2. Good entrance into a calling
apply him to a trade, or other bodily service; or contrariwise, to apply him to learning when he is fittest for a trade. For this is like a man applying his toes to feeling, and not his fingers; and to go about on his hands and not his feet; and to set the members of the body out of their proper places. And this is the second rule.
Rule 3. He that is fit for various callings, must make a choice of the 15 Paul plainly teaches this much in the next verse of this chapter: Are you called, being a servant? Do not care for it; but if you may be free, rather choose that (1Cor 7.21). He gives this counsel, that a bondman having liberty as a choice, must accept it rather than continue as a bondman. Again, Paul bids the Corinthians to covet spiritual gifts, but especially that they may prophesy – he gives this rule, that in the choice of gifts, we must labor for the best gifts; and if we are to seek after the best gifts, then correspondingly, we must seek the best callings. best.
Here is a special rule for all young students in the Universities. Those who are brought up in the schools of the Prophets, desire to know what particular calling is best for them, because they have liberty to be either Schoolmasters, or Physicians, or Lawyers, or Ministers of the word of God. Paul, according to this general rule, shows that a choice must be made of the best calling. And in the first place, if gifts will serve, a choice must be made of the calling of a Prophet or teacher, and that above all others. Academic callings must have the first place.
So much for choice.
2. Good entrance into a calling Once a choice is made, we must then consider how a good entrance is to be made into the calling which we have chosen. Touching entrance, many points are to be examined. The first is, in what sort and manner an entrance must be made. And the right manner is this: every man must so enter that he may truly in conscience say, God has placed me in this calling, however lowly a calling it may be. Thus
Paul says, As God has called every man, so let him walk (1Cor 7.17).
And Christ our Savior never openly took upon himself the office of a Mediator till he was baptized, and in this he was called to it by the voice of his Father from heaven saying, This is my beloved son, in whom I am well pleased.Mat 3.17 But immediately after, he began to teach and preach, and to show himself as the true Messiah in performing the duties of a King, Priest, and Prophet. There is no calling on earth, since the fall of Adam, that does not have crosses and calamities attending it; but they are held off by sufficient comfort, when our conscience can tell us we were placed in our callings by God himself; and when our conscience cannot say this, the comfort is gone.
Now, so that every man may certainly know himself to be called of God to this or that calling, he must have two things: Gifts for the calling from God, and Allowance from men.
For the first, to those whom God calls, He gives competent and convenient gifts or knowledge, understanding, dexterity to this or that, and such things, and thereby He makes them able to perform the duties of their callings. Contrariwise, those that enter into any calling, being utterly unable to perform the duties of it, were never called by God.
For the second, men are to be set apart to their particular callings by the appointment of men whom God has left on earth as his instruments for the ordering and disposing of vocations. For God has his deputies to allot men their offices in every society, such as parents and masters to dispose of persons in private families. For ecclesiastic callings, the Governors of the Church; for civil, the Magistrate and men of authority in the Commonwealth. And so anyone that would truly say, God has placed him in any particular calling, must also have the outward calling of men. And here it is to be remembered, that testing of gifts and free election, without partiality, should be in the design of all, especially of public callings.
Thus in the Primitive Church, not so much as Deacons were admitted without just and sufficient testing (1Tim 3.10). And here, various
abuses are to be reproved, such as, first of all, the buying and selling, the chopping and changing of civil offices; for where the calling is up for sale, there is little or no testing; little or no election takes place.
And someone that buys his office must say his money called him, rather than God. Therefore, those who lay up money to buy offices, had best take heed beforehand. For the saying is true: he that buys the seat, must sell justice; and where justice is sold, the poor are
16 The same is to be said of the sale oppressed, and all goes to wrack. of Ecclesiastic livings, 17 to which the cure of souls is annexed;
18 yes, 19 Indeed, to buy or sell dispensing and giving them hand over head.
