DISCERNMENT OF SPIRITUAL GIFTS

UNIFYING MINISTRY AND THE LAITY

THROUGH THE DISCERNMENT OF

SPIRITUAL GIFTS

Susan E. Zens

St. Norbert College

De Pere, WI

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment

of the requirements for the degree

Master of Theological Studies

Approved:

____________________

Thesis Director

____________________

Reader

____________________

Reader

The author hereby grants to St. Norbert College permission to reproduce and distribute publicly paper and electronic copies of this thesis document in whole or in part.

CONTENTS

IntroductionÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ..4

Changing Roles in Ministry

LaityÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ...7

ClergyÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ.....9

AuthorityÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ..12

LeadershipÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ14

History of Leadership and AuthorityÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ...18

Biblical FrameworkÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ22

Vatican II & Papal DocumentsÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ...25

Dogmatic Constitution on the Church

Decree on the Apostolate of the Laity

Decree on Priestly Training

Theology for the LaityÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ....30

Spiritual Gifts, Charisms and TalentÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ..34

DiscernmentÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ36

MinistryÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ...42

SummaryÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ.45

The Thesis ProjectÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ..47

Inventory of the Seven ProgramsÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ...49

Designing Curriculum and Evaluating TheologicallyÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ....51

The Four Sessions

Who is the Holy Spirit?.........................................................................................54

Our New Identity after Vatican IIÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ....55

Tabulating Our Spiritual GiftsÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ..59

Spiritual Gifts and MinistryÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ..60

ParticipantsÕ EvaluationÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ..61

Evaluation Based on GoalsÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ.....63

ConclusionÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ..64

Works CitedÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ67

Appendices

Personal Spiritual Gifts QuotientÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ. 71

Class Evaluation FormÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ.72

INTRODUCTION

At one time the role of the laity in the Roman Catholic Church was expressed as ÒPray, pay, and obey.Ó Yves Congar relates an anecdote from an essay; ÔThe Laymen in the Pre-Reformation Parish.Õ A priest was quoted as having said that the laity has two positions in the church: kneeling before the altar and sitting below the pulpit. A third was added by a cardinal who stated: he also puts his hand in his purse.

Who are the laity and what is their role in the Church? To answer this question the clergy and their role must be defined. In this thesis their relationship to each other will be explained by investigating authority and leadership within the Church as well as the history of these concepts. This paper will examine Biblical excerpts and Vatican II documents to demonstrate how they authorize spiritual gifts. An alternative theology for laity will be suggested in addition to exploring spiritual gifts, the discernment process, and ministry. Developing a formation process to encourage a larger percentage of active parishioners in ministry will be the focus of the project. The discernment of spiritual gifts will be suggested as this formation process to actively involve the laity and connect them with ministries. Several existing programs devoted to the discernment of spiritual gifts will be evaluated and portions of them will be used in a workshop to assist parishioners in understanding and activating their new role.

There is no doubt that the role of the laity within the Catholic Church has recently changed dramatically. Some believe it is due to the shortage of priests and religious. Since 1964, new seminarians in the Church have declined by 75%. (Finn 27) This in turn causes shrinking numbers of those in pastoral leadership in the Catholic Church. In Emerging Laity, James and Evelyn Whitehead suggest that the vocational crisis is a paradox of loss and gain: while losing seminarians, we are gaining more parishioners involved in ministry. There are many ready to serve, but the imagination necessary to restructure and reshape new leadership roles is missing. The hierarchy is reluctant to share power and authority and they seem unable to envision how it could be done. Parishioners are concerned about entering the realm of the clergy, not realizing they already participate due to their Baptism and Confirmation. If parishioners had additional knowledge regarding church documents, authority within the church, and the roles of the ordained and non-ordained, then the Church ministry would benefit from the gifts of both clergy and laity.

In the 1960Õs Vatican II set in motion the framework for many changes in the Catholic Church. One theme permeating this Council was aggiornamento, a Òbreath of fresh air,Ó that called for renewal, and updating. Scripture became more prominent in the Mass and in Bible studies for Catholics. The Eucharist was considered from the early perspective of the church when it was a communal meal rather than a ritual sacrifice. The Communion rail was taken away and parishioners were allowed to participate actively as Extraordinary Ministers of the Eucharist in giving Communion. Changes in the liturgy, use of the vernacular, and the rearrangement of the altar by Vatican II have all resulted in more active parishes, but many parishioners do not hear the call for active participation in ministry or if they do, they are reluctant to respond. This has been my personal dilemma. Somehow I became very focused on the outward changes of Vatican II, but I never read the documents nor understood their full meaning. There must be many other Catholics in the same or similar predicament.

In her short reflection titled, A Plea for Collaborative Ministry, Virginia Sullivan Finn feels that the Lineamenta for the Synod on the Laity expresses desire for involvement of laity, but provides no framework for the needed formation.

