“Our Institute chooses to share its Mission with the lay people…”
(Acts of the 10th General Chapter, pg. 68)

Introduction

If we asked the opinion of any Consolata missionary on who are the IMC Lay Missionaries, I believe that the most common and immediate answer would be this: They are people who possess certain adequate professional qualities, and who collaborate, for a certain time, in some of the many human development and human promotion projects run by our Institute in the missions, such as hospitals, schools, centers for the human promotion of the woman, social works of all kinds…
However, in the light of the post-conciliar theological reflection, and if we consider the many experiences that are being made in the Church and in the missionary institutes, our own IMC reality included in some of the areas where we work: such a definition of the Lay IMC seems to be too toned down. We believe that we, the Consolata Missionaries, cannot exempt ourselves from making an effort to deepen and amplify our ideas on the theme of the Lay Missionary.
It is really a question of positioning this theme in a larger ecclesial context in order to better understand it and its meaning for the whole of our Institute. This will help us to give a more adequate answer to the consequences that the sharing of our charism and spirituality with the laity will bring to all IMC missionaries. This is also the way suggested by the 10th General Chapter.
The sharing of the charisms of religious institutes with the laity is no longer, in the ecclesial and theological context in which we live today, a reality that we can ignore. On the other hand, such sharing will necessarily mean a change of mentality and of missionary praxis for our Institute.

The Secretariat for the Mission was given by the General Government the task of implementing the Practical Proposals relative to Lay Missionaries (cf. Acts of the Chapter, pg. 68-69). Consequently, it intends to conduct a joint reflection between the Consolata Missionaries, the Consolata missionary Sisters and the lay people of our groups and organizations. The purpose of this reflection is to arrive at a better understanding of the whole topic, and to suggest some concrete ways in which our Institute will be able to better accomplish, during the coming years, an authentic sharing of its charism and of its mission with the Lay Missionaries.
We are proposing here an outline for a work that you can all do, both as Consolata missionaries and as lay people, in community meetings or in group meetings. We ask you to read the first part, that is, the two first documents, which really are an introduction to the topic that interests us. Afterwards, we ask you to dialogue and reflect on other documents, especially on the two final questionnaires. We ask you to send us your reactions and your comments, your reflections and your suggestions. In a special way, we ask mission promoters, who are in contact with groups of lay people, to do this work with them, and to send us the reflections, the comments and the suggestions of those lay people…

The documents we ask you to study are, in the proposed order, the following:
n A synthesis of the talk given by Fr. Bruno Secondin, O.C., to the convention of the General Superiors’ Union, which took place at Ariccia in november 1999.
n Another synthesis, this one somewhat more concise, of the talk of Fr. Robert J. Schreiter, C.PP.S., at the same convention mentioned above.
n The Report of a meeting of the Secretariat with the IMC Lay Missionaries, which took place in Malaga, Spain.
n The concrete program that the Secretariat for the Mission wants to actualize in order to accomplish what was requested by the X General Chapter.
n A document to help you reflect together, missionaries and lay people, on some particular aspects of the problem.

Send every item of collaboration to the Secretariat for the Mission.




SHARING THE CHARISMS AND THE SPIRITUALITY
New paths of communion and apostolic radiation
by Bruno Secondin, O.C.

Right from the start of monasticism, since St. Pachomius and St. Basilius, and through the various seasons and forms of consecrated life, there always was a fruitful osmosis among the various experiences and forms of Christian life. Throughout history, this multiform phenomenology has used an abundant terminology: in reference to people, words like oblates, tertiaries, servants, associates, cooperators, confreres were used; in reference to the experiences, unions, communions, families, fraternities, etc. This is, no doubt, a history that is very rich in holiness and witnessing.
In the past, when the members were religious, these groups were run and considered as forms of spiritual “association” to the goods of a religious family, or else a form of collaboration and support to their apostolate or to the diverse “works” of a certain institute. A certain rapport of “paternity”, or maybe “paternalism” was exercised by the religious who considered themselves “titulars” in relation to other categories of people who approached them for one or another reason: spiritual, formative, apostolic.

Today, that model is still existing. But there are also different experiences. What seems new is the theological and ecclesiological approach to these phenomena. These experiences are to be seen in the light of the interpretation that theological reflection gives to the nature of consecrated life and to the Church as communion. This has also practical consequences for the management of reciprocal relations. These relations are to be inspired by principles of theology, ecclesiology and spiritual life rather than by juridical and organizational criteria.
There’s more, however. There is the impression that the surfacing of this new kind of experiences around a monastery, an institute or an apostolic mission is the concrete proof of ecclesial fruitfulness. On the contrary, their absence would be evidence of the sterility of a given group of “consecrated life”.
We can easily see that this reasoning carries a challenge: As we question “how to manage” these phenomena, we also question our own ecclesial role and the authentic creative fidelity to the charism we received.

