1Pe_5:3.
μηδʼ
ὡς
κατακυριεύοντες
τῶν
κλήρων
] i.e. “not as those, who,” etc. With
κατακυρ
. cf. for meaning and exprestion Mat_20:25-28; 2Co_1:24; it is not equal to
κυριεύειν
(Steiger), but the prefixed
κατα
intensifies the idea of
κυριεύειν
: “to exercise a sway, by which violence is offered to those who are under it.”[269]
κλῆρος
, properly speaking, the lot, then that which is apportioned by lot, then generally, that which is allotted or assigned to any one, whether it be an office, a possession, or anything else. Here it is the congregation (
τὸ
ποίμνιον
) that is to be understood; not as though
κλῆρος
in itself meant the congregation, but the churches are thus designated, because they are assigned to the elders as a possession, in which to exercise their official duties. The plural is put, because different elders filled offices in different congregations (Calov, Steiger, de Wette, Wiesinger, Schott, etc.). Compare the passage in Act_17:4, where it is said of those converted by Paul and Silas:
προσεκληρώθησαν
τῷ
Παύλῳ
καὶ
τῷ
Σίλᾳ
. It is incorrect to supply
τοῦ
Θεοῦ
, as is done by Beza, etc., and to derive the expression from the O. T., where the congregation of Israel is termed the
κλῆρος
(
ðÇçÂìÈä
) of God, Deu_9:29, LXX. But it is equally incorrect when Hofmann applies
κατακυριεύοντες
, not to the
πρεσβύτεροι
, but to others, and, taking
ὡς
as instituting a comparison, understands
κλῆροι
to signify “the estates belonging to some one himself,” translating accordingly: “not as those who exercise rule over estates belonging to themselves.” The apostle’s idea thus would be: “the elders are not to treat the church as an object over which they exercise right of possession, and do with as they please.”
How should the apostle have thought of bringing forward a comparison so far-fetched?—and how arbitrary it appears to interpret
ὡς
differently in this passage from in chap. 1Pe_1:14, 1Pe_2:2; 1Pe_2:5; 1Pe_2:11-13, etc.; to allow the article
τῶν
to take the place of the possessive pronoun, and to attribute a meaning to
κλῆροι
which it often has in profane Greek, but never either in the O. or in the N. T.![270]
ἀλλὰ
τύποι
γινόμενοι
τοῦ
ποιμνίου
] The antithesis here is a different one from that in the passage quoted from Matt. The elders, as the leaders of the church, necessarily possess a kind of
κυριότης
over it; but they are not to exercise this in a manner opposed to the character of Christian life in the church (which would be a
κατακυριεύειν
), but by being examples to the congregations, shining before them in every Christian virtue (1Ti_4:12; Tit_2:7); cf. 2Th_3:9; Php_3:17.
[269] Thus Hofmann interprets, correctly. He is mistaken, however, in maintaining that
κατα
here does not imply an hostile antithesis, since a violent rule is one by which he who is ruled over is injured in his rights.
[270] The opinion of Oecumenius:
κλῆρον
τὸ
ἱερὸν
σύστημα
καλεῖ
,
ὥσπερ
καὶ
νῦν
ἡμεῖς
(i.e. the priesthood), which many Catholic commentators have followed, requires no refutation; and as little does that of Dodwell, who understands
κλῆροι
to mean church property.