Without a collaborative pastoral framework there will be no substantial formation for lay mission, for Christian-inspired intervention. Without a solid formation process, dangers cited in the Lineamenta, e.g., Ôflight from the world,Õ Ôabsorption into secularism,Õ are almost inevitable. Overestimating or idealizing the ÔinterventionÕ by the lay person in his or her web without having helped the lay person develop the spiritual depth, the discernments, and the tools to bring about effective intervention, can evoke confusion and discouragement that leads to flight or to an over-identification with secularism.Ó (Finn 25)

Finn compares the formation of marriage candidates with the formation available for the involvement of laity and finds the latter has very little substance. In her experience with her daughterÕs wedding preparation the prospective bride and groom met weekly with a group of other marriage candidates and a diocesan priest to reflect on their relationship with their new partner. There was also a theology course focused on marriage which was available. Besides this the Pre-Cana classes have a driving force already in place due to the love developed between the man and woman and the natural planning process for their future. In contrast to this there are very few organized collaborative sessions available for laity to understand their role in the Church or to discern the gifts and direction they should take for ministry.

Many Catholics born before Vatican II are still involved in more passive roles and are reluctant to share in the authority in the Church. This reliance on an old system of authority with one leader or parent in charge is typical of the broader culture of the early 1950Õs. Like children, the laity, were to be seen and not heard. This assumption created a type of leadership that was carried over into the Church and has led to a stagnant relationship between clergy and laity. The laity also rely more on personal piety rather than on the communal aspects of the church. The rosary, novenas, and even personal altars at home reflect their emphasis on personal spirituality. How can the laity be reached, realize they have been given spiritual gifts for the benefit of the whole community and encouraged to use them? This question demands thoughtful research and reflection topic by topic.

LAITY

First of all, how did the church begin to use this term the laity? In Hebrew there is no term for laity. The only distinction was between Jewish people and Gentiles. (goy) In the Greek Old Testament the term lay is used only as an adjective with the word people. It originally referred to people other than the Jews or the People of God. It designated those who were not consecrated (Gentiles) from those who were consecrated (Jews). Eventually, it was used to distinguish the people from the clerics or to distinguish one who is qualified, from one who is not.

ÒNew Testament authors did not use the Greek terms for ÔlaityÕ at all. They rejected the Greek word laikos, which means Ôbelonging to the common peopleÕ because they felt it was a degrading term.Ó (Stevens 26-27) Another word used in the Greek language, idiots, was used to describe those who were not yet Christians and did not understand the rites used in services. ÒIt means Ôlayperson in contrast to an expert or specialistÕ. This word is never used by an inspired apostle to describe Christians!Ó (Stevens 29) ÒÔLaityÕ, in its proper New Testament sense of laos-the people of God-is a term of great honour denoting the enormous privilege and mission of the whole people of God. Once we were not a people at all, but now in Christ, we are Ôa chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people (laos) belonging to GodÕ.Ó (1Pet.2:9; Ex. 19:6) (Stevens 5) Yves Congar, in his definition of laity states, ÒIt designates the simple, not specially qualified members ÔamongÕ GodÕs people, the whole of whom are consecrated.Ó (Congar, Lay People 3)

Clement of Rome did use the term laity at the end of the first century to describe the faithful in comparison to the presbyters. Later, Tertullian used Ôlay person,Õ in a positive manner by espousing that laymen could perform the duties of priesthood if needed. (Stevens 26-27) Some Protestant theologians have established a theory that the early church was an Òundifferentiated primitive community living under a charismatic regime.Ó(Congar, Lay People 4) This would indicate there were no separate entities of laity and clergy. While the issue is complex, historians can determine that by the middle of the third century, there were actually three categories or states of life used to refer to those in the Church: the clerical, the monastic, and the lay. The clerical position is distinguished by service of the altar and to the Christian people. It is not a way of life, but is related to the office or function of clerics. The monastic state involved a way of life for people devoted to prayer and living apart from the world. They were primarily dedicated to God and holiness. The lay state on the other hand defines a group of Christians working toward their salvation in everyday life. They are part of the world and are oriented toward secular life. Eventually, clerics were expected to seek the level of sacredness developed by the monks. Some monks, meanwhile, began to take on tasks of the liturgy and were ordained. These two states became more similar especially in the West as celibacy was required for all priests, monks, clergy, and womenÕs religious orders which resulted in even greater differences between all religious and the laity. These distinctions between clergy and laity have contributed to the difficulty encountered in utilizing spiritual gifts in ministry.

