Introduction

Question 158 of the Westminster Larger Catechism asks, “By whom is the Word of God to be preached?” The answer, “The Word of God is to be preached only by such as are sufficiently gifted, and also duly approved and called to that office.” Since only those “duly approved and called to that office” may preach, then every candidate for gospel ministry should endeavor to ensure that he is “approved and called.” The natural question that follows is, “How may the individual be assured that he is called?”[1] This leads us to ask, “What is a call to the ministry?” Uncertainty on this point can generate anxiety in a ministerial candidate. Where is he to turn?

Evangelicals and Protestants more generally often recommend reliance on an “inner call,” defined as “that inner persuasion or experience whereby a person feels himself directly summoned or invited by God to take up the work of the ministry.”[2] This is a sense of compulsion, driving one to the work. Spurgeon’s words are well-known: “There must be an irresistible, overwhelming craving and raging thirst for telling others what God has done to our own souls.” If a candidate is content to be employed in any other occupation, he should, Spurgeon claims, “in the name of heaven and earth . . . go his way.”[3]

Against this view, this essay argues that there are two calls to ministry (the external and internal) rather than one. Moreover, the external call is not the church’s concurrence that a candidate’s sense of calling is valid, but an objective assessment of the candidate’s aptness to the work. Historically, the Reformed considered this aptitude—the giftings and qualities requisite to ministry—to constitute the internal call, rather than an inner certainty. Consequently, the candidate may be assured of his calling, not because of an inward, subjective call, but because of God’s outward and objective calling, heard as the voice of the church.

Backdrop of Reformed Doctrine of Vocatio

The Reformers defined the doctrine of vocatio in response to the Roman Church, which held that a true calling, or “vocation,” was reserved exclusively for those who served in a churchly role. God called a priest or nun, but not a farmer or milkmaid. The Reformers insisted that God calls all Christians to labor faithfully “as to the Lord” (Col. 3:23 NKJV), whether in a secular or religious position.[4] This went beyond an argument for the legitimacy of work. The Reformers taught that God, in his regular providence, assigned a place and work for each person.[5] How was an individual to discern his vocatio? For Calvin, one only had to look around him. He argued that this was God’s solution to the “boiling restlessness”[6] in every human heart. Paul, he said, “condemns the restlessness which prevents an individual from remaining in his condition with a peaceable mind and he exhorts, that everyone stick by his trade.”[7] Vocatio also included marriage; how was a person to know who his spouse should be? The answer is easy, if one is already married: your spouse![8] Following a mystical voice, or one’s subjective feelings, would be to disobey the Lord, for he assigns a life to each person, and they are to “lead the life . . . to which God has called” them (1 Cor. 7:17). This may be termed the “earthly” or “general call.” Such was the Reformers’ essential restructuring of society away from the two-tiered, secular-religious divide the Roman Church had established.

Biblical Data on Calling

The office of minister must be understood against this backdrop of general calling. A “special call,” as Turretin notes, is one “peculiar to pastors, by which certain men are selected for the public ministry and [their life and doctrine having been approved] are consecrated to God by a solemn ceremony and put in possession of the office.”[9] There is, however, much continuity between Christian vocation generally and the special calling of the minister. Whether a teacher, farmer, lawyer, or minister, each one has received his position from the Lord and so must serve him in his calling.

Perhaps the most memorable instance of God’s calling a man for a particular office is that of Moses. The Lord summoned him, saying, “Come, I will send you to Pharaoh that you may bring my people, the children of Israel, out of Egypt” (Exod. 3:10). Moses’s response is to shrink back, “Who am I that I should go to Pharaoh . . .?” (3:11). Clearly, this prophet did not feel an inner compulsion to the work. It is noteworthy that not all Old Testament offices were filled by immediate revelation. Soon after addressing Moses directly, the Lord instructs him to make Aaron his priest (Exod. 4:14–17). Because the words Moses spoke were God’s own, Aaron’s office was not less divinely established than Moses’s, even though it was mediated by a man. The same principle is evident in the Levitical priesthood and in the calling of Elisha through Elijah (1 Kings 19:16, 19). By contrast, the calling of Jeremiah was unmediated (Jer. 1:4).[10] Like Moses, he was uncertain of his fitness, seeking to refuse: “Ah, Lord GOD! Behold, I do not know how to speak, for I am only a youth” (Jer. 1:6).

