For some time now in the Church new experiences of collaboration and sharing between religious and laity have been taking place. It is a question of experiences which range from a completely occasional collaboration for individual initiatives of voluntary work, to closer and deeper relationships in regard to spiritual and apostolic life. This is what was dealt with by the conference of the Superiors General which took place in Ariccia (Rome) from the 24th to the 27th of November 1999.

Many were the Institutes which took part and therefore many and varied were the experiences which were indicated or described. Because of this, only the correct reading key will allow us to make a sufficiently objective evaluation of this phenomenon.

The first key to the reading is to identify the charismatic identity of the Institute, that is, to discover its ‘identikit’, which can be a specific activity with a ministerial purpose (care of the sick, education of young people, the missionary ideal, etc.), or a specific spirituality to be lived and to make live. In the first case there could be a simple work relationship, whereas in the second case it is a question of a true sharing of the values which are typical of that spirituality.

A second key to the reading is provided by the methods envisaged or proposed by the Founder of the Institute; but here too collaboration with the laity may concern only apostolic activity or may also deal with the sharing of spirituality. In each case, under the same Order or Institute, in addition to the religious which are, as it were, the vital trunk, there can grow autonomous and separately distinct branches which are, at the same time, associated with the Institute whose charism they share. It is enough to think of the Third Orders which go back to the Mendicant Orders, to the Franciscan Family and, in more recent time, to the Society of Mary, the Salesian Family and their respective associated collaborators, and to the Holy Society of St. Paul and its offshoots.

This involves a variegated terminology for the people concerned: oblates, tertiaries, servants, associates, cooperators, brethren, and for the group: union, communion, family, fraternity...

One speaks of spiritual “association” when one participates in the spiritual wealth of the religious family; of “support” when one supports the “works” of the Institute or one collaborates in the apostolate.

Today there is a strong demand on the part of the laity both to collaborate in the mission and share in spirituality, as well as to participate in the charism of the institute. To this demand we can respond by offering age-old solutions which can be associated with a certain image of Church and the religious life, or by finding new solutions, yet to be invented, which refer to Council and post-Council ecclesiology. In any case, the solutions always respond to a precise theological framework which can be presented under four principle headings.

a. Ecclesiology. “In Church-Communion the states of life, by being ordered one to the other, are thus bound together among themselves. They all share in a deeply basic meaning: that of being the manner of living out the commonly shared Christian dignity and the universal call to holiness in the perfection of love. They are different yet complementary, in the sense that each of them has a basic and unmistakable character which sets each apart, while at the same time each of them is seen in relation to the other... All the states of life, whether taking collectively or individually in relation to the others, are at the service of the Church’s growth. While different in expression, they are deeply united in the Church’s “mystery of communion” and are dynamically coordinated in its unique mission” (ChL 55). One speaks of equal dignity among all, of the ‘complimentarity’ of vocations, and of communal circularity among all the states of life.

In a strongly “clerical” ecclesiology, on the other hand, three states of life are classified (clerical, religious, lay): very distinct and characterized, but with degrees of subordination, according to a precise hierarchy.

b. The Mission. If one starts from Christ’s mission, which is to establish the Kingdom in the world, all the People of God are a “sacrament” of salvation, that is, a sign and an instrument; all Christians are called to mission. Therefore priests and religious are all in the service of the People of God, because also the lay person must manifest his or her ‘sacramentality’. Thus the “secularity” of the laity is a sign of the Kingdom of God. They are an instrument, for the laity works for the promotion of the values of the Kingdom, creating the human conditions for peace, justice, freedom, dignity, fraternity, solidarity, unity and dialogue. The “consecration” of the religious is a sign of the Kingdom of God through its meaning, since the religious is one who works for the eschatological values of the Kingdom, meaning when Christ “will hand the Kingdom over to God the Father”. The consecrated life thus plays a “symbolic, critical and transforming” role in society.