20 who sought to get the gifts of the Holy Spirit with money; yet this buying is a grievous sin, flat against the order that God has set down touching entrance into any calling. The very heathen themselves have complained of this chopping and changing of places, as the ruin of states and Commonwealths. the livings of the Church is not properly the sin of Simon,
Alexander Severus, the Emperor, says, It is necessary that the one who buys must sell. I will not allow buyers and sellers of offices. If I allow them, it is because I cannot condemn them, for I am ashamed to punish the one that buys and sells. Seneca says, This buying is the spoiling of Provinces; and that, he which buys must sell. Justinian complains that his dominions are robbed and pillaged because men take gold for offices; and he strictly forbids it.
So much about entrance in general.
Now follow certain questions about it. If this is as I have said — that those who enter into any calling, especially public, must first be enabled with gifts from God, and also set apart by men after due testing and examination — then here a question is to be examined which the Papists used to propound; namely,
Ques. 1: What calling did the first Preachers of the Gospel, and planters of our [Protestant] Church have?
It is necessary to answer this question; for if they had no calling, then neither have we, who are the followers. And I answer two things.
First, that they had their callings by virtue of which they restored the Gospel of Christ from the Romish Church itself; for they were either
21 as in England, Wycliffe; in Germany, Luther; in Bohemia, John Huss and Jerome of Prague; at Basil,
Oecolampadius; in Italy, Peter Martyr, and others. And therefore these, with many others, were ordained either in Popish Churches, or in schools, and there they were solemnly bound by oath to do the duties of their callings with a good conscience, by confuting error, and maintaining the ancient Apostolic faith.
Priests or School Doctors:
Which is why, if this — their calling — has any force to stop the Papists' mouths, we say, the first restorers of the Gospel in our times had their first callings from them.
Obj: It may said that these men were all perjured for preaching against the Church of Rome, to whose allegiance they were bound by oath.
Ans. 1: I answer that, by virtue of their oaths at their ordination, they were bound only to the Catholic and Apostolic Church, and not to the present Church of Rome. For the words "the Catholic and Apostolic Church of Rome," which now run in the tenor of the oath, were not so strictly used in former times, but are more urged now of late.
Ans. 2: Secondly I answer that many of them had callings that were in some sort, extraordinary; I say in some sort, distinguishing the office of teaching, and the use of it. The office which they performed was ordinary; but the execution of this office, in purging and restoring true religion — not in respect to that true order which God had set down in His word, but in respect to the abuse of it in the Romish Church — was extraordinary. Which I will declare in this manner: God calls men extraordinarily when he does not bind
Himself to ordinary laws of vocation set down in His word. And He does this in three ways.
First, by His own immediate voice. Thus Abraham was called, and Moses in the bush, and so were the Apostles of Christ called immediately; and Paul likewise after Christ's ascension.
Secondly, He calls extraordinarily, by the ministry of creatures: as Elisha was called by Elijah (1King 19.16); thus Aaron was called by Moses;Exo 4.14-15 and Philip was called to baptize the Eunuch, by the message of an angel (Act 8.26).
Thirdly, by special instinct, and extraordinary inspiration of the Spirit. We have examples of this in the word of God: Philip, who by his first calling was a Deacon, went and preached the Gospel in Samaria, and first began the Church of God there — not by a calling from the Apostles, because they were ignorant of his preaching (Act
8.14); and we may not think he engaged this work of his own brain — and therefore, in all likelihood his calling was by a special instinct of the Spirit of God. Again, when the Church of Jerusalem was dispersed, men came from Cyprus and Cyrene, to Antioch, without any outward calling; and yet they preached there, no doubt by the instinct of the Holy Spirit, as it appears the hand of God was with them. I say the like about Luther and the rest: namely, that they were stirred up by the special instinct of the Spirit of God, whereby they were moved to restore the Gospel to its former purity, as they did.
Obj: But some will say this doctrine lays open a gap to all heretics and deceivers, for they may likewise plead extraordinary instincts, and by this means, seduce and deceive the people of God.
Ans: I answer, there are certain special notes and marks whereby we may discern an extraordinary calling from the illusions of the devil, whereby he suborns heretics to deceive the world.
