How do you know it’s God? The theology and practice of discerning a call to ministry in Church assessment conferences

Dissertation, Durham University (2018)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Christian churches must assess the suitability of applicants who believe themselves called to ministry. Discerning this vocation requires that Assessors, alongside an external criterion-based evaluation of applicants’ personal qualities, address a less easily definable question: is this applicant called by God? This research aims to determine how Assessors sense, authenticate, and verbally articulate a spiritual discernment within the necessary practical confines of ecclesial assessment processes. Consonant with the subject matter, it employs the action-research methodology of Jane Leach’s “Practical Theology as Attention”, to a range of voices in mutual conversation. The mixed-methods approach utilized here is grounded in ethnographic studies of assessment conferences in five UK denominations, and on interview data from a purposive sample of their Assessors, to establish empirically the Assessor’s experience of discerning call. Thereafter, it draws on Ignatian spirituality to consider the reliability of a maturing spiritual “sense” in decision-making, both individual and corporate; and on Quaker practice for a contrasting communal discernment model. To address the identified challenge of utilizing intuitive knowledge, it engages with Iain McGilchrist’s scientific perspective on how the brain processes information through a bi-lateral pattern of attentiveness. Turning to the specifically theological epistemology, two conversation partners are selected for their divergent perspectives on how God may be known. Newman represents a Catholic continuity between grace and nature, by contrast with Barth, whose negative ontology grounds a distinctive Reformed view of revelation inaccessible to unaided human reason. Attention to all of these voices illuminates how Assessors experience knowing and affirming an authentic call from God. It also provides a basis for suggesting what personal qualities and procedural tools may be required to facilitate this highly distinctive element of their task.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

    This entry is not archived by us. If you are the author and have permission from the publisher, we recommend that you archive it. Many publishers automatically grant permission to authors to archive pre-prints. By uploading a copy of your work, you will enable us to better index it, making it easier to find.

    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 104,319

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2019-04-29

Downloads
29 (#850,642)

6 months
10 (#371,737)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

The empirical case for two systems of reasoning.Steven A. Sloman - 1996 - Psychological Bulletin 119 (1):3-22.
Acknowledgement.[author unknown] - 1998 - Linguistics and Philosophy 21 (6):645-646.
Acknowledgement.[author unknown] - 1997 - Linguistics and Philosophy 20 (6):747-748.
The ignatian prayer of the senses.Philip Endean - 1990 - Heythrop Journal 31 (4):391–418.
What Coleridge Thought.Owen Barfield - 1973 - Tijdschrift Voor Filosofie 35 (1):194-195.

View all 7 references / Add more references