Are the titles "Lay Minister," "Lay Chaiplain," "Lay Pastor," etc. illicit and indicative of incorrect ecclesiology?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lepanto
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

Lepanto

Guest
Sorry to all the “Ministers of Hospitality” (formerly known as ushers) and any other kind of “Lay Ministers,” but you should be aware of the following. What do you think?

An excerpt from:
vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cclergy/documents/rc_con_interdic_doc_15081997_en.html

PRACTICAL PROVISIONS

Article 1

Need for an Appropriate Terminology

In his address to participants at the Symposium on “Collaboration of the Lay Faithful with the Priestly Ministry”, the Holy Father emphasised the need to clarify and distinguish the various meanings which have accrued to the term “ministry” in theological and canonical language.(53)

§ 1. “For some time now, it has been customary to use the word ministries not only for the officia (officies) and non-ordained (functions) munera exercised by Pastors in virtue of the sacrament of Orders, but also for those exercised by the lay faithful in virtue of their baptismal priesthood. The terminological question becomes even more complex and delicate when all the faithful are recognized as having the possibility of supplying-by official deputation given by the Pastors-certain functions more proper to clerics, which, nevertheless, do not require the character of Orders. It must be admitted that the language becomes doubtful, confused, and hence not helpful for expressing the doctrine of the faith whenever the difference ‘of essence and not merely of degree’ between the baptismal priesthood and the ordained priesthood is in any way obscured”.(54) (more…)
 
I would maintain that when the Church uses her teaching authority to make extremely fine linguistic/semantic distinctions She is well outside Her expertise. Especially when dealing with a language which is spoken by 275 to 450 million souls, spread across the entire earth, with variations large and small by geography, ethnicity, social class and education.

The primary meaning of “minister” in the English-speaking world is “protestant cleric”. The seconday meaning is “head of a major government bureau (called a ministry)” (although American-speakers call such a person a “secretary”). The notion that there is some serious problem in the real English-speaking world where people of at least normal intelligence would be “confused” to think that “minister” equals “Catholic Holy Orders” and nothing else is the product of either a vivid imagination or dishonesty.

Having the Church exercise Her authority replying to imaginary “problems” just makes the Church look foolish.

Or, to translate into a different dialect of English: It sure looks like the Vatican got pwned on that one…
 
There are a lot of people running around doing various things. I have no doubt that there have been ample times wherein someone has been given a title that either previously was rather plain (calling a person a “minister of greeting” when usher would have been sufficient), or simply alcking at all; one just did the job and got on with life.

The difficult part is that something becomes popular and spreads like wildfire with hardly the touch of a match.

If Lepanto is seriouls concerned about such things, I would have several suggestions.
  1. if this is occuring in a parish that truly has an issue about priesthood - trying to minimize it, arrguing for women’s ordination, etc., the titles are not the problem or the source of the problem; they are simply ancillary evidence of the problem. Going around fussing about titles in such a place is akin to complaining about the chef burning the entre’ when the ship is sinking.
  2. if this is occuring in a parish that is generally true to the Magisterium and the GIRM, get over it. It is such a non-issue in comparison to the major challenges to our faith from the secular world that it is akin to worrying about the color of one’s shirt or blouse while one is having a heart attack.
 
lepanto said:
Sorry to all the “Ministers of Hospitality” (formerly known as ushers) and any other kind of “Lay Ministers,” but you should be aware of the following. What do you think?

An excerpt from:
vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cclergy/documents/rc_con_interdic_doc_15081997_en.html

PRACTICAL PROVISIONS

Article 1

Need for an Appropriate Terminology

In his address to participants at the Symposium on “Collaboration of the Lay Faithful with the Priestly Ministry”, the Holy Father emphasised the need to clarify and distinguish the various meanings which have accrued to the term “ministry” in theological and canonical language.(53)

