Charles Ellicott Commentary 1 Peter 5

The elders which are among you . . .—The best text preserves the word “therefore” after “elders.” In view, that is, of these hopes and threats, of the present persecution, and of the coming judgment, St. Peter gives his solemn charge to those who shared with him the responsibility of office in the Church. The word rendered “exhort” is that common New Testament word (parakalô), which we miss in English, including encouragement and entreaty, and even consolation, as well as exhortation. (See, for example, Acts 4:36.) The whole of this Epistle is an example of such paraclesis.

Who am also an elder.—St. Peter is giving no irresponsible advice. He knows by experience the dangers that beset the office. As the foremost Christian leader, and writing from the midst of the persecution already begun in Rome, the Asiatic elders could not regard his advice as that of some comfortable layman untouched by the difficulty. It can hardly be said, therefore, that this is an example of St. Peter’s humility, as if he recognized in himself no higher office than that of these presbyters. The effect is, on the contrary, to make the recipients of the Letter feel that he is using a strong argument à fortiori.

And a witness of the sufferings of Christ.—The Greek word calls attention not so much to the fact of his having been a spectator, an eyewitness, but rather to the fact of his bearing testimony to the sufferings. Here again, too, it is in Greek “the sufferings of the Christ.” (See Note on 1 Peter 1:11.) Not only did St. Peter know, by holding office himself, what the dangers of office were, but he was able to testify how the Messiah Himself, the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, had suffered, from which it was natural to conclude that all Christians also were destined to suffer.

And also a partaker of the glory . . .—This splendid assurance follows naturally from being a witness of the sufferings of the Christ. “I am in as much danger as any of you,” the Apostle says, “but I can testify that the Christ Himself suffered in this way, and therefore I knew that we who suffer with Him are even now partakers of the glory, though a veil at present hides it.” St. Peter insists in the same way on our present possession of what will not be shown to us for a time in 1 Peter 1:5.

On verses 1-11:

FURTHER EXHORTATIONS SUGGESTED BY THE CRISIS.—The officers of the community are not to flinch from the duties imposed upon them, nor to perform them in any spirit of self-assertion. The laity, on the other hand, are to observe discipline. Indeed, mutual submission is the only safeguard in the face of a common danger. An unbroken front must be presented, and the sense of brotherhood fostered.

Feed the flock of God which is among you.—By the word “feed” here is meant, not merely the giving of pasture, but the whole government. It is the verb used in John 21:16, not that in the 15th and 17th verses.

There can hardly be any doubt that St. Peter was thinking of that scene when he issued these directions. Our Lord had committed into his hands all His sheep and lambs, without restriction of age or country, to be fed and shepherded. Now the time was approaching when he would have to put off this tabernacle (2 Peter 1:14).

Therefore, he here ensures that after his decease the charge committed to him would be fulfilled. He still shepherds the flock by proxy.

Two other points must be mentioned, which bring this passage into connection with the charge given by St. Paul to the Ephesian elders (Acts 20:28), which was very probably known to St. Peter.

1. St. Peter calls it the flock of God. Textual critics are much divided on the reading in Acts 20:28, but, on the whole, the Received reading seems the best supported: the Church of God which He hath purchased with His own blood. At the same time, St. Peter remembers how Christ had said, Feed My sheep. It may be fairly thought, therefore, when we see St. Peter’s own theology in 1 Peter 1:25; 1 Peter 2:3; 1 Peter 3:15, that when he writes, Feed the flock of God, his thoughts turn to the Second Person of the Holy Trinity rather than to the First.
2. Hooker well points out, on Acts 20:28, the unity of the flock. Though there were many elders in Ephesus, there was but one flock they fed between them. So now, all over Asia Minor, it was but one flock. St. Peter, to whom the flock throughout the whole world was committed, saw it as a whole, but the elders to whom he writes had only to look to that part of the one flock which was among them. The marginal rendering is against the order of the Greek words and does not suit the context so well when the context is rightly understood.

Taking the oversight thereof.—It is exceedingly doubtful whether these words form part of the original text or not. If they do, the translation unduly limits the meaning, which would be better expressed by “maintaining (or, exercising) the oversight,” or “performing the duties of bishops,” for he is addressing men who were already ordained. By this time the word “bishop” had not become a fixed title of one special office, though the office itself was in existence.

Not by constraint, but willingly.—Why should this exhortation be given so prominently? It is hardly to be thought that St. Peter had in view the humility which led men to adopt such strange methods of avoiding the responsibility of the priesthood as we find resorted to by Chrysostom and Ambrose. Much more probably he is thinking of the actual danger to life and property of being ringleaders of the sect (Acts 24:5), which would lead cowardly bishops to throw up their office.

He is not treating of the motives which should lead a man to accept the position. He speaks to persons who already hold the office and urges them not to leave the flock, like hirelings, when they see the persecution coming on. Several of the best authorities add, but willingly, according to God. It was God, that is, who put them in that station, and they must not need the compulsion of their laity, or of the rest of the episcopate, or of the Apostles, to keep them at their post.

Not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind.—The opposite vice to that on which he has just passed sentence. Some, who had no fears, might be tempted to retain the office by the good salary which the Church gave, or might threaten to resign if their salaries were not raised in proportion to their risk. The ready mind, of which the Apostle speaks, means the love of the work itself, which should be the sole motive in seeking, or performing, the gospel ministry.

