Shepherding and Sanctuary
Animals: Tradition - Philosophy

FROM

Gracia Fay Ellwood, The Peaceable Table
December 2017

Because the good-shepherd-and-sheep theme doesn’t fit the facts, and because in both Judaism and Christianity, it has in practice been reduced to its metaphorical referents, the vast majority of adherents of both faiths have been for centuries, and still are, devouring animals with little stirring of conscience.

In recent decades, out of that whispered prophetic word, now proclaimed by thousands of voices, has come the animal sanctuary movement. And here, finally, the ancient Good Shepherd image has found a genuine and unambiguous grounding in the real world! The sanctuary keeper is a true Good Shepherd.

Jewish synagogue in Bucharest

The Holy Place

Most US citizens probably think of “Sanctuary” as a term often heard within the last year, referring to a place or policy of protection for undocumented immigrants threatened by deportation; but for animal activists it has been an important concept for three decades or more, referring to a place of safety for exploited animals. But in its very early meaning, it is a religious term, linked to “sanctus,” holy. It signifies a place set off from the ordinary world, where human beings can have access to That which is Sacred. In Mircea Eliade’s seminal book The Sacred and the Profane, the sacred place may be a mountain, a tree, or some other natural feature that is considered by a primal culture to be the center of the world, linking our world to the world of spirit, perhaps the divine realm above and the infernal realm below. A temple may be built on this unique spot, the House of God, in which the divine being lives, and to which pilgrims travel to approach the deity with worship and offerings. The offerings may be sacrificial in nature.

In later developments, after adherents of a religion have spread out geographically, multiple sanctuaries can be found: perhaps shrines where divine power was manifested, as in a miracle, a martyrdom, or the burial place of a saint. Another kind of (multiple) “house of God” is the meeting place of a local group of the religion’s adherents for worship, teaching, fellowship, perhaps sacramental participation. In the latter case, the sanctuary would be the most sacred part of the building, where the sacred ritual takes place. Here one can be in contact with God, That which is holy, though any one sanctuary does not claim to be the only place.

Over time, sanctuaries were considered to be places of refuge, where a person who had killed another without malice aforethought was secure from revenge killing by a member of the victim’s clan. In the Hebrew Bible, there were six such sanctuaries, “cities of refuge” rather than shrines or places of worship, but inhabited by Levites, a specialized tribe or category of people responsible for the cultus. The Levites would take responsibility for determining such persons’ guilt or innocence, and, in the latter case, would protect them during their stay in the city.

In Christian history, churches and cathedrals as sanctuaries became places where a wanted person about whom there was serious question of guilt could often find safety. This practice still obtains, particularly for undocumented persons who are threatened by violence if repatriated, or whose deportation would mean a family catastrophe such as separation of a parent from small children. Especially in the US-funded civil wars in Central America during the 1980s, and in today’s harsh climate of scapegoating undocumented immigrants and other vulnerable groups, some churches, Friends’ Meetings and synagogues “declare sanctuary,” meaning that they actively welcome and protect such vulnerable individuals or families under their roofs.

The Lord is My Shepherd

The concept of providing safety and sustenance to vulnerable animals--though not called sanctuary--is thousands of years old in Western religion, appearing first as a theme in the Hebrew scriptures. Before the ancient Hebrews settled in the land of Canaan and took up agriculture, they were nomadic herders, with flocks of sheep and goats, perhaps also herds of cows; some herding evidently continued after they became agriculturists. Attitudes toward these flocks and herds were ambivalent, a mixture of caring and of ruthless brutality. They were property; their reproduction had to be controlled by methods that included violence; their wool and skins were taken to make clothing and other equipment, their milk taken and drunk; individuals, both adults and infants, would be killed for food and sacrifice. But in the midst of the system that inherently required harsh, exploitative attitudes and actions (and probably fostered patriarchal control of women too), human caring and tenderness existed also.

Two examples particularly show this. One is from ancient Israel’s early monarchy period, when herding had long receded from its original place as the culture’s central means of livelihood, but was still part of the scene. In a parable told by Nathan the prophet to King David, a sheep, a little companion ewe lamb, lives with an impoverished person in his house, eats at his table, drinks from his cup, and “lies in his bosom.” But the lamb is kidnapped and killed by a rich neighbor to feed his guest. David responded with outrage on behalf of the grieving guardian and probably of the lamb as well--in his youth David (like Benjamin Lay, PT 140) had been a shepherd, and must have known how irresistibly appealing the wee lambs are. True, this story is not about sanctuary but about “pet-keeping;” nonetheless, the killing that it depicts is not only selfish but horrible because the listener feels that the lamb is precious beyond words. The tale is allegorical, yet would not have been effective unless it spoke to the heart in a culture in which such companionship could and did happen.

