In June this year, I had an opportunity to interact with a few members of a Mahila Sangh (Women’s Association), Catholic Sabha (Men’s Association) and the Youth Associations in one of the northern Indian dioceses.
During the interaction the Catholic Sabha members said that they help the parish priest to decide the details of celebrations like feasts, First Holy Communion, Confirmation and other liturgical celebrations, form committees for the celebration, and try to settle parish-owned property-related problems to some extent.
In all the above-mentioned activities the CS members play a secondary role and the priest plays the major role.
The Mahila Sangh members said that they conduct prayer meetings in the Basic Christian Communities or are a wise groups, collect monetary contributions for the parish, prepare children for First Holy Communion or Confirmation, assist in the choir, and undertake cooking meals on the occasion of fellowship meal at the parish level etc. This again is a secondary role.
The youth members said that they conduct Bible quiz, singing, dance, skit, speech competitions at the parish/diocese level, contribute short writings to the diocesan youth magazine, assist the parish priest at the time of parish level celebrations, and conduct choir. This also is secondary role.
This scenario of the laity did cause a lot of uneasiness in me. The reason for my grief is to see the mind-set that existed before the second Vatican Council.
Let us now try to understand the meaning of the term lay. Terms such as lay, layman, and laity are all derived from the Greek word ‘laikos’ which is an adjective, meaning popular or common or not sacred or secular. It refers to a person who does not belong to the specific category of those who govern but is a member of the common people.
In the Bible, the word ‘laos’ is used both in the inclusive and exclusive meanings. While in the inclusive usage it includes all the members, in the exclusive usage, it makes a distinction between the leaders and the rest of the people.
It is really surprising that the Pre-Vatican views about the clergy such as Teach- Rule-Sanctify and the views about the laity such as Pray-Pay-Obey continue to be prevalent even today after many years of Vatican-II Council.
The bitter reality today is this: the clergy think that only they have the authority to teach, speak and dictate. They expect the laity to be passive listeners. At every level the clergy think that they are supposed to rule the parish. As a religious head the clergy think that they possess all spiritual powers. Hence, they try to sanctify the people through rituals, liturgical ceremonies and gestures.
The reality on the part of the laity is this: the clergy teaches them to pray. Like parrots the laity has to say or recite the prescribed texts of the prayers. The laity work hard and earn money. They pay a part of their income to the parish as subscription, mass offering and donation. The laity is always in a position where they have to be passive listeners and just obey what the clergy tells them.
What did the second Vatican Council say about the laity? The Council has revolutionized the understanding of the identity and function of lay person in the Church. It is the direct result of the new vision of the Church as “the people of God”, and as “Christian faithful.”
The dogmatic constitution on the Church brings out the nature and function of the Church through various biblical images such as sheepfold, flock, field of God, vineyard, edifice, household, family, temple, mother, spouse, and body of Christ.
The second chapter of the entitled “The people of God” comes as a completion and culmination of the understanding of the nature of the Church. The Church is “the new people of God.” By this title, the council puts more emphasis on the human and communal side of the Church rather than on the institutional and hierarchical aspects.
The term “Christian faithful” occurs frequently in the documents of the Council. And it refers to the clerics, the laity and the members of religious institutes. It brings out the equality and dignity of all the baptized and the responsibility flowing from baptism.
Lumen Gentium no. 31 is an important text for the conciliar understanding of a lay person. The term laity is here understood to mean all faithful except those in holy orders and those in religious state sanctioned by the Church.
These faithful are by baptism made one body with Christ and are established among the people of God. They are in their own way made sharers in the priestly, prophetic and kingly functions of Christ. They carry out their own part in the mission of the whole Christian faithful with respect to the Church and to the world.
The Holy Spirit endows the believers with diverse gifts and charisms and the pastors of the Church have to recognize them and channelize them for the building up of the community. The consultative bodies prescribed in the Code of Canon Law enable the laity realize and manifest that they are people of God. Participation in these structures is a sign of communion and unity of the Church of Christ.
It is very unfortunate that the role of laity as described in the second Vatican Council is not remembered and followed. The pyramidal structure continues to exist even today. In this structure of the church the clergy is on the top and the laity is at the bottom. Today the word laity may be understood as Low, Afraid, Intimidated, Timid, Yoked.
It is high time the laity woke up, read and understood what is said in Vatican Council-II about the important role they need to play. Awareness building, participatory approach and empowerment of the laity must become the priorities for the clergy.

-M L Satyan, Matters, India