Thomas Aquinas Commentary John 10:11-13

"I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd layeth down his life for the sheep. He that is a hireling, and not a shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, beholdeth the wolf coming, and leaveth the sheep, and fleeth, and the wolf snatcheth them, and scattereth [them]: [he fleeth] because he is a hireling, and careth not for the sheep." — John 10:11-13 (ASV)

1. Here he explains the second clause of the parable: he who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep (John 10:1).

   1. First, he gives the explanation.

   2. Second, he makes it clear, with the words, I am the good shepherd.

      1. He explains that he is the good shepherd.

      2. He states the office of a good shepherd, with the words, the good shepherd gives his life for his sheep.

      3. He shows that the opposite is found in an evil shepherd, with the words, but the hireling . . . leaves the sheep and flees.

2. In regard to the first point, he says, I am the good shepherd. That Christ is a shepherd is clear enough, for as a flock is led and fed by its shepherd, so the faithful are nourished by Christ with spiritual food—and even with his own body and blood. For you were straying like sheep, but now have returned to the shepherd and guardian of your souls (1 Peter 2:25); he will feed his flock like a shepherd (Isaiah 40:11).

   To distinguish himself from an evil shepherd and thief, he adds the word good. He is “good,” I say, because he fulfills the office of a shepherd, just as a soldier is called “good” who fulfills the office of a soldier. But since Christ had said above that the shepherd enters by the door, and here he says that he is the shepherd, and before he said he was the door—I am the door (John 10:7)—then he must enter through himself.

   And he does enter through himself, because he reveals himself and through himself knows the Father. We, however, enter through him, because it is by him that we are led to salvation.

   Note that only he is the door, because no one else is the true light, but only shares in the light: he, John the Baptist, was not the light, but came to bear witness to the light (John 1:8). But we read of Christ that he was the true light, which enlightens every man (John 1:9). Therefore, no one else refers to himself as a door; Christ reserved this for himself. But the role of a shepherd he did share with others and conferred on his members, for Peter was a shepherd, and the other apostles were shepherds, as were all good bishops: I will give you shepherds after my own heart (Jeremiah 3:15).

   Now, although the Church’s rulers, who are her children, are all shepherds, as Augustine says, yet he expressly says, I am the good shepherd, in order to emphasize the virtue of charity. For no one is a good shepherd unless he has become one with Christ by love and has become a member of the true shepherd.

3. The office of a good shepherd is charity; thus he says, the good shepherd gives his life for his sheep. It should be noted that there is a difference between a good and an evil shepherd: the good shepherd is focused on the welfare of the flock, but the evil one is focused on his own. This difference is mentioned in Ezekiel: Ho, shepherds of Israel who have been feeding yourselves! Should not shepherds feed the sheep? (Ezekiel 34:2). Therefore, one who uses the flock only to feed himself is not a good shepherd.

   From this it follows that an evil shepherd, even one over animals, is not willing to sustain any loss for the flock, since he does not seek the welfare of the flock, but his own. A good shepherd, however, even one over animals, endures many things for the flock whose welfare he has at heart. Thus Jacob said: By day the heat consumed me, and the cold by night (Genesis 31:40).

   However, when dealing with mere animals, it is not necessary that a good shepherd expose himself to death for the safety of the flock. But because the spiritual safety of the human flock outweighs the bodily life of the shepherd, the spiritual shepherd ought to suffer the loss of his bodily life for the safety of the flock when danger threatens. This is what our Lord says: the good shepherd gives his life—that is, his bodily life—for his sheep. These are the sheep who are his by authority and by charity. Both are required, for they must belong to him and he must love them; the first without the second is not enough.

   Furthermore, Christ has given us an example of this teaching: he laid down his life for us; and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren (1 John 3:16).

4. Now he considers the evil shepherd, showing that he possesses characteristics contrary to those of the good shepherd.

   1. First, he mentions the marks of an evil shepherd.

   2. Second, he shows how these marks follow one another, with the words, but the hireling . . . flees.

   Concerning the first point, he does two things:

   1. First, he gives the marks of an evil shepherd.

   2. Second, he mentions the danger that threatens the flock because of an evil shepherd: the wolf catches and scatters the sheep.

5. Note that from what has been said about the good and evil shepherd, there are three differences in their traits: first, in their intentions; second, in their solicitude; and third, in their affections.

6. First, they differ in their intentions, and this is implied by their very names. The first is called a good shepherd, which implies that he intends to feed the flock: should not shepherds feed the sheep? (Ezekiel 34:2). But the other, the evil shepherd, is called a hireling, as though he were focused on his wages. Thus they differ in this: the good shepherd looks to the benefit of the flock, while the hireling seeks mainly his own advantage. This is also the difference between a king and a tyrant, as the Philosopher says, because a king rules intending to benefit his subjects, while a tyrant seeks his own interest. So a tyrant is like a hireling: if it seems right to you, give me my wages (Zechariah 11:12).

7. But may not even good shepherds seek a wage? It seems so, for the Scriptures say: reward those who wait for you ; the Lord God comes . . . his reward is with him (Isaiah 40:10); and, how many of my father’s hired servants have bread enough and to spare (Luke 15:17).