§ 1. “For some time now, it has been customary to use the word ministries not only for the officia (officies) and non-ordained (functions) munera exercised by Pastors in virtue of the sacrament of Orders, but also for those exercised by the lay faithful in virtue of their baptismal priesthood. The terminological question becomes even more complex and delicate when all the faithful are recognized as having the possibility of supplying-by official deputation given by the Pastors-certain functions more proper to clerics, which, nevertheless, do not require the character of Orders. It must be admitted that the language becomes doubtful, confused, and hence not helpful for expressing the doctrine of the faith whenever the difference ‘of essence and not merely of degree’ between the baptismal priesthood and the ordained priesthood is in any way obscured”.(54)

§ 2. "In some cases, the extension of the term “ministry” to the munera belonging to the lay faithful has been permitted by the fact that the latter, to their own degree, are a participation in the one priesthood of Christ. The officia temporarily entrusted to them, however, are exclusively the result of a deputation by the Church. Only with constant reference to the one source, the ‘ministry of Christ’ (…) may the term ministry be applied to a certain extent and without ambiguity to the lay faithful: that is, without it being perceived and lived as an undue aspiration to the ordained ministry or as a progressive erosion of its specific nature.

In this original sense the term ministry (servitium) expresses only the work by which the Church’s members continue the mission and ministry of Christ within her and the whole world. However, when the term is distinguished from and compared with the various munera and officia, then it should be clearly noted that only in virtue of sacred ordination does the work obtain that full, univocal meaning that tradition has attributed to it." (55)

§ 3. The non-ordained faithful may be generically designated “extraordinary ministers” when deputed by competent authority to discharge, solely by way of supply, those offices mentioned in Canon 230, § 3(56) and in Canons 943 and 1112. Naturally, the concrete term may be applied to those to whom functions are canonically entrusted e.g. catechists, acolytes, lectors etc.

Temporary deputation for liturgical purposes — mentioned in Canon 230, § 2 — does not confer any special or permanent title on the non-ordained faithful.(57)

It is unlawful for the non-ordained faithful to assume titles such as “pastor”, “chaplain”, “coordinator”, " moderator" or other such similar titles which can confuse their role and that of the Pastor, who is always a Bishop or Priest.(58)
Click to expand...
**“Lay Minister” **Yes

"Lay Chaplain" No, a person must be a priest to be a Catholic Chaplin.

** “Lay Pastor”** No, a person must be a priest to be a Pastor.
 
Br.Rich_SFO said:
**“Lay Minister” **Yes

"Lay Chaplain" No, a person must be a priest to be a Catholic Chaplin.

** “Lay Pastor”** No, a person must be a priest to be a Pastor.
Click to expand...
To which I would reply, just what dialect of English do you speak? Where I live, “layperson” is a synonym for “amatuer.”

“lay chaplain” == “candy striper”

“lay pastor” == “sweating, shouting, white-suited-in-winter head of a particularly low church fundamentalist protestant congregation where all you need for a church is 3 lawn chairs and a sign, and they believe that the pope is the anti-christ, baptism is not required for salvation (accepting Jesus as your personal Lord and Saviour is), and Catholics are decidedly not Christian and are all going to hell”
 
How about using the term “apostolate” for the work that we lay people do? It has a nice sound to it, and leaves the other terms for the ordained which is what the Vatican would like us to do.
 
Br.Rich_SFO said:
**“Lay Minister” **Yes

"Lay Chaplain" No, a person must be a priest to be a Catholic Chaplin.

** “Lay Pastor”** No, a person must be a priest to be a Pastor.
Click to expand...
By virtue of their ordination, cannot deacons be formally designated as chaplains?
 
ThuribleGuy45 said:
By virtue of their ordination, cannot deacons be formally designated as chaplains?
Click to expand...
It would appear that this would be permissible per this document – It indicates that the term Chaplain, within the Catholic church must be reserved for the ordained. And as you point out, a permanent deacon is ordained.

Similarly the term “pastor” would be reserved for a priest or bishop. Regarding other terms the document is not quite so specific, as long as steps are taken to avoid confusion in roles.

Despite this caution, I do not believe that document prohibits the use of the designation “lay minister”, although it seems to me that the term “extraordinary minister” is often preferable.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top