On the one hand, there is such a denial of the inner mystical voice, and on the other hand, it is impossible not to recognize the extremely vague "predestination of the Church." Origins from the clerical class, as it was in the former Russia? Or the forced admission to seminary of a boy who has no idea yet about the priesthood or anything at all? Or a sad sign of a scholarship in a theological school, which not all schools give? A similar state of affairs took place in the Serbian Church before the upheavals of 1945. In addition, we must not forget the mass exodus from seminaries and academies of students, who got there on the basis of class and then joined the ranks of other departments. Mitre. Anthony called such former seminarians "Rakitina" (according to Dostoevsky), who were just such renegades of their school because they did not have a vocation for it.

What is the question of vocation reduced to in the conditions of our reality? What can be considered a sign of a calling? Is there any such objective evidence at all for judging a person's vocation to the priesthood? If it is necessary to have courage and belligerence for military service, and a sense of beauty, spiritual refinement, etc., for artistic activity, then what are the attributes of one who considers himself called to the ministry of a pastor, and the absence of which is sufficient to judge the unvocation of such a candidate?

Here is an approximation of what should be considered an absolute sign of uncalling:

* Seeking the priesthood for material gain, on the assumption that the priest will never starve to death.

* Political or national calculations, e.g., the acceptance of the priesthood for the sake of "the salvation of Russia, Holy Russia," for the sake of national propaganda, which is more convincing on behalf of the priest. The Church and the priesthood have more important tasks than these national or political instincts.

 Ambition and desire to dominate, to become a bishop, a leader of a people or a certain class.

 * Aesthetic motifs: the beauty of the divine service, the melodies, the magnificent hierarchical ritual, etc. Such infatuations often pass quickly, the fervor cools down, and this kind of "calling" turns out to be just a fleeting infatuation.

* The mere fact of enrolling in a theological school or belonging to a clerical class, being a purely formal sign, in no way means a true calling.

* Nor can it be considered a vocation if it is caused by fatigue of life, disappointment, or disgust with former hobbies. Such a mood is also fleeting and also indicative of infatuation. Disappointment in one cannot be recognized as a vocation to the other: "it is romantic folly to think that disgust with life is a sign of a religious vocation" (L. Blois). What God needs in His most holy service is not a disappointed and paralyzed spirit, but a heart filled with fire, podvig, sacrifice, and creative impulses for the building of the Body of Christ.

What are the signs of a calling, or, according to the Apostle, that a given person has a taste for the priesthood?

* First of all, there must be a free attraction of the heart to the great and holy work of pastoral care.

* The desire to build the Kingdom of God, not the kingdom of this world, whatever its political coloring.

• Readiness for sacrificial service to one's neighbor and acceptance of pastoral care as the yoke of Christ.

• Willingness to have compassion for a sinful and sick, grieving person.