I. Actuality and Complexity of the Phenomenon
1. A sign in this direction

In Christifideles Laici there is a splendid sentence which I will transcribe right away:

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 of the commonly shared Christian dignity and the universal call to holiness in the perfection of ove. 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 and placed at each other’s service… All the states of life, whether taken 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” (Christifideles Laici, 55).

2. The Stages of the Synod on Consecrated Life

In the Instrumentum Laboris of June 1994, there are many references to the collaboration among the various members of the Church. This purpose of this collaboration is the concretization of an effective and more efficient communion in the work for one and the same mission.

Number 80 refers to the “Church as organic communion in the complementarity of the gifts of the Spirit”. This, it states, “has promoted a constructive collaboration, in all areas, between lay faithful and consecrated members”. After affirming that the laity expect religious to give a clear witnessing of faith and faithfulness to the Church, it goes on to say that often lay people “ask to be aided in their advancement on the paths of prayer and spiritual life… Today we see in individual lay persons and in groups a desire to participate in the spirituality and the mission that are proper to the institutes of consecrated life as a complementarity of vocations”.
It concludes with some suggestions: that committees or councils be created to take care of these experiences; that “formative programs and institutional forms of participation and collaboration be set up”.
N. 89 adds something new: “As of late, many communities and institutes have developed a network of associates and friends, priests and lay people, that share their spirituality and collaborate in the mission. This is a growing reality that still gropes for adequate forms… These are forms that offer the chance of creating places where faith and mutual support can be shared in a common mission, which is lived in different fashions, but concretized in the same spirit. It is important not to limit these new experiences, but to let them look for new ways of developing”.

Among the final propositions of the Synod, there are at least two that are directly connected with our theme.

N. 32. Its title is “Communion among Consecrated and Lay Persons”. It “expresses the desire that the connection among the various vocations be more known by all”. It says that “consecrated life and the life of the laity enrich one another: each one gives and receives to and from the other”.
N. 33, on “associates and volunteers”, is even clearer: “The institutes of consecrated life must know how to accurately discern vocations to gratuitous service and associate them to themselves, not only in the area of activities, but also in the field of mission and charism, always respecting, however, the secular and spiritual character of the laity”.

3. “Consecrated Life” (54-56)
In the Apostolic Exhortation Vita Consacrata, there are three numbers (54-56) that the Pope dedicates explicitly to the theme “Communion and Collaboration with the Laity”. Several aspects of this topic are presented, both from the theoretical and the practical point of view:
-An ecclesiological and cultural premise is used as the point of departure: Communion and collaboration with the laity are fruits of Church-communion, make up a more complete image of the Church, are an example of collaboration and exchange of gifts, and are a more efficient answer to the great challenges of our time (VC 54).
This makes us understand that our interpretation must be wide, and not limited by the problems of one’s own institute. We must always go back to the ecclesial perspective, in a big and complex sense.

-Diversity of rapports: keeping in mind the kind of charism (contemplative-active), the type of pastoral collaboration, or the past history. Today, a new stage is here, a “new chapter full of hope”, according to the Pope, in the conviction that “the charism may be shared with the laity” (VC 54b).
We have to see the new that is blooming, which is a sign of a new kind of “sharing” not programmed by us but by the Spirit.

-These are “new experiences of communion and cooperation”: from the irradiation of spirituality we go to cooperation in the services. All this “facilitates a more intense cooperation between consecrated persons and the laity in view of the mission” (VC, 55).
This first perspective seems to talk only about areas of spirituality and simple cooperation in activities. Partly, this is a traditional perspective, which is still alive and efficient. Immediately after, however, is mentioned the “new” which is being experimented: the term used in the Council as ‘proper’ of religious, is used here, meaning, the witnessing of the Beatitudes (LG, 31).

-“Participation of the laity often brings unexpected and rich insights”: in the interpretation of the charism, in its apostolic dynamism, in its spirituality. The ones who are consecrated give the contribution of their “consecration”. The laity give the contribution of their secularity (VC, 55b).
The statement is still in general terms, but it’s wording is precious: “unexpected and rich insights into certain aspects of the charism… new directions in the apostolate…”.

-Five concrete cases of sharing are mentioned: Associate members, meaning adherence to an institute by established and recognized bonds; temporary sharing of life, contemplation and apostolic dedication; volunteers: their formation must be well taken care of and their juridical status has to be cleared up; cooperation in local activities (VC 56).

