Lost sheep

A cartoon-caption competition in the American Christian journal Leadership featured a spectacle-wearing sheep speaking from behind a pulpit. In my favourite among the ten listed winners, the sheep is saying, 'I want to thank all 99 of you for giving Pastor Bob the freedom to seek me out'.

The well-known parable of the lost sheep, as recorded in Luke's Gospel, contains a rhetorical question: 'Then Jesus told them this parable: "Suppose one of you has a 100 sheep and loses one of them. Does he not leave the 99 in the open country and go after the lost sheep until he finds it?"'

The question is rhetorical for the answer is obvious: so obvious that it devastatingly refutes the religious critics of Jesus who asked why he welcomed sinners and ate with them. Yes, of course, any good shepherd would leave the 99 and go after the one lost sheep:

'And when he finds it, he joyfully puts it on his shoulders and goes home. Then he calls his friends and neighbours together and says, "Rejoice with me; I have found my lost sheep".'

Today's version

Today in most British churches, the answer to the rhetorical question about sheep is not so obvious. At best, it is an issue for debate. At worst, the answer is negative not positive.

No, he stays with the 99 in the open country and settles for an acceptable 1% loss?

After all, 'open country' sounds a rather insecure if not hostile environment, and who knows how many more sheep might be lost while the shepherd is out seeking?

In the churches in the West, we are fast approaching a situation where the proportions of 'saved' and 'lost' sheep are the exact reverse of those in our Lord's parable. Suppose one of you has a 100 sheep and loses 99 of them.

What now the answer to the rhetorical question? Surely, where there is (literally) less to lose, there is an increased incentive to take risks and 'give Pastor Bob the freedom to seek out lost sheep'.

Does he not leave the one in the open country and go after the 99 lost sheep until he finds them?

But in practice, this is rarely the case. Pastor Bob has other demands on his time - to feed, lead and protect the sheep that are not lost - and to make sure they stay that way, contented enough not to wander away, and safe enough not to be dragged or enticed away. And so the shepherd builds a sheepfold in the open country - not just to keep wolves out but also to keep wandering sheep (and prodigal sons) in.

However, such is the lure of distant fields (and far countries) and the nature of sheep (and sons) that this strategy inevitably fails. And, with every sheep that is lost, so the insecurities and fears of the remaining sheep grow deeper - and the walls of the sheepfold are built higher and its doors made stronger.

Ironically, rather than this increased security in the sheepfold freeing up Pastor Bob to go and seek lost sheep, it instead places increasing demands on him to maintain the sheepfold and to care for his dwindling flock. But in so doing he not only fails to arrest its decline but also hastens its demise.

The future version?

One day in the not-too-distant future, the last remaining sheep will wander off and/or die, or the few remaining sheep will amalgamate with a similarly declining neighbouring flock. And the sheepfold, along with many others, will lie abandoned - or be converted into a mosque or a theme-pub.

The only way to ensure that this does not happen is to get the right answer to the rhetorical question about sheep.

Suppose one of you has 100 sheep and loses one of them. Does he not leave the 99 in the open country and go after the lost sheep until he finds it?

A 'yes' not only brings lost sheep home, but also brings joy - on earth and also in heaven.

'And when he finds it, he joyfully puts it on his shoulders and goes home. Then he calls his friends and neighbours together and says, "Rejoice with me; I have found my lost sheep". I tell you that in the same way there will be more rejoicing in heaven over one lost sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who do not need to repent.'

Questions for discussion

1. Granted that the role of the shepherd (and the local church) is both maintenance and mission, it is undoubtedly true that most of our energies and resources are devoted to the sheep who are saved rather than those who are lost (just check, for example, any church budget or any pastor's diary). What steps can we take to shift this balance?

Will such a shift require radical changes in which a significant number of the existing flock become disaffected, or is a gradual transition possible which carries most of the congregation with us? Are there practical strategies we could adopt to try and ensure the latter, or is the former inevitable?

2. While the mandate of the church is 'Go and tell', most of our evangelistic strategies and programmes are focused on the principle of 'Come and hear'. In a post-Christian society, where the church is marginalised and largely ignored, and faith is regarded as a privatised matter, very few accept the invitation. If this is so, are there other ways and places in which we might win a hearing for the good news of Jesus and provide a forum in which people can ask questions and find answers? And how will this affect what we 'do together' as church - particularly our Sunday services?

3. Jesus described his disciples as 'the salt of the earth' and 'the light of the world'. How can we avoid the twin dangers of (a) the light being hidden away, and instead challenging and freeing up our members to get out of the ghetto and to 'eat and drink with sinners'? And (b) the salt losing its saltiness, and instead enabling and equipping our members to live distinctive 'counter-cultural' life-styles and relationships which attract (and repel) others?

To which of these two dangers are we more susceptible?

Peter Grainger

© Evangelicals Now - July 2003
Please consider supporting this ministry by subscribing.