Have you ever noticed that generalizations based on personal anecdotes are often contradictory? Have you ever had two people give you advice based on their experience, both of which sounded plausible but were completely opposite? I know you have. I have too. Let me offer this personal anecdote to illustrate my point. :-)
Along the way of training for pastoral ministry, I've heard many well-intentioned men say, "I never wanted to be ________. In fact I ran from it. I had neither the gifts nor desire to do it. But God wouldn't let me go, so eventually I found myself doing ________. Therefore I know he's called me to it." I've also heard many men say just the opposite. "From as far back as I can remember I wanted to be a ________. It's been hard work to get here, but God's been faithful all along the way, and he's gifted me for it. Therefore I know he's called me to _________."
Now there's no problem with either experience per se. But if one succumbs to the temptation to extrapolate general principles from them, then we run into big problems. The truth is God's call is an aspect of his providence, which is mysterious to us. Therefore when we scramble to understand and explain it in order to legitimize our work or encourage someone else in theirs, we always run afoul. Rather than constructing our own personal eschatological charts to explain exactly when and how the rapture of God's call came to us, perhaps we should simply say, "I know God has called me to _______ because I am doing it."
Personal anecdotes are good illustrative devices but we (especially those called to preach and teach) must be careful not to generalize our own experiences as normative. To do that is to claim to know what only God knows, which is idolatry. We must look to Scripture alone for those sorts of norms, submitting the interpretation of our experiences to the God of providence.
Along the way of training for pastoral ministry, I've heard many well-intentioned men say, "I never wanted to be ________. In fact I ran from it. I had neither the gifts nor desire to do it. But God wouldn't let me go, so eventually I found myself doing ________. Therefore I know he's called me to it." I've also heard many men say just the opposite. "From as far back as I can remember I wanted to be a ________. It's been hard work to get here, but God's been faithful all along the way, and he's gifted me for it. Therefore I know he's called me to _________."
Now there's no problem with either experience per se. But if one succumbs to the temptation to extrapolate general principles from them, then we run into big problems. The truth is God's call is an aspect of his providence, which is mysterious to us. Therefore when we scramble to understand and explain it in order to legitimize our work or encourage someone else in theirs, we always run afoul. Rather than constructing our own personal eschatological charts to explain exactly when and how the rapture of God's call came to us, perhaps we should simply say, "I know God has called me to _______ because I am doing it."
Personal anecdotes are good illustrative devices but we (especially those called to preach and teach) must be careful not to generalize our own experiences as normative. To do that is to claim to know what only God knows, which is idolatry. We must look to Scripture alone for those sorts of norms, submitting the interpretation of our experiences to the God of providence.
4 comments:
Wait, did you just reject anecdotal reasoning based on anecdotal evidence?
You caught it! Very good!
Almost. But I stopped short when I appealed to the doctrine of providence taught in Scripture as the basis for my reasoning. My personal anecdote is only an illustration interpreted in light of Scripture. It's not a basis.
Jay wrote: perhaps we should simply say, "I know God has called me to _______ because I am doing it."
That's all well and good for someone such as yourself, but for a guy who is at times asked to help confirm a call prior to preparation for ministry (for example), it still leaves many questions unanswered.
Yet, I feel ya on trying to validate or legitimize or objectify that which is quite subjective.
Yes, that statement is intended for those already serving a particular call.
I suppose I would reword it for the one questioning a possible call to ministry as, "I believe I am called to ________ because I have the desire and gifts to do the work, which have thus far been evidenced and acknowledged by my elders in the visible church." However, at the end of the day, if one doesn't receive a call from the visible church, then he is not yet truly called. Perhaps he might speak of having an internal call, but I think that is just another way of saying he has a desire and giftedness to serve in the ministry.
Post a Comment