Neither as being lords.—Rather, nor yet as lording it. The English version is somewhat too strict for the Greek and for the sense. There is a sense in which the heads of the Church are, and ought to be, lords and princes over the rest; but this is very different from “lording it,” acting tyrannically, forgetting the constitutional rights of their subjects.

Over God’s heritage.—Quite literally, Over the lots. The word first of all means (as in Matthew 27:35 or Acts 1:26) the actual scrap of paper or wood that was tossed. Then it comes to mean (like the word “lot” in the language of auctions) the piece of property that falls by lot to anyone’s share. Then all notion of chance disappears, and it comes to mean the portion assigned to anyone. So St. Peter says that Simon Magus has no share nor lot in this thing (Acts 8:21).

In Acts 26:18 and Colossians 1:12, the same word is rendered “inheritance.” In Acts 17:4, our version endeavors, not very successfully, through the Latin word “consorted,” to keep up the underlying notion of the Greek, which literally is “were allotted to Paul and Silas.” Here, therefore, we must understand “the lots,” over which the clergy are not to lord it, to be the different congregations, districts, parishes, dioceses, which had been allotted to them. At the same time, it does not at all imply that any process like drawing of lots had been resorted to in their appointment, as is seen from Acts 17:4, just cited. It will be seen that our version is misleading in substituting singular for plural, and in inserting the word “God’s.”

The whole flock is God’s (1 Peter 5:2), purchased with His own blood; but the “allotments” are the portions assigned by Him to the different clergy. It is some consolation to see, when we groan under the lives and characters of some church officers now, that even in the Apostles’ days, cowardice, greed, and self-assertion were not unknown.

Examples to the flock.—The best way of becoming a real prince and lord over men is to show them by example what they ought to do, like Chaucer’s Parson, who—

“Cristes lore and hys Apostlis twelve
He taught, but fyrst hee practys’d it himselve.”

Leighton well quotes from Nazianzen: “Either teach not, or teach by living.”

And when the chief Shepherd shall appear.—Or, And at the chief Shepherd’s appearing. The “and” treats it as a simple natural consequence of acting as just indicated. The beautiful word for “chief Shepherd” seems to have been invented by Saint Peter, and it has been apparently imitated in Hebrews 13:20. How could an office be more honored than by speaking of Christ as the chief bearer of that office?

“A crown of glory that fadeth not away.—It might perhaps be more closely, though less beautifully, represented by the glorious crown of amaranth, or the amaranthine crown of glory. Amaranth is the name of a flower which, like our immortelles, does not lose its color or form. Saint Peter immediately adds “of glory,” so that we do not think too literally of the wreath of immortelles.

Likewise, you younger.—Self-submission has been, at least tacitly, instilled in the pastors in 1 Peter 5:3; so the writer can say “likewise” in turning to the rest. In comparison with the presbyters or elders, the lay people are called “younger,” or “juniors,” although in terms of natural age, or of baptismal seniority, they might be older. So our Lord addresses His disciples (according to the rabbinical fashion) as “children,” though there is good reason to suppose that several were older than Himself; and St. Paul, in the same way, called all the Corinthian Christians his “sons.”

This seems to be the most natural interpretation of the word, for it was undoubtedly because of the supposed juniority of all the lay people that their rulers received the name of “presbyters.” Otherwise, there is nothing against the interpretation which makes “you younger” an address to those who held inferior offices in the Church, such as deacons, catechists, readers, and the like (Acts 5:6; Acts 5:10). The danger of any insubordination of the laity or inferior clergy against the priesthood at such a crisis was very obvious.

Indeed, all of you.—Here the correct text omits the words “be subject and,” so that the clause reads, Indeed, all of you be clothed with humility one to another. Not only mutual deference between rulers on the one hand and ruled on the other, but clergy to clergy and laity to laity are to behave with the same self-suppression.

Be clothed with humility.—The Greek verb is a rare and curious one. It properly means, “tie yourselves up in humility.” Humility is to be gathered tightly around us like a cloak, and tied up so that the wind may not blow it back, nor the rain beat inside it.

But there is a still further and more delicate shade of meaning in the word. There was a peculiar kind of cape, well known by a name taken from this verb (we might call it a “tie-up”), and this kind of cape was worn by slaves, and by no others; it was a badge of servitude. Thus St. Peter tells them all to gird themselves for one another in a slave’s “tie-up” of humility. None are to be masters in the Church of Christ. And humility is to be the very first thing noticed about them, their outward mark and sign.

For God resists the proud.—The exhortation to mutual self-submission is reinforced by a quotation of a well-known proverb. The proverb is based on the Septuagint translation of Proverbs 3:34; but as it differs somewhat from both the Hebrew and the Greek of that passage, and is found word for word in James 4:6, we may probably give the same account of it as of the other proverb quoted in 1 Peter 4:8 (see the note there). A sad calamity for Christians under persecution, suddenly to find God Himself arrayed on the enemy’s side! (Such is the meaning of “resists”); and this is what they would find, if they went against discipline. On the other hand, if they were submissive, He would bestow “grace” on them; here again, perhaps, not in the strict theological sense, but in that of “favour.”