The categories of calling in the New Testament are very similar. The disciples were called by God’s own mouth—the voice of their Good Shepherd, who summoned them from their labors to be fishers of men (Matt. 4:18–22). To have seen and been called into that work by Christ himself was one of the distinctives of an apostle (Acts 1:21–22). Paul shared this calling, having been converted on the Damascus Road by a face-to-face encounter with the ascended Christ (Acts 9). It was by the “laying on of [Paul’s] hands” that Timothy received “the gift of God” (2 Tim. 1:6)—his calling and ordination were of God, but by the means of the apostle. In his writing to Timothy, the apostle instructs the young pastor that “if anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task” (1 Tim. 3:1). This text should be noted as the exclusive explicit statement in the canon regarding what is typically considered the “inner call.” Following quickly on the heels of this statement are the many qualifications for an elder.

With these examples, we can clarify the special call. Sometimes it is immediate, proceeding directly from God, as was the case with Moses, many Old Testament prophets, and the apostles. Contrasted with this is the mediate call, when God remains the source but is pleased to use means—as in Aaron, the Levitical priesthood, and Elisha. It is not any less the call of God than the immediate; every special call has its origin in God but is mediated to its recipients by the church.[11] This mediated calling is the manner in which God calls pastors today.

A legitimate call, then, is a calling from God. The question is, how is God’s will to be discerned? In the lives of the prophets and apostles, God’s calling was unmistakable and extraordinary—not so today. It must be affirmed with James Bannerman that in the present age “there is no miraculous light thrown across the path, no voice from on high, like that which met Paul on the road to Damascus.”[12] In the Christian ministry, calling is “always mediate, that is, through and in conjunction with, the instrumentality of man.”[13]

Can the mediated call, by the instrumentality of the church, still be identified as God’s voice? This is certainly so. To the elders of the church in Ephesus, Paul affirms that “the Holy Spirit has made you overseers” (Acts 20:28). These church officers had not received an immediate call; nonetheless, it is God who granted them their position. The apostle writes further that Christ “gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers” (Eph. 4:11).[14] Though the Ephesian “shepherds and teachers” at that time did not walk with Christ during his incarnation, their office is still regarded as a gift of his to the church—as legitimate as that of the apostles themselves. Though they had not seen his face, they could still be confident they had heard his voice, confirmed to them in the calling by the church. As R. L. Dabney writes, at their root, “both are, in some form, from God, and both summon men to a ministry for God.”[15]

Some Definitions

Bringing these various themes together, I suggest some tentative definitions. First, it is better to conceive of the internal call as the qualifications necessary for the minister.

Attending this is a “desire” or “aspiration” (as Paul writes to Timothy), but this is not to function as a form of guidance, determinative of actions. Calvin prefers to “pass over” such inner forces driving a man, referring to them as “that secret call.” He does not disparage it, writing that each minister “is conscious [of it] before God . . .”[16] But for Calvin, the “secret call” has to do with sincerity of motive, not impulse: “There is the good witness of our heart that we receive the proffered office not with ambition or avarice, not with any other selfish desire, but with a sincere fear of God and desire to build up the church.”[17] Turretin converges on the same point, calling the internal disposition “rather a disposition of mind to receive the call than a call properly so called.”[18] For both, the internal sense is not a burning “need” to preach, but testimony within oneself that the aspiration issues “from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith” (1 Tim. 1:5).[19]

Bannerman argues that internal calling consists in the biblical qualifications for the office. After asking how a ministerial candidate might be assured of his calling, he points to the Scriptures, for they describe “the gifts and qualifications” which constitute Christ’s call.[20] It is because “the gifts and graces for the office, when conferred, are God’s commission and call to the office” that no “supernatural call personally addressed to [the] man to assure him of his warrant to serve the Church of Christ” is necessary.[21] If the internal call is the gifts, graces, and godly motives for the office, then—if a man has these—he may consider himself called.