II. Some interpretive perspectives

From the quotations above, which give the substance of what can be documented, we might think that we are just looking at some more of the customary general statements that “accept” what was in the past, but do not refer to what could come to be. My opinion is different. I think that, in the texts, a further development of these phenomena is not denied, a development of a more radical value; its value is somewhat “insinuated”, and we can make it more explicit.

a) Statu nascenti (initial state)
First of all, I see outlined in these phenomena that situation which sociologists and anthropologists call the “statu nascenti” (cf. F. Alberini), meaning that stage of open, fluid, inventive, de-structuralizing research, which at the same time is re-forming (of the ecclesial service and of its intitutional, sustaining form), and which brings about the re-definition of roles and styles of life, all for a new fruitfulness of the charism.
Religious institutes were born in such a process: they began in the intuition that we could call “mystical” of their founder and became an initial ‘movement’; with the passing of time they attained ‘stability’, and finally arrived at a consolidated “institution’, which was approved and became definitive, and distant too from the creativity of their origins.
The new experiences seem to re-open the dossier of the foundation in order to recuperate the creative thrust of the origins and, sometimes, also the ecclesial sense of “open family”, of compex family that existed at the beginning, but got lost later on.
There is in all this a theological value: The contact with the charism dos not come from an external approach, it is more like a new pollination, an approaching to an incandescent source, or to a vortex that carries away, that grabs and engrosses you. All this by the direction of the Spirit who is creator and speaks in prophecy.

b) What Kind of Ecclesiology
There is a second aspect at stake: in the evolution, in the interpretation and in the management of these phenomena, we have to keep in mind a certain kind of theology of the Church of consecrated life. Summing up:
-If the Church is mainly centered on “clerics” and on its group of “special consecration”, then the lay people are not generous helpers, but outsiders; the preoccupation will be to define their invasion and to preserve the differences of identity through discipline and fear.

-If the Church is the people of God marching across history (cf. Lumen Gentium, chap 2), then an integrated sense of the various ecclesial typologies will prevail; we will be able to talk also about “paradigmatic vocations” that serve one another.

-If the Church feels attached to the history and fate of the whole of humanity, especially of the poor and of those without voice, then the protagonism of the laity will come out strongly, and the charisms of consecrated life are forced to assume an innovating tension which will conduct them to “explore” its origins.

-If at the center we place the history of all humanity, which is destined to enter the “Kingdom”, and if inside this history we keep the role of leaven and “sacrament” of the people of God, then priests and religious are at the service of the people of God, in order that the latter may live the three-fold aspect of their prophetic, regal, and priestly vocation in a full and responsible way, a way that is liberating and transforming, so that “ the world may believe”.

c) For a new alliance
From what we have already said, we can see that it is urgent to give life, among religious and laity, to a new alliance which is not based on a delegation of services, but on participation and co-responsibility, on communion and exchange of gifts, on a new ecclesial co-responsibility in favor of the creative fruitfulness of the charism.
In a Church that is primarily centered on “keeping up” its hierarchical structure, its administrative efficiency and its “conceptual system” (orthodoxy), very little space is left for the laity, and above all they are denied any role of co-responsibility and protagonism.
We might speak of the laity as of a “sleeping giant”, that we try to “tame” with various forms of control. In the next century, the awakening of this protagonism will be a great challenge: and the charisms of consecrated life must give their prophetic contribution in this reciprocal encounter and in this search for new ways.
If we can suggest an orientation: we must, in some way, learn from the new “ecclesial movements” a new way to tread on. These movements involve both religious and laity. But the management of activities must not be used as a starting point (as, it seems, religious want to do vis-à-vis the laity). Instead, the departure for all this are the spirituality and the charisms, and the global ideals and perspectives, without primarily imposing specific activities that must be done together.

d) Feeling one’s pulse alone
In this last note there is a certain novelty: we are witnessing the awakening and the growth of a more mature laity, which is more organized and undertaking, at least as far as they, the lay, are concerned. This laity does not like to be conditioned by big “aggregations” dedicated to management, a laity that nevertheless seeks styles of life that are authentically evangelical that must be concretized in this history. A consequence follows here, which is carried on by a sane ecclesiology that has recognized the specificity of spaces and identity of the laity. Many are the examples of lay people that no longer want to live a second hand ecclesial responsibility and engagement in evangelization: the Spirit invites them to “feel their own pulse by themselves”, without any need for the customary ecclesiastical “nurse’ to control them.
Applying this to our theme: Those groups of lay people that ask to be associated to an Institute, or that express the wish to assume a direct responsibility, have no intention of being second or third rate religious, they want a full participation in the charism, while remaining laity, so that they can interpret their lay status in a “charismatic” way.
The will to collaborate in the activities or in the difficulties has always been there, and it remains valid. But that is not the main reason for the present phenomenon, or, at least, this is not its innovative aspect. Today more than in the past, these lay people want truly to belong, while remaining secular lay people, in the spirituality, the projects and the mission of the Institute in the Church. They want to live its spirit in the first person, they want to share the gift of the Spirit in full co-responsibility, while remaining fully secular.

III Rewriting the Theology
The novelty is also given by another reason: the concept of Church has changed, right from Vatican II, in relation to the mission and in relation to its protagonists.

1 A Church in a state of mission
The Church is essentially a Church in mission, not in the sense that it is involved in activities and does mission, but rather that it is a “community of people who are sent”; the charisms are graces that render this identity even efficient and dynamic. Baptism is not a passport to salvation, more precisely it is a call to mission. The true identity of the Christian, which is based on Baptism, is the one of being called and sent to build up the Kingdom of God in the world.

