The Dignity and Mission of the Laity

“Ganito Noon; Paano Ngayon?”

Part 8

•The basis of the lay apostolate

The call of the laity to the “apostolate” is given in baptism and confirmation, and not by a special mandate of the hierarchy which singles out some of the faithful from others. Neither is it derived from emergencies of the moment such as shortage of priests. Thus, we can speak of real “lay apostolate.” Laymen have the native right to be part of the Church’s apostolate. They can also form groups for the advancement of the apostolate:

Church communion, already present and at work in the activities of the individual, finds its specific expression in the lay Faithfull’s working together in groups, that is, in activities done with others in the course of their responsible participation in the life and mission of the Church. (CL, 29ff provides criteria for ecclesiality for lay groups).

In the Period After Vatican II.   Lay life after Vatican II can never be the same. The Council has changed the direction of the Church and focused its attention on new priorities. Both the new direction and changed priorities centered on values of lay life. The laity’s apostolate within the Church and in the service of the world is considered so necessary without which the work of the clergy will frequently be ineffective (AA 10). Reflections on the laity continue even after Vatican II.

After the Council, lay people have assumed many of the functions formerly reserved to the clergy, e.g., those of lectors, acolytes and extraordinary ministry of the Eucharist. In many places due to the shortage of priests, the laity have found it necessary to take primary ministerial responsibility for their communities. But as these things occur, the boundaries demarcating lay and clerical responsibility become blurred and difficult questions arise concerning the relationship of ordained and non-ordained ministries.

The Council documents spurred such creativity in the local churches that many of these innovations have simply outpaced sustained systematic reflection, leading to many questions. While on the one hand, the Council clearly states that because of their familiarity and expertise, the laity are best suited to mind the world and its affairs (LG 31, 36), on the other hand, the Council cautions that pastors alone have the right to judge the authenticity and proper use of lay charisms (AA 3) and the clergy are obliged to clearly state the principles concerning the purpose of creation and the use of temporal things (AA 7). This ambiguity proves to be a source of continuing tension today: the conflict between lay “expertise” and clerical “discernment.”