   I answer that “wage” can be understood in a general sense and in a proper sense. In a general sense, a wage is anything conferred on the basis of merit. Because everlasting life—which is God, for this is the true God and eternal life (1 John 5:20)—is conferred on the basis of merit, everlasting life is said to be a wage. This is a wage that every good shepherd can and should seek. In the strict sense, however, a wage is different from an inheritance, and a wage is not sought by a true child, who is entitled to the inheritance. A wage is sought by servants and hirelings. Thus, since everlasting life is our inheritance, anyone who works with an eye toward it is working as a child. But anyone who aims at something different (for example, one who longs for worldly gain or takes delight in the honor of being a prelate) is a hireling.

8. Second, they differ in their solicitude. We read of the good shepherd that the sheep are his own, not only as a trust but also by love and concern: I hold you in my heart (Philippians 1:7). On the other hand, it is said of the hireling, whose own the sheep are not; that is, the hireling has no care for them: my shepherds have not searched for my sheep, but the shepherds have fed themselves (Ezekiel 34:8).

9. Third, they differ in their affections. The good shepherd, who loves his flock, gives his life for it; that is, he exposes himself to dangers that affect his bodily life. But the evil shepherd, because he has no love for the flock, flees when he sees the wolf. Thus the Lord says, he . . . sees the wolf coming, leaves the sheep and flees.

   Here, the “wolf” is understood in three ways:

   1. First, it represents the devil as tempter: What fellowship has a wolf with a lamb? No more has a sinner with a godly man .

   2. Second, it stands for the heretic who destroys: Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves (Matthew 7:15); I know that after my departure fierce wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock (Acts 20:29).

   3. Third, it stands for the raging tyrant: Her princes in her midst are like wolves (Ezekiel 22:27).

   Therefore, the good shepherd must guard the flock against these three wolves, so that when he sees the wolf—that is, the tempting devil, the deceiving heretic, and the raging tyrant—he can oppose him. Against those who do not, we read, You have not gone up into the breaches, or built up a wall for the house of Israel (Ezekiel 13:5). Accordingly, we read of the evil shepherd that he leaves the sheep and flees: Woe to my worthless shepherd, who deserts the flock! (Zechariah 11:17). It is as if to say, “You are not a shepherd, but only appear to be one”: Even her hired soldiers in her midst are like fatted calves; yes, they have turned and fled together, they do not stand (Jeremiah 46:21).

10. But we find the contrary command: when they persecute you in one town, flee to the next (Matthew 10:23). Therefore, it seems to be lawful for a shepherd to flee.

    I reply that there are two answers to this. One is given by Augustine in his Commentary on John. There are two kinds of flight: that of the soul and that of the body. When we read here, he leaves the sheep and flees, we can understand it to mean the flight of the soul. For when an evil shepherd fears personal danger from a wolf, he does not dare to resist its injustices but flees—not by running away, but by withdrawing his encouragement and refusing to care for his flock.

    This should be the explanation when considering the first kind of wolf (the devil), because it is not necessary to physically flee from the devil. But since a shepherd does sometimes flee physically from certain wolves, such as powerful heretics and tyrants, another answer must be given, as found in Augustine’s Letter to Honoratus. As he says, it seems lawful to flee, even physically, from wolves, not only because of the authority of our Lord, as cited above, but also because of the example of certain saints, like Athanasius and others, who fled from their persecutors.

    For what is censured is not the flight itself, but the neglect of the flock. So, if the shepherd could flee without abandoning his flock, it would not be blameworthy. Sometimes it is the prelate himself who is sought, and at other times, it is the entire flock. It is obvious that if the prelate alone is sought, others can be assigned to guard, console, and govern the flock in his place. If he flees under these circumstances, he is not said to leave the sheep. In this way, it is lawful to flee in certain cases. But if the whole flock is sought, then either all the shepherds should be with the people, or some should remain while the others leave. If all desert the flock, then these words apply: he . . . sees the wolf coming, leaves the sheep and flees.

11. Here he mentions the twofold danger that threatens. One is the ravaging of the sheep; so he says, and the wolf catches them. This means the wolf takes for himself what belongs to another, for the faithful are Christ’s sheep. Therefore, leaders of sects and wolves snatch the sheep when they entice Christ’s faithful to their own teachings: my sheep have become food for all the wild beasts (Ezekiel 34:8).

    The other danger is that the sheep are scattered; so he says, and scatters the sheep. This happens insofar as some are led astray while others persevere: my sheep were scattered over all the face of the earth, with none to search or seek for them (Ezekiel 34:6).

12. Now he shows how the above-mentioned marks are related, for the third follows from the first two. Since the evil shepherd seeks his own advantage and has no love or solicitude for the flock, it follows that he is not willing to endure any inconvenience for them. Thus he says the hireling flees for this very reason: because he is a hireling—that is, he seeks his own advantage (the first mark)—and he has no care for the sheep—that is, he does not love them and is not solicitous for them (the second mark). So we read about the evil shepherd: she deals cruelly with her young, as if they were not hers (Job 39:16).

    The opposite is true of the good shepherd, for he seeks the welfare of his flock and not his own: not that I seek the gift, but I seek the fruit that increases to your credit (Philippians 4:17). Furthermore, he is concerned for his sheep—that is, he loves them and is solicitous for them: I hold you in my heart (Philippians 1:7).