-The whole community has a leading role in the mission
A Christian community in which the mission is an optional “supplement” which is reserved to some generous members has no true meaning. This refers also to consecrated life because it truly is “in the state of mission” (cf. VC 72). Without this setting of relation to the mission, a mission that is united to the mission of Christ who was sent by the Father, and united to the mission of the Spirit who sets everything in salvific tension, a perspective of “maintenance” of what’s already there, and of self-complacent and administrative “reform” will prevail.

-Christ, the true missionary
Christ is always the leading character, “to the end of the ages”, of the missionary activity that is accomplished by his disciples “to the ends of the earth”. He it is who renders truthful and efficient that same “activity”: He is the goal, the content, and also the subject of all that the community does (in union with Him).
Theologically, the church does not have a mission, it participates in the mission of Jesus Christ and of the Spirit, by transforming this world into a “house for all”, welcoming, rich in justice and truth. To evangelize is to live with the others, to dialogue, to give all one is and has, including the word of God in all its integrity.
The Church is a society characterized by fragile and conflicting relations of consumistic type. It must express models of relations based on the Gospel, on largesse, on mutual acceptance, on dialogue and on reciprocal forgiveness. To marginalize the laity, to consider lay people as simple auxiliaries of projects elaborated without consulting them, this amounts to walking aimlessly.
The Pope stated that in the missionary encyclical Redemptoris Missio, when he said that such a job is universal and is engagement for all believers on the strength of their baptism. “The mission ad gentes is incumbent upon the entire people of God. Whereas the foundation of a new church requires the Eucharist and hence the priestly ministry, missionary activity, which is carried out in a wide variety of ways, is the task of all the Christian faithful” (RM 71).

2. A people of God for the Kingdom
It is clear, I hope, that the new evangelization should be characterized by the first class role exercised by the whole people of God, and not only by the protagonism of the chosen troups: “Before considering the diversity of gifts, offices and duties, we must recognize as fundamental the common vocation of all to union with god for the salvation of the world” (Mutuae Relationes 4).

-Instrument and meaning
The urgency that all faithful share in this responsibility is not only a question of apostolic efficiency, it is before all a duty and a right based on baptismal dignity (cf. CfL 14). It is question here of a community of disciples, of a people of prophets, of people who are sent to work so that the Kingdom of God will bud forth among the peoples and make them become disciples (Mt 28:18).
Consequently, even the special agents (the priests and the consecrated people) are at the service of this larger protagonism, which belongs to all: to accompany, support, and recognize it. Not to annul or fear it, but to promote and free it from the obstacles accumulated by the ecclesiastical mentality.
As Vatican II recalled, the sacramental dimension of the Church involves both being sign and being instrument for the Kingdom of God (LG 1). This way, the “secular” style is a sign of the Kingdom of God under the aspect of instrumentality. For this reason, the promotion of the values of the Kingdom, such as peace, dialogue, justice, freedom and brotherhood have a lot of importance (RM 17, 20).
As the style of religious life is sign of the Kingdom of God because it acts by emphasizing the meaning, the cognitive function, the meaningful message: which means the eschatological opening, that reserve of hope and of sense that will be revealed when Christ will “hand over the Kingdom to his Father” (cf 1 Cor 15:24-28). No one of these perspectives is exclusive or excluding.

-May the laity grow
In the history of the Church, the great changes have been marked by prophetic movements and by charismatic currents. All these did not take possession of the Kingdom, they placed themselves at its service in moments of bewilderment and confusion, of weariness and anti-gospel opposition, of social tragedies and political changes. The charisms were instruments of the Spirit pointing to new paths and to daring fidelity to the gospel. They were for the advantage of all, to arouse everyone and to stimulate the protagonism of many to announce Christ the savior all in relation to the Kingdom.
Today we see that there is need of a new prophetic leadership which will involve the laity in many ways and give lots of value to their capacity as prophets and witnesses of the Kingdom within the “temporal affairs in order to order them according to the plan o God” (LG 31). Lay people are not only collaborators of the priests and the religious and cooperators in their activities: they are partners in the same common mission; charismatically diverse, but all called to communion in diversity.
We can say that only a mutual relationship and complementarity can make credible and efficient both the laity and the religious and priests. Maybe we can even say more: we will be credible if we will be able to overturn the plans: the laity must grow, and so we must place ourselves at their service, to make them grow. We must make their participation in the Church a common path in an experience of conversion that is renovating for all.
Symbolism and praxis of both religious and and laity attract and require one another, and so has Christifideles stated in N. 55: “In Church communion the states of life, by being ordained one to the other, are thus bound together among themselves… Whether taken collectively or individually in relation to 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 dynamically coordinated in its unique mission” (CfL 55).