If one starts from the mission of the Church, on the other hand, there is the risk that this will be exhausted in the “plantatio ecclesiae”. In this “plantatio” the hierarchical “munus” has the role of the land owner, the religious are the farmers and the lay are simple farm hands.

c. The Theology of the Religious Life. This is a theology which will have to choose between the charism of the founder as being a gift for the Church, or as being the heritage-attribute of the institute. If it is seen as a gift for the Church it can be taken up directly by others in consecrated institutes, or even directly by the laity in their respective aggregations. If, on the other hand, it is a charism-heritage of the institute, then the charism risks being monopolized by the institute itself and managed autocratically. But starting from the ecclesiology of Church- Communion and regarding the charism as a gift for the Church, results in believing that the Institute, in its relationship with the laity, must put itself in a situation of “statu nascenti”. The institute is only one of the many possible realizations of the charism. The demand on the part of the laity for full participation in the charism and for association with the institute and its community life, is therefore a challenge for the institute itself, one which forces it to review its juridical structure. If, instead, the charism were for the institute, then defense of the current institutional situation would be the consequence.

d. Lastly, The Theology of the Laity. The Council concept of the universal vocation to holiness according to one’s individual state of life, is a consequence which should be acquired through baptism; as is also the ‘complimentarity’ of vocations and states of life. It follows that the role of the laity is to be the protagonists (partners) in Christ’s mission for the establishment of the Kingdom in the world. Unless one continues to consider the laity as simple executors of the hierarchy’s orders, and as assistants; or at most, as far as we religious are concerned, as qualified collaborators.

The leading part to be played by the laity lies within the secular dimension and is their own, even if it is not exclusively theirs. The lay people offer the religious the specific contribution of their “secularity”. The religious constitute for the laity the reminder “that this world can be transformed only with the spirit of the beatitudes”, and in this they offer to the laity the contribution of their “consecration”.

The relationships between the laity and religious in the various institutes are considered on different levels. They can be broken down as follows: collaboration in the mission, sharing of spirituality, participation in the charism, association with the institute.

1. Collaboration in the Mission. This collaboration is articulated according to different degrees, according to the activity which the institute carries out in the Church and to the type of collaboration which the lay man intends to provide.

One first form of collaboration is to be found in “voluntary work”. Generally speaking it is the young who decide to dedicate some years of their life to helping their neighbors: giving social assistance to the marginalized, social justice, human promotion, development of agriculture and crafts... On their own initiative, or as members of voluntary organizations, these young people collaborate with the religious in the institute’s works, in their homeland or in the missions. They provide their services without being too interested in the charismatic inspiration of the religious institute. Voluntary service organizations are, for example, the NGOs as well as the voluntary service associations which have been founded by the religious institutes themselves.

In the USA there is the “Volunteer Corps” promoted by the Jesuits, and the “Associates of the Holy Cross” run by the Congregation of the Holy Cross. They are composed of young people in their twenties with a good education, who collaborate for a specific period in the apostolate of the religious institute, with a service of human promotion and social justice. They receive, from the religious institute, a financial subsidy to cover living expenses.

On the plane of collaboration again there are many ministry workers involved in the parishes and in the works managed or run by religious. This is a question of collaboration in social or ministerial services.

In the management of hospitals, when the lay person also views it as being a charismatic inspiration, professional lay people are considered as “collaborators” in the religious Order’s mission. There is then an exchange of gifts: the laity offers its professionalism, the religious offers the spirit of mercy (the good Samaritan). The same thing happens in the running of schools: the laity contributes its specific specialization, the religious the educative spirit of its founder.

In these two cases a large part is currently being played by the fact that there is a fall in the number of religious, leaving an insufficient number to run all of the Order’s hospitals or schools. In order not to close them down they must perforce take on salaried lay people. But it happens, sometimes, that some lay persons, considering their engagement not simply a craft but a profession and a mission, ask the religious if they can share also their charismatic inspiration by taking part in courses of formation. That is what is happening to the Brothers of the Christian Schools, whose schools, run by such lay people, are called “Christian Brother Schools”. That is what is happening with the hospital Orders. These professionals are correctly qualified as “Lay Collaborators” of the institute in their apostolic activity. But if the professional lay person is not interested in the charismatic inspiration of the religious Order, or is indeed an atheist, can he still be qualified as a “Lay Collaborator”? Isn’t this a question instead of simple professional service on the part of an employee, regularly paid?

In the mission “Ad Gentes” some lay people discover their vocation as proclaimers of the Gospel. Their collaboration, as catechists or ministry workers with the missionary institutes, even if only for a few years, helps them to grow as Christians in the common missionary vocation.

2. Sharing of Spirituality. Various religious institutes are categorized in the Church not so much for a specific activity as for the spirituality which lives in them. The spirituality is derived from the charism of the founder and the institute’s experience of faith. Even if any spirituality is contextualized in a historical period and is conditioned by cultural influences, it all the same constitutes the concrete way of living the founder’s charism today. For these institutes the lay voluntary worker or collaborator is characterized more by the sharing of spirituality than by his or her collaboration in apostolic activities.

