... If we want to draw on the vast resources of divine grace, there must be the humility that was seen in Christ and in those who follow His steps. We cannot come into God's presence in a spirit of pride. But we can come before Him to humble ourselves, and so be sure of true exaltation, in due time.
- Place — "Elder" here means older in years and experience, not a title. The younger owe them respect. That rules out both self-will and officialism.
- Dress — The word for "clothe" pictures a slave's apron tied on for work. Behind it stands the Lord, towel in hand, washing feet.
- Bond — Pride pushes for prominence and splits fellowship. Humility holds believers together, and it restrains elder and younger alike.
- Peril — Pride allowed in the heart sets God Himself against a believer. The danger is nearest where position and duty are misread.
- Supply — Grace flows to the lowly. Humble yourself now, and God will lift you up in His time.