3. Experienced reciprocity: expression of an ecclesial re-foundation
In general terms, we can set the mutual relations as example in the following way:
-We must accept and affirm the charismatic diversity, promote communion in the acceptance of the diversity, support the specific paths of each one, and be available for collaboration in apostolic initiatives that are sustained by both religious and laity. There is no right of pre-emption by one over the other: each one must make an effort to create mutual esteem, even of “apostolic initiatives”. Rather, if anything is urgent in the matter, if there is a dream that has not yet been realized, it is the promotion of the laity that risks being suffocated by the institution’s way of seeing things.
-This means that resources and qualifications must be put together in order to facilitate the universal mission. In his missionary encyclical the Pope tells us: “God is opening to the Church the horizons of a humanity more fully prepared for the sowing of the Gospel. I sense that the moment has come to commit all of the Church’s energies to a new evangelization and to the mission ad gentes. No believer in Christ, no institution of the Church can avoid this supreme duty: to proclaim Christ to all peoples (RM 3).
-All are workers in the one vineyard, and all are “at one and the same time the goal and the subjects of the Church communion as well as of the participation in the mission of salvation” (cf CfL 55). As an instrument and as dynamic symbol, each one must see in the specific role of the other the way and the support towards the Kingdom. The laity too is called to be sign and instrument of salvation and of unity. As a matter of fact, it is through the laity that the Church becomes more efficiently a sign of salvation inside the history and the concrete reality of the world.
-A Church that is in communion and lives mission cannot grow without the relation and the collaboration among diverse groups that are rich in charismatic gifts. Religious and laity must engage together in the growth of a Church that will more radically live the following of Jesus, a Church that will be a model of communion among all the brethren, a Church that will become a permanent process of formation, searching for the truth about God, man and the meaning of life.

Conclusion
I know that there would be other important questions to be deal with and clarified. In closing, here is a beautiful text from Vita Consacrata: “The challenges of evangelization are such that they cannot be effectively faced without the cooperation, both in discernment and action, of all the Church’s members. It is difficult for individuals to provide a definitive answer; but such an answer can arise from encounter and dialogue. In particular, effective communion among those graced with different charisms will ensure both mutual enrichment and more fruitful results in the mission at hand. Consecrated life ... can contribute to the creation of a climate of mutual acceptance in which the Church’s various components, feeling that they are valued for what they are, come together in ecclesial communion in a more convinced manner, ready to undertake the great universal mission” (VC 74).



Examples of Lay Association with Religious Institutes
by Robert J. Schreiter, C.PP.S.

What I would like to face here is the explosion of new associations, new in their typology and in their numbers, which took place from Vatican II to our days. The majority of them are still in an evolutionary phase, and only a minority has come down to look for a juridical status.

1. Multiplicity of Lay Associations
When we take a close look at these lay associations, the first impression is about how numerous they are. However, we can divide these lay associations into three general categories: Groups of Volunteers, Foreign Missions Associations, and programs for Lay Associates.
The first category, the one of the Groups of Volunteers, is made up of associations that give to individuals the opportunity of working for certain periods of time established in the apostolate of the religious institutes. The members of these groups are usually in their twenties and have a good education. They are frequently going through their university studies, or have just finished them. The activities they normally want to engage in belong to the area of social justice. Their attention focuses more on the kind of ministry they are doing than on the charism of the religious institute within which they operate. Their engagement is rarely a preliminary phase that will eventually end up in a stricter association with the institute.

The second category is composed of foreign missions associations. These people, men and women, engage in a service overseas, usually for a determined period of time, often for three years, which period of time can be renewed. They are young people between twenty and thirty-years-old, who already have a definite profession which they exercise in the location of their overseas destination. They can also give service as catechists or pastoral agents. People belonging to this category also possess a good level of education.
Compared with the preceding category of volunteers, the people in these associations of foreign missions have a stricter association with the institutes within which they work. They follow programs of more intense and longer preparation than in the preceding group, and their participation in the life of the institute is deeper too.

The third category is made up of programs for lay associates. It is the most extensive and widespread category of the three. The members of these lay associations are usually fifty and over and possess a certain level of higher education. About 70% of them are women. The majority of them participate in the spirituality of the institute within which they work. This includes regular meetings with the members of the institute, observing celebrations on special days, participation in meetings, etc.

Diversified too is the mode of structuring the relations between them and the institute. In most cases, one or two members of the institute have the charge of working with the associates. In some cases, a lay associate is co-director of the program. The methods by which are defined the qualifications, the various roles and the expectations of the lay associates are much diversified. In some cases there are meticulously elaborated statutes, In other instances there are only general statements on the mission. Generally speaking, qualifications, expectations and roles are not clearly defined.
Participation of the associates in the life of the institute varies too. It goes from simply praying together, to participating in meetings, sharing of ministry, and even in some cases a life lived together with the members of the institute.
About half of the associates mention spiritual enrichment as a cause for them to join the groups. Some 25% say that it is the attraction they feel for the charism of the institute. 10% speaks of their desire to share the ministry of the institute.