However, the question of certainty has not been resolved, because in the same context Bannerman goes on to say that if a man “feels” these qualifications are his, he can conclude it to be the call of Christ.[22] But how does this help the ministerial candidate? It seems too great a burden to place on his own senses. The problem is only exacerbated when Bannerman writes, “There must be, first, Christ speaking to the soul of the man by a secret voice, heard only by himself . . .”[23] How can a man know that it is Christ whom he hears speaking to his soul?

To hold that the internal call is a sort of Christ “speaking to the soul” argues too much—it is tantamount to extrabiblical revelation. What Bannerman writes of here is specific life guidance (whether a man should pursue the ministry), which is beyond the scope of the Scriptures’ sufficiency (Westminster Confession of Faith 1.6). Just as they do not tell Christians the particular person to marry, where to go to college, etc., neither do they tell a particular man whether or not he should be a minister. But if Christ himself is “speaking to the soul,” then this is conclusive and ought to be followed without reserve. These, then, are the two options: Either God speaks to a man and calls him to be a minister (immediately), in which case he is obligated to obey and the church is obligated to accept him; or, God calls his ministers mediately, by the church, on the basis of an assessment of the man’s fitness for the ministry by Scripture.

Samuel Rutherford provides some clarity. He writes that the immediate breathings of the apostles “were allowed in themselves to be not less authentic than the canon of Scripture since they contained, of their very own selves, the formal will of God.” Notwithstanding, “those breathings, as far as to us, are not formally the regulating rule of faith, but with respect to us are a rule having been regulated.”[24] Most germane to our topic is Acts 17:11, where the Bereans are praised for “examining the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so.” The apostle Paul, recipient of the immediate breathings of God onto his soul, was also tested by the rule of faith. If even the inspired apostles were to be weighed according to Scripture, how much more a man today when he has an internal sense that he is called to the ministry? The rule by which the legitimacy of an internal call can be determined is the biblical qualifications for pastoral office, and the only one authorized to assess whether the gifting is present is the church. The external call of the church provides a man with warrant to believe that he is called by God to serve.

In summary, the traditional Reformed definition of internal calling does not consist in a sense of divine compulsion, but in testable gifts and graces joined to a man’s testimony that he aspires to the office from a pure desire for Christ’s honor and the good of the church. It is the position of this essay that it is wiser to, with Calvin, specify this sense as the “secret” rather than “inner” or “internal” call, and with Turretin, to prefer not to refer to it as a call at all, but as a preparation to receive the call. What is available to the church for evaluation?—whether the candidate is self-controlled, hospitable, apt to teach, etc. The internal call should be seen as pure motives and the requisite gifting provided by the Holy Spirit, and not as a form of subjective guidance.

Based upon this objective evaluation, the external call is issued—the voice of the Spirit of God heard in the verdict of the church. Quite simply, it is “the call that comes to one through the instrumentality of the church.”[25] This call may note the presence of desire and question concerning motive, ensuring that the candidate does not aspire to the office to advance himself. However, the church’s deliberation is not to rest on whether the candidate’s desire is sufficiently comprehensive. It is not an evaluation of his sense of the Spirit’s leading, but whether the candidate possesses the true internal calling: the Spirit’s provision of the requisite gifts and motives. Bannerman states that “until this formal and outward call of the church is superadded to the inward call of Christ, the individual’s title to the ministerial office . . . is not, in ordinary circumstances, complete.”[26]

Responding to Objections

But what of the various Scripture passages which seem to describe an “overwhelming craving and raging thirst”? There are two which are typically pointed to: the apostle Paul’s self-maledictory oath, “Woe to me if I do not preach the gospel!” (1 Cor. 9:16), and the prophet Jeremiah’s expression, “If I say, ‘I will not mention him, or speak any more in his name,’ his message becomes a fire burning in my heart, shut up in my bones, and I become weary of holding it in, and I cannot prevail” (Jer. 20:9 Berean Study Bible). Each will be considered in turn.

