Although ancient Oriental societies and the Hebrew tradition had already used the idea of a shepherd as the leader of his flock, their conception was quite different from the later Christian view. For them, the shepherd-king was like God watching over his people, giving them protection and ensuring food.
The Hebrews regarded the shepherd as the personification of obedience and law, yet they did not think of the relationship as one of individual and complete dependence, traits that were added later by Christian philosophy.
Differences of the Shepherd’s Duties and Responsibilities between the Christian and Greek tradition
The first main difference was that for the Greeks the gods were seen as owners of the land, so the possession of a geographical area became of utmost importance. However, the Christian shepherd was primarily wielding power over a specific flock regardless of locations. In fact, land served as an incentive or gift, a kind of reward or promise to the flock.
In addition, the Christian shepherd ought to gather, guide and lead the flock with a clear focus on individuality. Without the shepherd the flock would be scattered and dispersed, and each individual member was dependent on his presence and his direct action.
The shepherd was necessary for their subsistence as well as their existence and he was there to provide constant watch and to support each member individually through kindness while ensuring that each “sheep” was fed and on the path of salvation.
As such, the Christian shepherd was attentive to each and every individual need and desire of the members. In fact, he would need to render an account for his flock and their actions, for example at a final event such as the Last Judgment. As mentioned previously, it was different from the Hebrew view of following the given laws as the flock was more or less helpless on its own and strongly dependent on the will and guidance of the shepherd.
For the Greeks, on the other hand, the deity was thought to rule not over individuals but a collective group of people or a city, for example. Laws were made to ensure that society as a whole would function, namely as a set of harmonious and rather independent individuals.
A Greek god would sometimes save a city which was the embodiment of a group of individuals or he would provide land and abundance of crops yet not take care of his people on a constant or daily basis. Greeks would obey because it was either the law or the will of the city, yet considered it often as a temporary measure or a means towards an ulterior goal and not as an end in itself as was the case with the Christian thought.
This “pastoral technology” according to Foucault has changed the Christian relationship and view towards power structures, such as the Church and the State. In Christianity individuals would submit personally to the will of the shepherd, whether it was Jesus, the priest or pastor as the shepherd of a church or parish. It was then also the responsibility of the shepherd to know his flock in an intimate and concise manner by gaining access to their public and secret sins so that they did not sway from the Christian path and were eventually saved.
Works Cited
Foucault, Michel. Politics Philosophy Culture. Ed. by Lawrence D. Kritzman. Routledge: New York, 1988.
Arash Farzaneh - Arash Farzaneh is a writer and a language professor. He has a Master's degree in French literature with a minor in Psychology. Since his ...
Join the Conversation