The institutes themselves, asked why they organize these programs for lay associates, answer as follows: 50% do it to share their charism. 30% see in these programs a concrete opportunity to collaborate with lay people. 12% see in these programs an answer to the call of Vatican II to the universal call to holiness.
Involvement with the laity seems to be felt as an important element. The motivation seems strong. However, what such an involvement entails is less clear if we examine the rather diversified nature of these programs for the laity. We must also mention that involvement with these lay people on the part of the institute is limited to a few members, since often the idea of having a group of lay associates meets with opposition on the part of the other members.

2. Reasons for the expansion of the groups of Lay Associates
What is the cause for this sudden expansion of groups of associates? Naturally, the causes are complex. However, if we take a good look at the identity of those who join the programs and study their motivation, we will get some pretty good clues as to the cause of this expansion.

First of all, we are struck by the fact that the groups of volunteers and of missionaries overseas generally speaking attract a good number of young people and of people who have a good level of education. Volunteers are usually highly motivated in matters of social justice and giving service.
The second aspect that pushes volunteers to join these programs that are sponsored by religious institutes is the possibility of short term engagements. This seems to adapt itself to a widespread American (western) model. To think about an engagement of one to three years becomes more natural than an engagement for an indeterminate period of time. As a matter of fact, the requirement of an engagement for an indeterminate period of time is seen by many young people as a true obstacle to even consider religious life as a form of life for them.
Another aspect of these three kinds of lay associations that must be kept in mind are the various spans of age of these people. The volunteers and the missionaries overseas usually attract the young, mature as they may be (between age 20 and 40), while the third group, the lay associates, attract more people in their middle age or the elderly (50 and up).
The groups of volunteers are preferred by those going through their university studies, or those who have already completed them. Such a volunteer service can be seen as a further stage in the educational process, or just as an experience, something that one follows before engaging in a true profession. People who enter these volunteer services are generally, although not always, young people who are married and have a family, or non-married.
We might ask why the difference of age in the third category. Part of the answer could be seen in the fact that the main motivation for half of them is spiritual enrichment. The question about the sense of life, even if it is present at the age of twenty, becomes more pressing in people of middle age. It is no wonder then that precisely people of middle age address themselves to a religious institute in order to deepen their own spiritual life and to share the charism of that institute.
From these age factors and other contextual factors, a pretty homogenous model comes out: The young feel attracted towards a religious institute especially because of services it proposes. Middle-aged people are attracted by the possibility and the chance of becoming spiritually enriched.

It seems that we can identify the main causes of the expansion of these new forms of lay association: age, a desire for spiritual life, a desire for holiness. We can also say that there is no direct causal relation between the phenomenon of the expansion of lay associations and the decrease of members in the religious institutes.

Anyhow, the debate on lay associations is far from concluded. We are just about half way through. The result of this journey might at present be to add new and fruitful dimensions to religious life. I hope that the debate will continue.













Meeting of the Secretariat
with the IMC Lay Missionaries of Malaga
December 7, 1999

1. The experience of the IMC Lay Missionaries in Malaga. Problems and obstacles.

-Exasperating slowness in searching for and defining the place where to go as Lay Missionaries (LM). The LM prepares for the task, is ready, sometimes has even left his own job and… doesn’t yet know whether he’ll be able to leave and where he’ll go.
-Lack of precision in the definition of the work project, especially if the LM does not go somewhere directly as a technical professional, for example, in Latin America. There is a need to begin with a clear work project.
-The LMs often do not know who is responsible for them while in the missions: who cares for them spiritually; who is going to pay the social contributions while they stay in the missions; who pays for their trip or their vacations… Sometimes, the parish where the LM works and the Region throw at each other the duty of paying; idem between the sending Region and the receiving Region; all this puts the LM at a loss…
-The contract signed before leaving (cf. document “The Lay Missionary IMC”) was not enough. Some of them had to sign another contract upon arriving there, filled with little clauses, more complicated… and which afterwards was not respected.
-It is important for the LM to know who asked for him. Was it an individual missionary? Was it the Regional Superior? Sometimes, if it is an individual missionary who asks for a LM, the missionary is changed of assignment and his successor is not interested in the LM.
-The mentality of the missionaries, who are not able to see the LM as “an effective part” of the IMC, and make him worry, especially when problems come up…
-We go as LM to the missions after belonging for many years to the youth group, to the group of the Consolata mission promotion, and after a long preparation. Then, in the missions we meet some other lay missionaries from other countries who had known the Consolatas just for a few months… There are no common criteria to define an IMC LM.

2. What do we mean exactly when we talk about IMC Lay Missionaries… and which are the necessary elements to affirm that a person is an IMC Lay Missionary?

