The Council for Laity

by Editor · March 11, 2015

The plan by the bishops of Southern Africa to establish a Council for the Laity must be commended. The bishops have rightly recognised that they need recourse to drawing from the skills, experiences and insights of lay people, and to give them a voice.

“The laity council and diocesan laity structures should exclude no faithful Catholic from representation.” (Graphic: The Southern Cross)

At a time when Pope Francis is increasingly calling on the contribution of lay people � for example, as members of the Vatican�s Council for Economy or as auditors of the bishops� synod � attempts to give the laity greater influence in the activities of the Catholic Church in our region is timely.

It is also encouraging, as Cardinal Wilfrid Napier of Durban has noted, that the 29-member laity council is intended to help the bishops� conference serve the needs of the dioceses, not the other way around.

This should not mean that the collegiality of bishops at conference level must be diminished, but that the Southern African Catholic Bishops� Conference will be better placed to facilitate the mission and work of the Church on diocesan levels.

To that end, the SACBC�s departmental structures are already being reconfigured. Diocesan structures may likewise need reform, ideally in such a way as to encourage wider and focused participation by the laity which the council is intended to aid.

The composition of the laity council will require much care. The Catholic Church in Southern Africa, much as the general population, is racially, socially, culturally, economically and philosophically varied. The great challenge will be to set up a laity council whose 29 members reflect this diversity with some degree of representativity.

For instance, the council will require members from remote rural areas and from urban centres; some dioceses incorporate both rural and urban areas. It will have to draw from the experience of people who live in poverty as well as it must from the expertise of the middle class.

The activities of the Council for the Laity must be driven by functioning diocesan structures, which should give those who are delegated to serve on the council a clear mandate.

The laity council and diocesan laity structures should exclude no faithful Catholic from representation. Structures for the laity must by necessity represent the middle ground which is occupied by the majority of Catholics. But they must also take on board the views and concerns of conservatives and progressives, even, and especially, if their views are at odds with those of their local bishop.

This is important. A council and diocesan structures for the laity that fail to challenge the hierarchy when necessary and instead only confirm the positions held by bishops would be a waste of resources and opportunity.

Of course, the relationship between bishops and laity structures should not be intrinsically adversarial; indeed, the point of the council is to foster reciprocal cooperation in the service of the Church at all levels. Nevertheless, there are times when bishops need the insights of the laity, even when these are not welcome, to better read the signs of the times.

Bishops would do themselves and the Church a disservice if they were to deliberately load the council with individuals who reflect their particular biases, never mind with their friends.

Ideally, bishops should have no influence, direct or indirect, over the composition of the laity council or the diocesan structures from which the councillors should receive their mandate.

Since the costs of the council�s activities � such as transport to meetings, accommodation and so on � must be carried by the SACBC or the dioceses, there will always be the risk that councillors do not feel free to represent positions which they feel might be at odds with those of the hierarchy or their local bishop. The necessary independence of thought, without which the council would be irrelevant, must be strongly asserted.

The Council for the Laity will invariably fail if it becomes, or is seen to be, dependent on episcopal favour. Therefore it is necessary that the council and its members have the explicit and guaranteed freedom to confront the bishops when they feel it�s necessary, without concern for repercussion.

The bishops, in setting up the council, evidently seek a collegial relationship with the laity. This must be supported. May the Council for the Laity bear rich fruit.