First, extraordinary calling never has a place, except when ordinary calling fails. There are two special times in which God calls men extraordinarily. The first is in the founding and planting of the Church; and upon this, the Apostles and Evangelists were called extraordinarily. The second time is when the Church of God is defaced, and universal apostasy takes place. For then there is no place for ordinary calling, and therefore to restore the Church again
to her former estate, He calls men extraordinarily. We may not look for any reformation of a stew from those who live in it, unless the occasion is extraordinary; and the same is to be thought of the Reformation of a heretical and Apostolic Church, as without a doubt the Church of Rome is.
Secondly, we may discern men who are extraordinarily called, by the doctrine which they deliver, which must be the very doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles. So that the one who pleads an extraordinary calling, and yet brings any other doctrine, is not called by God, but is deluded by the devil. Thus Moses taught us to judge true and false
Prophets, not by their miracles, but by their doctrine (Deu 13.1-3).
And when it was demanded of Christ by the Scribes and Pharisees, by what authority he did those things, he answered by demanding a similar question: whether John's baptism, that is, his ministry and doctrine, were of God or not (Luk 20.4). And if his doctrine was of God, then his calling was also of God; and consequently the calling of Christ was of God, because it was the office of John to testify of him.
Thirdly, they may be discerned by their lives and conversations.
Christ has foretold that false prophets in sheep's clothing would come, which are inwardly ravening wolves (Mat 7.15). How then shall we know them? The answer is by their fruits (v. 16); that is, not only by their doctrine, but also by their lives: because their office is to teach, not only by doctrine, but also by example. Now the men whom
God called to restore the Gospel, he gave sincerity of judgment, along with integrity of heart and life — which the Lord in mercy joined together for the confirmation of the truth of their calling. And the one that teaches wholesome doctrine, and produces contrary fruits, is in that regard a false prophet, even though his doctrine is ever so true.
Fourthly, those whom God calls extraordinarily, he furnishes with gifts above the ordinary measure of men: namely, he furnishes them with knowledge, zeal, wisdom, constancy, courage, and other gifts that serve for the discharge of extraordinary callings. And this we find to be true in the first ministers of the Gospel, but especially in Luther, whom God notably armed with boldness and courage to
withstand the whole Church of Rome. In our own age, some upstarts have said they were Elijah, John the Baptist, and Christ; but, they
22 by this last mark: for when their gifts were examined, they have been found to come far short of the gifts of many ordinary men. have been exposed Now, if we lay all these marks together, it will easily appear that the first preachers of the Gospel in this age may, at least some of them, be said truly to have received extraordinary callings from God. For first, they preached in such a time when no face of a true Church was to be seen, and a general apostasy overspread the world. Secondly, they renewed the very doctrine of the Apostles and Prophets. Thirdly, they adorned their doctrine with godly life and conversation.
And lastly, they were all, or most of them, furnished in great measure with sufficient gifts of knowledge, wisdom, zeal, and courage, to manage their callings and professions.
Obj: But the Papists say there was nothing extraordinary in them, because they could not confirm their doctrine by miracles.
Ans 1: I answer first, the doctrine which they taught did not then need to be confirmed with miracles, seeing that when it was first published, it was sufficiently confirmed by miracles wrought by the Prophets and Apostles.
Ans 2: Secondly I answer that extraordinary men do not always confirm their callings by miracles: such as John the Baptist and various Prophets in the Old Testament, who never wrought any miracles.
Ans 3: Thirdly, the gift of working a miracle may be given to one who is an enemy to God and his Church, such as the gift of prophecy may be given, which is greater.1Cor 14.12 For Balaam and Caiaphas
23 and yet they were professed enemies to Christ and his Church. And Moses says plainly that false Prophets coming among the people would work miracles for this end: to test them both prophesied,
(Deu 13.1-3). Therefore, the working of a miracle does not always serve to confirm an extraordinary calling.
Ques. 2: Secondly it may be asked, If entrance is made into a lawful calling with an evil mind, and by evil means, what then must be done?