-When we say Consolata Lay Missionary we mean a person that was formed in the IMC youth groups, that chooses the Mission as his own style of life, whether he will work for some years in the missions, or whether he cannot do that.
-The type of bond with the Consolata Institute depends especially on the Institute itself, on the way it sees the laity, and on what kind of relationship it wants to establish with them.
-The elements that are proper to the Consolata Lay Missionary should be as follows:
-sharing of the IMC charism and spirituality;
-the IMC identity;
-sharing with the Institute the work in the missions, following some norms that will be examined later in this document, or sharing the work of mission promotion. In the latter case, there should exist in IMC mission promotion centers a team formed by missionaries and lay people, with a common project;
-Choice of life: for the mission or for the Institute.
-Some express elements of skepticism: whether IMC one and for Religious… Will a sharing-collaboration with the laity be Lay Missionaries can really exist, since the Institute is a Religious possible?

3. Relationship between the Institute and the LMs: sharing of the charism, organizational autonomy. How to realize this project.

-It is difficult to achieve a just balance in these things. But we want to be considered as belonging to the IMC.
-The correct way of working in the missions, as far as we lay people are concerned, is through concrete projects. As a matter of fact, that is why the missionaries usually ask for lay missionaries. The Institute has its own groups and collaborators. Here at Malaga, we have organized ourselves as ONG: we can organize projects together with the missionaries. Or we can do things totally independent from them, a little bit like the Medicus Mundi. To us, what’s important is that we be the creators of the projects without waiting for the Institute to offer them to us…
-It is important for us to be the managers of all this. That’s why we have a legal basis (ONG). Individual missionaries change often, and the laity pay the tab. The Lay organization will directly contact the Regions that will receive the Lay Missionaries. At the most, we will accept a general coordination on the part of the General Direction of the Institute. It’s more operational this way. We could propose technical projects of development, or professional projects, or even pastoral projects.
-We must be autonomous, just like the ONG.
-According to some;
-The Institute should always offer the Lay Missionaries a spiritual assistant;
-The Lay Missionaries depend directly on their own Coordination Committee;
-They will work in their own projects, or projects they agree upon with the Region that receives them;
-This way, there may be projects that are done in accordance with the IMC, and others that are totally independent;
-In the Mission Promotion Centers, there must be a common project, elaborated by both the IMC missionaries and the Lay Missionaries;
-Each Lay Missionary must be sent for a specific project, in such a way that the Lay is as a part of the project, the financial aspect included, right from the beginning of the writing of the project;
-The projects of the Lay Missionaries must be autonomous from the IMC missionaries, but in the countries where the Institute works. Maybe we the laity can give to the Consolata missionaries the priority in the collaboration and realization of the projects the Lay Missionaries propose.
-According to others:
-There are dangers in the preceding proposals: If these mission projects were not in direct contact with the Institute, wouldn’t an excessive autonomy of the laity lead them to an eventual loss of the identity of the IMC and of the sharing of the charism? We have to study well the means to strengthen the bonds of the charism and of the spirituality between the Institute and the laity. We could easily become simple “cooperators in development” and lose the missionary spirit of the Institute.
-The ONG of the Lay Missionaries is only an instrument in order to get people and means together around the IMC missionary project. It must not become an end, the purpose. It is necessary to plan the missionary projects for the LM that we have and that are available, and not the contrary.

4. What we ask from the IMC

· The IMC should open more concrete ways to the mission;
· Continue to accompany in a serious way the community of the Lay Missionaries;
· Slowly, try to change the mentality of the missionaries towards the laity;
· On its side, the IMC must have a clear project for the LM;
· We must work together in the missions, although in a just autonomy (house…);
· There must be a serious human and spiritual following and support of the laity by the missionaries;
· There must be common basic criteria (for the formation, the preparation, the ways of discerning, the contract…) for all the IMC Lay Missionaries, regardless of their places of origin;
· Let us try to cooperate with the Lay Missionaries of the Consolata Missionary Sisters.

5. A congress of the IMC Lay Missionaries

· It should take place, together with the LMs of other Regions.
· Prepare a questionnaire, a general plan, to be sent to all the entities (groups, members) of the LMs of the Institute so that each one of these entities may give its opinion. The opinions should be assembled in a document and sent to all the regions for further discussion before the congress.
· Representatives of the LMs and of the Missionaries should attend the congress.
· The Congress should establish the minimum common denominator for all the IMC LMs in the various dimensions: definition of the figure of the Lay Missionary, his belonging to the IMC, conditions for discernment and formation, ways of concretizing the vocation of IMC laity in Mission and Vocation Promotion, and in the Mission.

BOX 1.
If anyone is interested in the integral text of the reflections of Fr. Bruno Secondin and of Fr. Robert J. Schreiter, which were summarized in these pages, this is available in the following versions: English, French, Italian and Spanish.
Ask from:
Mission Secretariat (E-mail: )

BOX 2.
Mission Secretariat:
Work Program on the theme IMC Lay Missionaries

1. To complete the table of the reality of the groups and associations of the laity that somehow refer to our Institute. Where possible, meet with those entities for an initial dialogue with them about the rest of the program that has to accomplished.