In the beginning of this verse the apostle states, “For if I preach the gospel, that gives me no ground for boasting. For necessity is laid upon me,” and then, “If I do this of my own will, I have a reward, but if not of my own will, I am still entrusted with a stewardship” (1 Cor. 9:16,17). He is saying that he has received a divine commission from his Lord, which obligates him to fulfill his ministry. Does this mean that those who have not received this face-to-face encounter with Christ have a lesser commission? Certainly not. Christ appoints each minister. The only king and head of the church continues to supply his church with ministers, even if not immediately. Therefore, each duly called pastor must have this same motivation of “necessity,” because he has been called by God into his work, no less than an apostle. However, a non-ordained man, who has yet to receive the external call of the church, does not have the confirmation of this divine commission.

The same is seen in the case of Jeremiah. When the Lord had first called him to the work (Jer. 1:5), he expressed uncertainty and doubt. But in chapter 20, he claims he cannot refrain from preaching the message of the Lord—this despite the intense opposition he faced: “The word of the LORD has become for me a reproach and derision all day long” (v. 8). What has changed in this man between chapter 1 and chapter 20? He has received an official appointment. The Lord has called him, made him a prophet, and so he is constrained to fulfill this work.

This is far from an argument against zeal. It is an observation that the zealous statements appealed to come after an official appointment. Both the apostle and the prophet express a controlling necessity that is mandatory for all those in possession of the ministerial office but cannot be required of those who have yet to receive the external call.

Practical Benefits

Those who emphasize the inner call (defined as a subjective sense that compels one to the work) claim that only this will sustain one during the difficulties of pastoral life. Is this valid? Not necessarily. A minister must have a personal conviction that he is called to the work—but where is he to obtain this? The voice of God was heard in the external confirmation of the church, which reached his ears upon his ordination. From that point on, unless providence prevents him, he is obligated to do the work of a minister. There may be times when he does not desire to “do his job.” But in this, he is like every other person who has a vocatio, who at times tires of the mundane. What should he do? Remember that he has been called of God, and there is no doubting it.

This stress upon the legitimacy of the outward call has many practical benefits. The “secret call” (as Calvin referred to it) cannot be assessed by the church. However, candidates must still be examined. Calvin argued that the church is to base its evaluation upon four criteria: the candidate’s giftedness; the possession of sound doctrine; a holy life; and the “skills necessary for the discharge of [his] office.”[27] The Reformer further clarified that, for a call to be true, the gifts of the candidate must be observable to the people and not only those in high office.[28]

A proper view of the external call also promotes good order in the church. It prevents candidates who are convinced in themselves that they are to be ministers—who have not been called by the church—from taking possession of office. Calvin refers to Hebrews 5:4 (“And no one takes this honor for himself, but only when called by God…”), placing this calling “by God” as the external, and not the “secret call.”[29] Therefore, if anyone thrusts himself forward, “tak[ing] this honor for himself,” he was to be regarded as self-appointed and not a duly called minister. Chafing under the constraints of the church evidences a man’s lack of calling, even if he has a strong conviction that he ought to be a minister.

The process of examination and external call is essential. If a man is unwilling to submit to the voice of the church, then he is the exact opposite of the sort of man who should be in the pulpit—for humility is the attitude requisite of all ministers as they imitate their Lord who “came not to be served but to serve” (Matt. 20:28). Besides the matter of patience and humility, a candidate’s belief that he is uniquely called by the Spirit to the work of the ministry may reveal a heterodox pneumatology. What may he teach God’s people, if he believes the Spirit has spoken directly to him?