Ans: I answer, he is not to forsake his place, but to repent of his bad entrance, and do the duties of his calling with diligence and good conscience, waiting after this for further approval from God and also from men. When he has in any measure obtained this, he may proceed in his calling with good conscience: for the after-approval and acceptance — though it does not justify the bad entrance, yet it
24 A Prince, such as William the Conqueror, enters into a land or kingdom, and by war and bloodshed he seeks to subdue a people, and to make them subject to him. Now, by the bad entrance he is not a lawful king, for every lawful king is placed by God, and by men that are appointed under God to set up Princes over them according to the laws and customs of the several kingdoms. Yet if the people willingly submit themselves to this usurper, and are content to yield subjection, and the king likewise is content to rule them by good and wholesome laws, then he has now become a lawful
Prince, even though his entrance was but tyrannical. does make up for it.
On this ground another question is answered, touching the calling of the Ministers of our [Protestant] Church.
Obj: Some say our Church is no Church, that our Ministers are no Ministers; that indeed, the preachers of the Gospel are the worst of all. The ground of their opinion is because (they say) we have no good and lawful entrance to our calling and ministry according to the word of God.
Ans: In answer to them, let us grant the case that all the preachers and Ministers in the Church of England were unlawfully called; indeed, lacking the very substance of true calling (which no man can, with good conscience, either speak or think), yet it is possible that there may be a true Church of God among us, and lawful preachers of the word, because they may have an after-acceptance and approval
both from God and from man. And an after-acceptance makes up for a bad entrance.
Furthermore, it is evident that our ministers have approval both from God and man. For first of all, God enables them to teach the true and wholesome doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles, which is one special mark to distinguish a false prophet from a true. Secondly,
God enables them with grace to adorn their doctrine and profession with reformed lives. Thirdly, God's hand is with them, in that He blesses their labors for the conversion of many souls to God, in all parts of this land. And by this, as it were, God sets His hand and seal for the approval of our callings. The question was raised among the Corinthians whether Paul was an Apostle or not. And Paul himself answers that if he were not an Apostle to others, yet he was an Apostle to them, because he was the minister of their conversion
(1Cor 9.1, 2). Now, if this is a good reason to prove the extraordinary calling of an Apostle, then no doubt it will serve much more to prove the calling of an ordinary minister.
Ques. 3: Thirdly, it may be asked, Whether a man entering into a calling may lawfully offer himself, and make the means to enter it or not?
Ans: Paul answers this question when he says, He that desires the office of a Bishop desires a worthy work (1Tim 3.1). Here we are given to understand how it is not lawful to desire an office. It is true indeed, there are unlawful desires for places and callings; namely, when they are sought from a vain and greedy mind, for pleasure or 25 Yet, when they are desired or sought for conscience' sake, to discharge a duty to God and man, there is no offense. Now, if the desire for an office is lawful, then to show that desire by honest and lawful means, is not unlawful. Therefore, men may use honest and lawful means to enter into a calling fit for them, if they bring sufficient gifts for the discharge of it, and along with that, they submit themselves to examination and election according to lawful order. for money's sake.
The prophet Isaiah, as soon as God had touched his tongue with a coal from the Altar, was ready to go at the call of God; and when the Lord said, Whom shall I send? he answered, Here I am, send me (Isa
6.6-8). And following the example of this holy Prophet, any man may show himself willing to enter into an office when God has furnished him with gifts; if so, he may be called. Here then is a lesson for those who are brought up in the schools of the Prophets: as soon as they are enabled to do the offices of ministers, their duty is to show they are willing and ready to take this kind of calling upon themselves, in a godly manner. And therefore, without question, it is a fault in many, that being enabled
with sufficient gifts, they nevertheless employ themselves wholly in their private studies, not showing any willingness to take it upon themselves to discharge any ministerial calling for which they are fit.
For whoever seeks a calling in the Church of God for money's sake, is unlawful; yet, to seek a calling is not unlawful in itself, if there is an honest mind, good means, and the glory of God is truly intended.
Ques. 4: Fourthly, it may be asked, Whether a man may enter into two callings at once, or not?