2. To contact the Consolata Missionary Sisters that are responsible for their same kind of program for the laity, so as to dialogue and agree on a common course of action.

3. Together with the Consolata Missionary Sisters and the laity, to come up with a draft of an Instrumentum Laboris that will already make some proposals and suggestions for a future statute that will regulate the rapport of our Institute with the Lay Missionaries IMC, keeping in mind its: definition, relations with our Institute, participation in the Mission and/or activities of Mission Promotion, structures, operation, etc. Such draft will be sent for further in-depth study to:
The General Governments IMC and MC;
The various groups and communities of Lay Missionaries in existence;
Regional Superiors IMC/MC;
Mission Promoters IMC/MC;
Other Missionary Experts of the two Institutes

4. To collect comments, suggestions, proposals towards a complete re-composition of the Instrumentum Laboris on the Statute of the IMC/MC Lay Missionary.

5. To organize a Congress of the IMC/MC Lay Missionaries for a final discussion of the Statute.

6. To submit for approval the Statute to the General Governments IMC/MC.

7. Send to all the missionaries the approved Statute. To sensitize the missionaries with some appropriate initiative of ongoing formation.

8. To support the sharing of the charism and of the spirituality of the Institute with the Laity, with appropriate initiatives. To begin, accompany and evaluate some concrete experiences of this sharing on the basis of the new Statute.

BOX 3
Points for reflection

For missionaries:
1. The reality why our Institute has become a point of reference is manifold: youth groups that were created and are guided by our mission promoters; communities of laity that are already autonomous and which grew out of those youth groups, that prepare some individuals for a direct service in the missions, and that collaborate in mission and vocation promotion; individual volunteers who want to cooperate with the missionaries; autonomous groups of volunteers; diverse associations less clearly defined (Dame Missionarie, Familias Colaboradoras, Amici IMC…) that collaborate in the Mission through prayers, by financing missionary projects, working in Mission Promotion.
In front of this multiple reality, can the Institute suggest at least minimal criteria to define the IMC Lay Missionary?
Is it preferable to go for a definition of the IMC Lay Missionary that is more strict and technical? In each of the two cases, which would be the definition of the IMC Lay Missionary?

2. The preference that seems to stand out among the laity who refer to our Institute is for a definition in which they are more connected with the mission as a choice of life than with some sort of technical collaboration in a development project (which is not totally excluded), and which strongly emphasizes that it truly is a lay missionary vocation.
In front of this definition of the IMC Lay Missionary, the sharing of the charism becomes very important, more than any kind of collaboration in any specific development project. At the same time, the laity claim their own autonomy, and lean towards organizing themselves into groups and institutions (ONG… communities). In front of this:
Should the IMC think about structuring and manage their own Lay programs?
(In this case, the Institute elaborates its own Lay Missionaries project, engages itself in it, and presents it to those who might be interested…)

Or should the laity decide, structure and live their own missionary vocation, according to the charism of the IMC?
(In this case, the laity themselves become the subjects-actors of their own course and of their own way of concretizing the IMC missionary charism).

Either way, how should the relations between IMC and the laity be defined? How should they be managed? With which criteria?

3. No doubt the Lay Missionaries (especially those who discovered this vocation of theirs through the formative course of our youth groups) want to have an IMC identity, want to be acknowledged as such by the Institute, and want to be helped in the accomplishment of their vocation, whether this will mean to be sent to the mission, or/and to have a responsibility in our mission promotion. But they want their autonomy to be recognized by our Institute. From this point of view, what kind of means should the Institute come up with in order to help these Lay Missionaries in the concretization of their vocation? (formation, spiritual assistance, insertion in the activities of Mission and Vocation Promotion, support… structures…)

4. What should we do in order to get the Consolata missionaries to become conscious of this new reality of the Lay Missionaries, so as to welcome them cordially and collaborate with them? Are there Consolata missionaries who are ready “to start again” their missionary project, to give space to the laity, to program, to concretize and evaluate together as a team?
Can we think about some pilot experience in this field?

For the Laity:

1. Has your group (community, association, ONG…) some kind of reference to the IMC, to its charism and spirituality? How would you define this reference: is it ephemeral, narrow? Does it tend more at collaboration in some development project in the missions, or to the sharing of the charism and of the missionary spirituality? Does your group desire and search for a concrete sharing of the charism?
2. When your group speaks of IMC Lay Missionaries, what do they mean… which are, according to you the necessary elements that define the person of an IMC Lay Missionary?

3 Has your group organized itself, or is it organizing itself at present, to become autonomous? How is it doing it? Do you see the convenience of this autonomy? Do you have any experience of Lay Missionaries that were sent (and came back) to do some IMC missionary project? How do you evaluate such an experience? How do you collaborate with the IMC in Mission Promotion?

4. Concretely, what do you ask from the Consolata Missionaries? What do you expect from the Institute? According to you, how could you share more deeply the IMC charism?