Because it's a major part of the Sunday-school canon, I would repeatedly hear stories about God using Moses to free the hundreds of thousands of Israelites from slavery in Egypt. The emphasis was on Moses, his calling, and how he overcame his speech impediment. I learned about David, how he was the scrawniest out of his brothers, yet anointed King of Israel. I learned about the Apostle Paul and his dramatic conversion story. It wasn't all males, though. I also learned about Esther, Ruth, and of course, Mary.
The common theme was that each of them had a calling. God had chosen to work through them to do his work. The application was, and still is, that we too have a calling. We're important, just like Moses and David and Mary, and need to figure out what we've been called to do, so we can do God's great work.
I don't mean to sound cynical about a very valid tool that Christians use when we think about our profession or passion, but sometimes this whole "calling" business, to me, smacks of first-world self-centeredness, and I feel ambivalent about it. I wonder about the 600,000 Israelites. What if I'm called to a life as one of the many, forming bricks out of straw, as opposed to the thrilling life of a leader whom God uses to turn rods into snakes? I think about the would-be victims of genocide in Esther's day. Isn't it much more fun to think about being called to a life of an important queen who rescues her people?
I don't have a problem with learning about and emulating those mentioned in Scripture. But, when combined with the narcissism and comfort so entrenched in our culture, I've realized I tend to aggrandize this idea of a special calling. I've assumed that I too will be the next Esther or Paul, to be remembered down through the ages.
This hearkens back to the realization I had when we lost electricity for a while: it's the little, gritty, sacrificial things that make up the kingdom of God. Perhaps my realization also applies to how I've viewed my calling and profession. I'll admit, it's much easier for me to get excited about following Christ when it involves big, leadership-type, comfortable opportunities. As a future attorney, my hope is that I would win an important case that would provide more dignity and rights to the least of these. But would I be just as content if God intends for me to work anonymously, day-by-day, quietly helping those who need it most? Hmm, that doesn't sound too glamourous. Perhaps I could make the sacrifices and live like Mother Theresa and Shane Claiborne, but I sure wouldn't mind getting a book deal out of it as well!
What if I'm called to a life that wouldn't make a great Sunday-school story centuries from now? Would I still want to pursue that calling? Is even thinking about the concept of a calling a first-world luxury that would seem silly or pointless to my fellow Christians in the two-thirds world? It all just seems very "me-centered." Instead of asking "What am I called to do," I'm trying to ask "What does the Church need to do, and how can I join in?" It's a shift from "me" to "we," and a dose of much-needed humility. But parting the Red Sea is much more fun, isn't it?
One side effect (if it is a side effect, and not the main purpose) of the focus on calling is that it grants social standing to leader-types who are confident that they've found theirs. Questioning someone's power grab as an overreach is tantamount to doubting God, and ever so conveniently, doubt is seen as an unmitigated evil. The culture of credulity in evangelical circles can be a breeding ground for exploitation by sociopaths and psychopaths.
But I've also heard of Christians using the concept of "vocation," which has the same connotations of finding or creating purpose through meaningful work, but without the messianic pretensions of "calling." Vocation seems to be a safer and more attainable goal, and it also acknowledges that there are other ways to find purpose than through epiphany. Sometimes it's just an accumulation of tiny insights that add up to a quiet realization one day that you've known something for quite a while.
Posted by: Leighton | July 25, 2011 at 04:32 PM
"Questioning someone's power grab as an overreach is tantamount to doubting God,"
Yes, this. Claiming that you've lined up your will (or actions, or choice of profession, or really anything) with God's will is a nice little rhetorical move, isn't it. Exploitative, like you said.
Vocation doesn't sound anywhere near as *exciting* for us bored middle-class Americans, but you're right, it might be a healthier word choice.
Posted by: Natalie | July 25, 2011 at 05:39 PM
You know, I hadn't thought about boredom as a motivation, but it makes sense. People who are more or less securely middle class rarely feel the need to be saved from violence or hunger or sin. But pointless, soul-crushing jobs? That's different. "Calling" is a convenient way to appeal to people desperate to know there's more to life than their daily drudgery, while not alienating the substantial base that believes GOP stands for God's Only Preference. Caring for the poor and working hard to build community are too Communist.
Posted by: Leighton | July 26, 2011 at 01:40 PM
Totally agree, although I think this boredom-escaping idea transcends party lines.
Posted by: Natalie | July 26, 2011 at 06:33 PM