Another benefit of the re-establishment of the external call is the role of the local church. George Howe argues that “[i]n calling persons into the Christian ministry, there is a great work to be done by the church”[30]—not merely in the final act of ordination, but in identifying and encouraging candidates to the office. He likens this to the saving call of the gospel, which God is pleased to make through the “instrumentality of the church to whomsoever the Lord our God shall call.”[31] Therefore, “believers generally . . . are under obligation to see to it that this ministry is perpetuated and maintained, and to use every proper means to secure this end.”[32] If churches recognized that it was their duty to inculcate such aspirations in their young men and to encourage them when gifts were apparent, there might be far more ministers. However, whenever churches believe that a call to the ministry requires extraordinary or direct guidance by the Holy Spirit, they will typically have a dearth in supply.

The commonly held position that only an intense inner call will enable perseverance in the pastorate is, therefore, inaccurate. Rather, the external call has been designed to promote zeal in ministers of the gospel, whereby they can be assured that God has truly called them into their office. This biblical and historical balance not only assists an individual pastor but is also how the church of Christ may maintain good order and a perpetual ministry, as believers recognize their role in the education and encouragement of their young men to the pastorate.

Conclusion

This essay has not argued that an inner desire for the work of the ministry is improper. Indeed, it is often (but not always) the way in which God begins to move a man towards the office. What has been presented here is an extended critique of the necessity of an “all-consuming passion” for the work in a ministerial candidate. Prior to ordination, inner certainty is unnecessary. The calling of the church, understood as God’s own, provides a confidence that one is duly called, enabling the minister to set about his work with zeal. This confidence rests on the ordinary working of God’s providence; on the scriptural witness that many called men did not at first have a total willingness; and on the Reformed historical practice of defining the “inner call” as those giftings and qualities requisite for the faithful execution of ministerial labors. The biblical descriptions of “all-consuming desire” belong to those who already possessed confidence in their call because it came by the immediate voice of God—and so those who hear the external call through the church may likewise be assured. An unbiblical view of calling, which waits for the Spirit to sensibly call before a man may proceed, is an abdication of the church’s role in raising up her young men. May the Spirit of God cultivate in us the fruits necessary for the Christian ministry.

Endnotes

[1] Or as James Bannerman asks, “In what manner is the call or commission or warrant, which every real minister receives from Christ to the ministerial office, obtained; or in what way may the individual himself come to know that he has received it?” James Bannerman, The Church of Christ, vol. 1 (Banner of Truth, 2015), 429.

[2] Richard Niebuhr, Purpose of the Church and Its Ministry: Reflections on the Aims of Theological Education (Harper and Row, 1956), 64. The same idea is present in Edmund P. Clowney, Called to the Ministry (P&R, 1964), v; R. Albert Mohler Jr., Donald S. Whitney, and Dan Dumas, The Call to Ministry (SBTS, 2013), 13–15; David T. Harvey, Am I Called? The Summons to Pastoral Ministry (Crossway, 2012); Allan M. Harman, Preparation for Ministry (Banner of Truth, 2015), 3–6; Darrin Patrick, Church Planter: The Man, the Message, the Mission (Crossway, 2013), 16; Thomas C. Oden, Pastoral Theology: Essentials of Ministry (HarperOne, 1983).

[3] Charles Spurgeon, Lectures to My Students (Banner of Truth Trust, 2008), 2.1.

[4] For more on the Reformers' doctrine of vocatio, see John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book III, chs. 6–10; Martin Luther, The Freedom of the Christian; Luther, Genesis; Luther, Sermon on the Mount; Gustaf Wingren, Luther on Vocation (Wipf & Stock, 2004); James M. Hamilton Jr., Work and Our Labor in the Lord (Crossway, 2017); Max Weber, “Luther's Conception of the Calling: Task of the Investigation” (chap. 3), in The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (Allen & Unwin LTD., 1930), 79–92.

[5] God “has appointed duties for every man in his particular way of life. And that no one may thoughtlessly transgress his limits; he has named these various kinds of living ‘callings.’ Therefore each individual has his own kind of living assigned to him by the Lord as a sort of sentry post so that he may not heedlessly wander about throughout life.” Calvin, Institutes, III.x.6.

[6] Calvin, Institutes, III.x.6.

[7] John Calvin, The First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, trans. John W. Fraser (Oliver & Boyd, 1960), 7:20.

