It’s Friday in Brisbane, Australia. But in the US it’s still Thursday night. So without further ado, here’s Theology Thursday (one day late!)
…
I’m pretty aware that language changes and evolves with time. I found out recently that the word ‘sinister’ (which we usually take to mean something suggesting or threatening evil) has its simple roots in the Latin word to mean ‘left-handed’ (to be ‘left-handed’ was to be cursed by the gods). This does, however, explain some of my left-handed friends…
So I’m aware that language changes and we should keep an eye on how it does it so we can best communicate the truths of the gospel. For instance, I think the word ‘faith’ has evolved in our society and English so that its current meaning has only loose ties with the biblical use of the word – I think ‘trust’ better encapsulates the meaning of the original word. But I’m also an advocate for Christians maintaining biblical definitions for biblical words and to use them biblically. For example the word ‘worship’ and how it can often be practically limited to a synonym for ‘singing’.
But there’s another biblical word that hasn’t been battled over as much, but probably should be. That’s the word ‘call’.
For our purposes the word ‘call’ relates to that impression, feeling, or emotion on the Christian towards a particular vocation, area, or general issue needing guidance. Examples:
“I feel called to youth work.”
“I’m sensing a call to leave this church and help another one.”
“God is calling me to ministry.”
Get the drift?
It’s a word sometimes used to justify strange decisions, and even to cover up ungodly or unwise decisions.
It’s also a word I’ve personally felt uncomfortable trying to explain whenever someone asks me, ‘How do you know you’ve been ‘called’ into ministry?’ Often when I confess I didn’t receive any particular ‘calling’ as such, and explain the path towards ministry that I took, I’ve received the reply, ‘Well, maybe that is how God has called you.’ That’s a rather ambiguous, vague and postmodern way of defining the matter isn’t it?
So helpfully Michael Bennett has expanded his original booklet and had it published by Matthias Media. ‘Do You Feel Called By God? Rethinking The Call To Ministry’ is a helpful biblical theology on the word ‘call’ and a helpful corrective to the way the word is often used.
Good friend Andrew Hong (check out his blog for always thoughtful stuff) has reviewed it also so I quote at length:
Matthias Media have recently put out a book by Michael Bennett on this specific topic of calling and guidance, titled Do you feel called by God? Rethinking the call to ministry. It basically takes a biblical studies approach to the topic of calling and guidance – and it does much to reveal how the common way of talking about guidance is not actually biblical.
Bennett’s argument goes along these lines: when prophets were called, it was always distinctive and external to themselves (ie. not merely a feeling). And when the Bible talks about calling in the life of the Christian, it always means (a) the call of the gospel to repentance and faith, and (b) the call to godly living. And when the Bible talks about qualifications for elders, it never makes use of the language of calling.
Bennett therefore argues that when we use the language of calling to refer to feelings that we have, this may sound very spiritual – and everyone else around us may be using this kind of language – but Bennett has done a great job in showing very clearly that there is no biblical support to claim this kind of language.
Bennett’s book deserves to be carefully read and its implications for the way we talk about ministry pondered.
That’s a neat summary of the book itself and I concur. But, Andrew also notes a fundamental weakness with the book as he goes on to say:
However I’m aware that Bennett’s book won’t help everyone. And that’s because this is an essentially inductive approach. It basically says: nowhere in Scripture is ‘calling’ used like this, and so we should not use ‘calling’ in this way.
When presented with how ‘calling’ is actually used in the New Testament, someone who still wants to cling to the language of calling might say, “Maybe calling is used differently in the New Testament – but I know that I have been called, and it’s important to me.” This is the weakness of the inductive approach: it can show that calling is not used in these cases – but it can’t show that it is illegitimate to use it in every case.
Here is an example of inductive thinking: “is not snowing in Sydney because there is no snow in Parramatta, there is no snow in Chatswood, and there is now snow in Mascot” (different suburbs of Sydney).
However a stubborn person might still say, “But what about Hurstville? what you say about Parramatta, Chatswood and Mascot might be true – but there is still the small possibility of it snowing in Hurstville. And so it might still be snowing.” The inductive approach is a bottom-upapproach to thinking, and this is the general weakness of the inductive method.
The deductive method takes a different approach: it says that “snow only falls in certain conditions – yet none of these conditions have been present across the Sydney region. Therefore it cannot have snowed.” The deductive approach is a top-down approach to thinking.
I once knew someone who would defend things by saying, “yes I know it’s not biblical – but that doesn’t mean it’s unbiblical.” And unfortunately, that is the problem of the inductive approach. You may be able to say that calling isn’t used in these places – but you can’t say that calling isn’t to be used everywhere. There is always the possibility – however slender – that it could be acceptable. Which therefore gives people an ‘out’ to keep on using the language of calling.
Andrew goes on to show how an understanding of the doctrine of providence can helpfully correct deductive thinking on this issue. It’s worth reading the whole thing.
Back to Bennett’s book itself, while I agree with Andrew’s assessment I also think there is another area for improvement. While the book does well to teach how the Bible uses the word ‘call’ it’s very short on what to do if you are thinking about ministry generally. And given that it probably doesn’t help the person with stronger deductive reasoning what is there to do?
Enter Dave Harvey and his book ‘Am I Called? The Summons to Pastoral Ministry’. Where Bennett is strong in his exegesis on the word ‘call’ Harvey pretty much doesn’t hit the issue at all and his use of the word would have Bennett up in arms.
That said, it’s incredibly strong in asking heaps and heaps of questions to the person thinking through a ‘calling’ to pastoral ministry. Where Bennett doesn’t give much, Harvey is replete with questions in, what he calls, diagnosing the call:
- Are you godly?
- How’s your home?
- Can you preach?
- Can you shepherd?
- Do you love the lost?
- Who agrees?
Get over the use of the ‘calling’ language and Harvey’s book is incredibly helpful.
So would I recommend the book to read? Yes, with caveats. I’m likely, at this stage, to suggest reading both books – Bennett’s first and then Harvey’s – until a better book comes along.
Any other suggestions on books which deal with wanting to head into pastoral ministry? Put them in the comments below…
Comments are closed