The sharing of spirituality is a requirement of the universal vocation to holiness. It is a path of holiness to which the lay person feels called. It is a true “vocation”, with a correspondent “formative apprenticeship” guided by a spiritual advisor. Hence the necessity, on the part of the lay person, to communicate with the institute’s life of prayer, in one of its communities, in order to nourish himself with that inspiring spirituality of its apostolate.

One can share the spirituality of an institute without collaborating in its mission (for example the “Prayer Associates”). One can collaborate in an institute mission without sharing its spirituality (Collaborators), and one can share spirituality and collaborate in the mission. These are all possibilities which can exist in the relationships between laity and religious.

In the USA there are more than 250 Lay Associations of this kind. They are made up of people who are at least 50 years of age and who have a high level of education - 70% of them are women. Half of these people want to share in the spirituality, a quarter are attracted by the founder’s charism and 10% want to collaborate in the ministry of the institute. The link with the institute is ratified with a set of conditions. The relationships with the institute are defined in various ways: from a statutory declaration of a few lines on participation in the charism, in spirituality and in the mission; up to statutes which are meticulous in their details. The participation of these lay people associated with the life of the institute ranges from simple prayer to collaboration in the activities and also to taking part in the institute’s meetings and in the Provincial and General Chapters.

3. Participation in the Charism. The Charism of a founder, a gift of the Spirit to the Church, is a unique and original gift: it is the intuition or evangelical inspiration of a founder in response to a ministerial need of the Church. It is like a genetic code, transmitted from the founder to his or her disciples, to be conserved and interpreted with creative fidelity. The charism is an instrument used by the Spirit to point out new avenues and audacious fidelities to the Gospel, to the advantage of all.

In so far as it is a gift to the Church, the charism is received according to a person’s particular state: priestly, religious or secular. It is not a question of ‘clericalizing’ the laity, nor of ‘layicizing’ the religious. In today’s demand to participate in the charism of a founder, these lay people are committed to discover and live the “lay dimension” of the charism, while in the institute it is the “religious dimension” which is lived. Thus one single charism can be lived in different forms and ways: in the priestly religious dimension of the male priestly institutes, in the dimension of consecrated life of the female institutes, in the secular or lay dimension of the lay person and of his lay aggregations.

4. Association with the Institute as Members. This association can take place both individually and as a member of a group. The participation in a charism involves the need for continuity and for strong and stable communion. It also implies greater participation in the life of the religious institute.

Today the laity asks for a full adherence to the life of an institute with bonds which are stable and recognized. These associate lay people however do not intend to become second category religious. They intend to live the lay dimension of the charism, taking upon themselves the full responsibility for the implementation of the charism. In this situation collaboration in the mission, sharing of spirituality and participation in the charism of an institute, means being the authentically lay expression of the founder’s charism lived in a fixed way.

What responses can be given to these requirements of today?

In the history of the religious life one encounters various solutions: from the total dependence of the various branches from the Male Orders (Secular Third Order and Female Institutes), to the total and full autonomy between the single Orders, even if they are united in vital communion in the same charism.

The history of the Franciscan Family is typical. Only with Paul VI, in 1978, did the Secular Franciscan Order obtain full autonomy from among the three branches of the Friars Minor (Franciscans, Conventuals, Capuchins) and from the regular Third Order of Saint Francis.

The foundation of the “Society of Mary” is also interesting. At the beginning of the last century a group of seminarians in Lyon planned to create a work entitled “The Society of Mary” with 4 branches, priests (Marianist Fathers), sisters (Marianist Sisters), lay people (Third Order of Mary), brothers (Marianist Brothers). Subsequently they have added, in Oceania, the “Missionary Sisters of the Society of Mary”. They all have the missionary aim of evangelization and reconciliation. The Third Order of the laity has had great development, promoting the creation of further lay groups. Today, under the general name of “Lay Marianists”, various groups with various names have gotten together according to the type of work or apostolate which they carry out, or to the environment in which they live and operate.

But, to today’s demand on the part of the laity who ask to share the spirituality, to participate in the charism and to associate themselves with the institute, one cannot give replies starting from the past so much as envisaging solutions which may open to the ecclesial future.

But what answers?