Ans: I answer, by distinguishing, in some respects he may, and in some he may not. An entrance may be made into two callings in three cases:
First, when God has combined two callings together by His own appointment. Thus Melchizedek, that he might be a lively figure of Christ our Savior, was a king and priest, and he did the offices of both King and Priest (Heb 7.1). And the high priests that were successors of Aaron, by God's appointment, were not only Priests, but civil judges also. Jehoiada the high Priest was protector of Judah in the nonage of Jehoash; 26 and by virtue of his protectorship, he slew Athaliah, that usurping Queen (2King 11.15). And there is no marvel at this, because the Levites were the common lawyers, and the Scriptures were the positive laws of the Jews; and therefore none were so fit to be Judges as the priests and Levites. Even as in this
land [England], the fittest Judges in both civil and criminal causes, are Lawyers who are expert in the laws of the land. In this regard, it was not so great a burden among the Jews to manage the office of a Priest, and to execute civil judgment.
Secondly, two callings may be combined when entering into them at once is not against the word, and it is for the common good. Thus Eli in the kingdom of Israel was a Priest by one calling, and a Judge by another calling. Thus Samuel was a Prophet and a Judge. Thus
Moses was a Prophet and a civil governor, indeed, a Prince. For in those times, both states were so corrupt, that sufficient ordinary men could not be found to discharge either calling severally.
Thirdly, two callings may be endured when, being joined, they do not hinder each other, nor the common good. Thus a man may lawfully be a Master of a family, and a Merchant, or any other trade whatsoever. We have examples of this in the word of God. Abraham, besides being a Master of a great family, and in his family also being a prophet and priest in offering sacrifices, he was by another calling, a mighty prince and a great warrior. And the same may be said of the Patriarchs; they were governors in their families, and also princes bearing the civil sword, as it appears in the example of Judah.
Now, there were two reasons why they might bear both these offices; firstly because the Church of God was then very small and comprised one family; and secondly, the doctrine of religion was comprised in a 27 and delivered from man to man by tradition. And in this case, Paul was an Apostle by one calling, and at the same time, a Tent-maker by another calling. This was because of the poverty of the Church of Corinth, and also because he hoped hereby to stop the mouths of false Apostles who would have accused him of taking advantage of the Gospel. And in a similar case of necessity, I have no doubt that the Ministers of the Gospel now may take other callings — with this always being remembered: that such callings are not hindrances to their principal callings, nor offenses to men. few heads, Now I come to the SECOND PART of my distinction, to show when men may not enter into two distinct callings at once; and that also is in
three cases:
First, if God has disjoined these callings by His word and commandment. Secondly, if the practice of the one hinders the practice of the other. Thirdly, if combining them together hinders the common good.
On these grounds, our Savior Christ being the Teacher of the Church, refused to be judge of the inheritance between two brothers (Luk
12.13-14). And hereupon the Apostles, in order to do the duties of their own callings, refused to perform the office of Deacons (Act 6.2).
From this I gather that in towns, corporations, and societies, care (as much as possible) is to be taken, that various offices and charges being weighty of themselves, and of diverse kinds, are not laid on the shoulders of one man. For the execution of them all breeds distraction, and distraction disables the most able man in the discharge of even one office. He that comes to the corn heap, the more he opens his hand to receive, the less he holds — so too, if one enlarges himself to bear more offices, the fewer he will discharge.
Ques. 5: Furthermore, it may be asked here, whether it is lawful to enter into two trades at once, or not?
Ans: It is not unlawful, if they do not hinder each other, and combining them does not hinder the common good of men, and the party does not intend dishonest gain, but the common good.
Nevertheless, it is inconvenient in a peopled commonwealth; for then, one man shall live hard by another. Yet if one calling is not sufficient to maintain charge of a family, a second calling may be added under the former conditions.
Ques. 6: Again, it may be asked whether one may have two farms at once or not?
Ans: Some have thought it not convenient; but the truth is, it may as well be asked whether it is lawful to have two coats at once or not?
For in a commonwealth, all must not be equal, but some may be above, and some under others in regard to wealth. And therefore those who have a number of farms, whether it is by inheritance or by honest purchase, may lawfully enjoy them.