[8] John Calvin, Commentaries on the Epistles to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon, trans. William Pringle (1856; repr., Kessinger, 2010), 107–08. In this context, Calvin is comparing the Roman prohibition on marriage for monks, priests, and nuns to the ancient errors of Encratites, Manicheans, and Montanites. Montanus was “the first that dissolved marriage.” He required this of his followers because of private “revelation.”

[9] Francis Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, vol. 2 (1679–85; repr., P&R, 1992), 215.

[10] Interestingly, Jeremiah was already called by God to the priestly work (Jer. 1:1).

[11] As Turretin notes, “Although from God originally as the primary author, [the call] is still through the intervention of men whom God employs as instruments when he calls by the church; such is the call of sacred ministers at the present time.” Institutes, 2:216.

[12] James Bannerman, The Church of Christ (1869; repr., Banner of Truth, 1974), 1:429.

[13] George Howe, D. D. “A Discourse on Theological Education and Advice to a Student,” in Southern Presbyterian Review, vol. II, no. 2 (1848): 158–83.

[14] The same idea is present in 1 Corinthians, where Paul states that “God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers” (12:28). It is the express act of God to establish and make an officer. Indeed, only God can make a minister.

[15] Robert L. Dabney, Discussions: Evangelical and Theological (1891; repr., Banner of Truth, 1967), 2:26.

[16] Calvin, Institutes, 4.3.11.

[17] Calvin, Institutes, 4.3.11. The ministerial vows in OPC BCO 23.8.2 are in Calvin's terms: “Have you been induced, as far as you know your own heart, to seek the office of the holy ministry from love to God and a sincere desire to promote his glory in the gospel of his Son?” Note that it is not prescribed for the candidate to be asked, “Do you feel called?”

[18] Turretin, Institutes, 3:23.3. He goes on to clarify that even these pure motives are “not sufficient unless there is added an external manifestation and confirmation, either by an appearance of God himself or by a declaration of the divine will, joined with an agreement of the doctrine proposed with the doctrine revealed by God in his word, that it may not be confounded with the impostures of fanatics who boast of divine breathings and revelations.” Where is this declaration of the will found?—in the church. Institutes, 3:23.4.

[19] A subjective sense of “falling in love” with the work is never to be raised to a standard for calling. For who can dispute with love? Fair assessments must fall by the wayside if the candidate feels a “love” for preaching, etc. Dabney, Discussions, 2:34.

[20] Bannerman, The Church of Christ, 1:429.

[21] Bannerman, The Church of Christ, 1:429.

[22] Bannerman, The Church of Christ, 1:429.

[23] Bannerman, The Church of Christ, 1:447.

[24] Samuel Rutherford, Examen arminianismi, conscriptum & discipulis dictatum a doctissimo clarissimoque viro (Antonii Smytegelt, 1668), 683–84.

[25] Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology (Banner of Truth, 2021), 613.

[26] The scenario Bannerman pictures is that of shipwrecked Christians on a desolate island, unique circumstances, indeed. The Church of Christ, 1:432.

[27] Calvin, Institutes, IV.iii.12.

[28] Calvin, Institutes, IV.iii.15. One author notices the modern inversion: “See how we have turned this around. Presbyterian churches . . . have come to feel that they must be impressed primarily by testimonies of an inward call, and ought seldom to allow judgements about education to frustrate a sincere desire for ministry.” Alexander McKelvay, “The Importance of Calvin Studies for Both School and College,” in John Calvin and the Church: A Prism of Reform, ed. Timothy George (Westminster, 1990), 137.

[29] Calvin, Institutes, IV.iii.10.

[30] Thomas Smyth, “A Discourse on Theological Education and Advice to a Student,” in Southern Presbyterian Review, vol. II., no.2. (1848): 158–83.

[31] Howe, “A Discourse,” 173.

[32] Howe, “A Discourse,” 173.

Elisha W. Walker is a member at Reformation OPC in Grand Rapids, Michigan, and under care in the Presbytery of Michigan and Ontario. Ordained Servant Online, April, 2026