Another instance is the well-known Twenty-Third Psalm, “The Lord is my shepherd . . . ,” attributed to David himself. The narrator imagines himself (probably not herself) as a sheep whose needs are all met by his caring guardian: green abundant pastures, a pond or lake from which to drink freely, soul refreshment, wise guidance, protection when predators threaten his life. The imagery appears to shift from the sheep and shepherd theme at one point, as the narrator eats at the table the Lord provides and drinks out of an overflowing cup. But can we be sure it is shifting? At the close, the “goodness and mercy” of the Lord, still the shepherd, will follow him devotedly all his life, almost pursuing him (perhaps when he strays into danger), and he is confident of living in God’s house forever. This may mean that he will always have the safety of the sheepfold at nights or even that he, as sheep, will live with the shepherd in his house as did the ewe lamb in Nathan’s story. References to fleecing and killing obviously have no place in this psalm; it is implied that the shepherd cares for the sheep for their sake, not his.

The God-as-loving-shepherd image, and variants in which human leaders are also shepherds, appear many times in the Hebrew scriptures, especially in the psalms and the writings of the prophets.

Good Shepherd Rescuing a Black Lamb by Nathan Greene

The exploitation and violence inherent in human sheepherding are done only by bad shepherds, but God the Good Shepherd meets the needs of the sheep: feeding, seeking out and rescuing, protecting from predators, and healing them--because he truly cares about them. The image is carried over into the Christian scriptures (“New Testament”), especially in one of the discourses attributed to Jesus in the Fourth Gospel. By drawing particularly on the extended sheepherding image in Ezekiel 34, the author identifies Jesus with God: “I am the Good Shepherd.”

Imagine a scene in which all the flocks of members of a community are kept together in a single enclosure. The good shepherd comes to the door of the sheepfold and, when it is opened for him, calls each of his or her own sheep. All have names. They recognize his voice and know their names, so they come out and follow him to today’s pasture. If a hired hand--a bad shepherd--tried to get in, perhaps by vaulting over the wall, it would be to steal or kill; the good shepherd, however, comes to give the sheep abundant life. The fact that real-life shepherds do exploit and kill “their” animals is not, in this Johannine story, just displaced onto bad shepherds. Rather, it is turned completely on its head: the good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. We can imagine that this happens when he is defending them either from a would-be thief or a predator. But he loves them, and his love is unconditional.

How About Real Sheep?

Is the image primarily a metaphor, implying that God is like a good shepherd, humans are like bad shepherds in some ways, like sheep in other ways? Or is it a symbol, referring both to real shepherds and real sheep, and to much more, including God, and human beings and others? This is a very important matter whose implications have seldom been considered in Christian history.

It matters because when the whole extended biblical image--including this startling Johannine turnaround--is placed in conjunction with herding in the real world, it doesn’t really work. Real-life shepherds and other herders may have something--even a lot--of the good shepherd in them; they may be up late at night tending to a birth; they may brave icy winter winds to feed or bring in a vulnerable herd. But essentially they are the bad shepherds. The fact is that humans engage in herding and other forms of animal agriculture, both past and present, as owners of property that provides their livelihood. It is enslavement, exploitative in its very core, requiring callousness and violence to turn a profit. (Any care and kindliness that still appeared in traditional animal keepers are, of course, totally crushed by that rampaging dragon, factory farming.)

Because the good-shepherd-and-sheep theme doesn’t fit the facts, and because in both Judaism and Christianity, it has in practice been reduced to its metaphorical referents, the vast majority of adherents of both faiths have been for centuries, and still are, devouring animals with little stirring of conscience. It is a bleak picture.

Old Slaughter’s Coffee House where the first SPCA meeting was held

But the Jewish and Christian prophetic word in defense of the animal defenseless, although long reduced to occasional lone voices, has never been definitively silenced. And it is that prophetic word that prompted the start of organized activism on behalf of animals, when the Rev. Arthur Broome called a meeting in London in 1824 to found the [R]SPCA, whose members included both a committed Jew, Lewis Gompertz--probably the only vegetarian--and several Christians of strong conviction, including Evangelical parliamentarian William Wilberforce (he of the anti- human-slave-trade movement) and three clergypersons.

In recent decades, out of that whispered prophetic word, now proclaimed by thousands of voices, has come the animal sanctuary movement. And here, finally, the ancient Good Shepherd image has found a genuine and unambiguous grounding in the real world! The sanctuary keeper is a true Good Shepherd who cares for animals for their own sakes, not her or his own. They seek funding, rescues, gives names, feeds, cleans up, protects, and heals. I know none who have actually laid down their lives for their animal friends, but I expect that some of them would.

They love them, and through that love the unconditional Love of God the Good Shepherd radiates into the world.

---

Return to Animals: Tradition - Philosophy - Religion