Feed my Lambs / Sheep

[DavidFilmer]

I was looking at the Great Commission. No, not one at the end of Matthew, but the OTHER one at the end of John. Where Jesus appoints Peter to shepherd his flock, and Peter makes a threefold affirmation of love in contrast with his threefold denial (this passage is often used in Catholic apologetics to support the authority of the papacy)

Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” He said to him, “Yes, Lord, you know that I love you.” He said to him, “Feed my lambs.” He then said to him a second time, “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” He said to him, “Yes, Lord, you know that I love you.” He said to him, “Tend my sheep.” He said to him the third time, “Do you love me?” Peter was distressed that he had asked him a third time, “Do you love me,” and said to him, “Lord, you know everything; you know that I love you.” Jesus said to him, “Feed my sheep.” [John 21:15-19]

In this passage, Jesus uses the term “lambs” (baby sheep) once and “sheep” twice. I heard it once said that this has a subtle meaning - Peter is to shepherd not only the laity (the lambs) but also the clergy (the sheep).

I wonder if this distinction (or any other) is credible with respect to traditional Catholic teaching?

 

[edwinG]

DavidFilmer:

I was looking at the Great Commission. No, not one at the end of Matthew, but the OTHER one at the end of John. Where Jesus appoints Peter to shepherd his flock, and Peter makes a threefold affirmation of love in contrast with his threefold denial (this passage is often used in Catholic apologetics to support the authority of the papacy) In this passage, Jesus uses the term “lambs” (baby sheep) once and “sheep” twice. I heard it once said that this has a subtle meaning - Peter is to shepherd not only the laity (the lambs) but also the clergy (the sheep).

I wonder if this distinction (or any other) is credible with respect to traditional Catholic teaching?

Hi David,
Yes, I am a non catholic and this story, lambs ( the laity) and sheep the clergy is familar to me.in that it means that Peter has authority over all… One can not convince otherwise, but that makes Jesus a member of the laity. The lamb of God, our high priest and a priest forever.
It is also notworthy that Peter was there, he knew Jesus, and this great commission caused him distress. I would have thought a great commission brought joy.
Christ be with youhttp://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon7.gif
walk in love.
edwinG

 

[DavidFilmer]

edwinG:

… that makes Jesus a member of the laity. The lamb of God, our high priest and a priest forever.

I’m not EXACTLY sure what you’re trying to say here. So I’ll refrain from challenging your orthodoxy (Catholic OR protestant) and say only that, in the language of metaphor, the phrase “Lamb of God” (where the lamb is the object of bloody sacrifice) and the phrase “Feed my lambs” (where the lamb is the charge of a loving and protective shepherd) are two completely different metaphors, and the understanding of what is meant by “lamb” is completely different.

If my grandfather was alive today he’d be turning in his grave to hear those metaphors mixed up like that.

 

[prodromos]

“lambs” and “sheep” are used interchangedly throughout the New Testament to mean the same thing so I don’t believe you can attach special meaning to them here. I believe Jesus is being poetic in His use of words so that they aren’t a jarring repetition of the same expression. For the same reason Christ doesn’t ask, “Do you love me?”, “Do You love me?”, “Do you love me?” but rather, “agapas me pleon toutwn?”, “agapas me?” and “fileis me?”

John.

 

[prodromos]

DavidFilmer:

If my grandfather was alive today he’d be turning in his grave to hear those metaphors mixed up like that.

From Safir’s rules for writers, “Take the bull by the horns and never mix metaphors”

 

[Sheen]

edwinG:

…but that makes Jesus a member of the laity.

No, it does not. As we see when also reading about the handing over of the keys to the kingdom, Peter’s charge over the flock occurs when Christ is no longer bodily present to guide His flock.

edwinG:

It is also notworthy that Peter was there, he knew Jesus, and this great commission caused him distress.

Suppose you were just told that the weight of the world would soon be resting on your shoulders. No pressure there . . .

 

[prodromos]

Sheen:

edwinG:

It is also notworthy that Peter was there, he knew Jesus, and this great commission caused him distress. I would have thought a great commission brought joy.

Suppose you were just told that the weight of the world would soon be resting on your shoulders. No pressure there . . .

Goodness guys, Peter was grieved because he understood Christs threefold question related to his threefold denial. If it was with regards to his commision, do you think he needed to be told three times before he “got it” and then was grieved?

John.

 

[Sheen]

prodromos:

Goodness guys,

If you are going to take us to task for our thick-headedness, at least be poltiically correct and linguistically inclusive about it. I’m a “gal,” not a guy.

You have a good day now, fella.

 

[prodromos]

Sheen:

If you are going to take us to task for our thick-headedness, at least be poltiically correct and linguistically inclusive about it. I’m a “gal,” not a guy.

You have a good day now, fella.

oops, sorry about that. You have a good day too maam :tiphat:

 

[mtr01]

“lambs” and “sheep” are used interchangedly throughout the New Testament to mean the same thing so I don’t believe you can attach special meaning to them here. I believe Jesus is being poetic in His use of words so that they aren’t a jarring repetition of the same expression. For the same reason Christ doesn’t ask, “Do you love me?”, “Do You love me?”, “Do you love me?” but rather, “agapas me pleon toutwn?”, “agapas me?” and “fileis me?”

John.

I tend to agree with you that it is more of a poetic/literary device. I never thought to make that distinction between lambs and sheep in the passage.

For me, the more interesting thing about that passage is the reference to Zechariah 13:7

“strike the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered”

Our Lord first made reference to this in Luke 22:31-32:

31 And the Lord said: Simon, Simon, behold Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat: 32 But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and thou, being once converted, confirm thy brethren.

Perhaps the above passage is where the clergy/laity thing began (confirming the brethren). Regardless, I see the current passage about tending the sheep/lambs as a continuation of Luke 22:31-32, with the threefold affirmation to counteract the threefold denial. Our Lord seems to be clearly telling Cephas that he will be given divine guidance to withstand Satan, and to keep the flock from being scattered.

 

[DaveBj]

“lambs” and “sheep” are used interchangedly throughout the New Testament to mean the same thing so I don’t believe you can attach special meaning to them here. I believe Jesus is being poetic in His use of words so that they aren’t a jarring repetition of the same expression. For the same reason Christ doesn’t ask, “Do you love me?”, “Do You love me?”, “Do you love me?” but rather, “agapas me pleon toutwn?”, “agapas me?” and “fileis me?”

John.

Actually, John (the Apostle) was recording, in Greek, a conversation that took place in Aramaic, and in which the word for “love” probably was the same every time. However, John probably used the different Greek words for the very reason you mentioned.

This is a common mistake. People think that because the Gospels that we have were written in Greek, that Jesus spoke Greek all the time and used the Greek Old Testament (the Septuagint, AKA the LXX). Actually, Jesus, as a Galilean Jew, spoke Aramaic, and when He was reading the Scriptures in the synagogues, He was reading from the Hebrew scrolls. When the Evangelists quoted the OT passages He was reading, they used the LXX version because that’s what their Greek-speaking audience was used to hearing.

DaveBj

 

[mark_a]

edwinG:

It is also notworthy that Peter was there, he knew Jesus, and this great commission caused him distress. I would have thought a great commission brought joy.
Christ be with youhttp://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon7.gif
walk in love.
edwinG

Well I don’t know about *that. * Jesus wasn’t too happy in the Garden.