CLERGY

If the laity comprised the unordained people of God, then who were the clergy and what was their relationship to the laity? First of all the clergy were the trained, authorized, and eventually, ordained members of the Church. The ancient Church initially elected leaders by a process of casting lots and relying on the Holy Spirit to assist them in the selection process. (Acts 1:24-26) Once these elected leaders returned to the lay state, another leader or president was elected. Those who were elected were expected to accept the call of the community. Since the leaders were part of the local Church, the elected person was well known for his faith and convictions. The community had time to test the candidateÕs apostolic faith so it would reflect the apostolic community. Once elected, the new leader was seen as a gift of the Holy Spirit to the community. He was sacramentally conferred with this new honor by Òthe Ôlaying on of handsÕ with epiclesis or prayer of the whole community to the Spirit.Ó (Schillebeeckx, Ministry: Leadership 42) This special ceremony was presided over or completed by the bishop who called upon the Holy Spirit to confer power on new leaders in the Church. Thus, the clergy had the power and ability to proclaim the good news. In the early Church, a leader could return to the lay state. A Òfundamental consequence of the canon of Chalcedon was that a minister who for any personal reason ceased to be the president of a community ipso facto returned to being a layman in the full sense of the word.Ó (Schillebeeckx, Ministry: Leadership 41).

Besides being elected as new leaders of the Church and experiencing ordination, these leaders were expected to be a sacerdos in the sense of being president of the Eucharist. Cyprian was one of the first to begin explaining the Eucharist in Old Testament sacrificial terms. He suggested the priest was acting in the place of Christ when he presided over the Eucharist. (Schillebeeckx, Ministry: Leadership 48) This eventually led to the ordained as the exclusive presiders over the Eucharist. ÒEverything that the priesthood of the Old Covenant prefigured finds its fulfillment in Christ Jesus, the Ôone mediator between God and men.ÕÓ One concept within the Christian tradition considered Melchizedek, Ò . . . Ôpriest of God Most High,Õ as a prefiguration of the priesthood of Christ, the unique Ôhigh priest after the order of Melchizedek,ÕÓ (CCC 1544, Heb 5:10). While all clergy and laity are considered as the priesthood of all believers, only the former receive the sacrament of Holy Orders. This special consecration that includes the imposition of hands, allows the clergy to act as the representative of Christ in an unbroken succession from the apostles.

Through the sacrament of Holy Orders, priests share in the universal dimensions of the mission that Christ entrusted to the apostles. The spiritual gift they have received in ordination prepares them, not for a limited and restricted mission, Ôbut for the fullest, in fact, the universal mission of salvationÕ to the end of the earth,ÕÓ prepared in spirit to preach the Gospel everywhere.ÕÓ(CCC1565)

Over time the clergy became important figures in each community. Their status was elevated as the most educated in each community. Their duties comprised taking care of their flock from birth to death. They were involved with all aspects of family and community life. The Parish Church maintained its status as the center of the community even when the schools became public entities. This was due to the proximity of the Parish Church to everyone in the neighborhood. There was little transportation and people tended to live in one area the major portion of their lives. As nations became industrialized, with more movement of families, the Church lost its centralized character. Families relied on themselves and not on an institution. Priests still worked with their own parish and managed to maintain their identity as someone who could be all things to all people. Even in the 1950Õs, before Vatican II, most parishes had enough priests to work with the poor, attend the sick in the hospitals, take the Eucharist to the sick, teach, perform sacramental duties, etc. There was hardly an area of daily life in which they did not function. After Vatican II, there were many secular changes contributing to fewer clergy. They could no longer be all things to all people. Vatican II called for a new style of leadership:

Priests, prudent cooperators with the Episcopal order as well as its aids and instruments, are called to serve the People of God. They constitute one priesthood with their bishop, although the priesthood comprises different functions. Associated with their bishop in a spirit of trust and generosity, priests make him present in a certain sense in the individual local congregations of the faithful, and take upon themselves, as far as they are able, his duties and concerns, discharging them with daily care. As they sanctify and govern under the bishopÕs authority that part of the LordÕs flock entrusted to them, they make the universal Church visible in their own locality and lend powerful assistance to the up-building of the whole body of Christ(cf. Eph. 4:12). Intent always upon the welfare of GodÕs children, they must strive to lend their effort to the pastoral work of the whole diocese, and even the entire Church.Ó (The Church, 28)

The above quote serves as an elementary definition of the role of priests, but does

not give explicit directions for their work with laity. Certainly, it does not suggest empowerment of the laity in regard to their spiritual gifts. This section explains that the clergy are the trained and ordained members of the parish authorized to preside over the Eucharist, but how does the laity begin to understand their relationship with the clergy and ultimately the role of the laity in ministry?

AUTHORITY

One of the major elements underlying the issue of laity involvement is the issue of authority. Specifically in the Catholic Church, the question is: who has authority and where do parishioners fit into this function of the Church? Authority is defined by John L.McKenzie Òas the power or right to give commands, enforce obedience, take actions, or make final decisions.Ó(McKenzie 6) There are different kinds of authority, such as de jure authority, inherited by kings. Some are granted authority by being born into royal families. Authority is then granted by investiture. There is also jurisdictional or legal authority, which is used to promote order and avoid chaos. This type of authority is given to police, judges, etc. by the public, but how is authority understood in a Western religious institution?

The word authority originates from the Latin word, auctor, which means author or source. It is a word that has a negative connotation for many people because of abuses of those in authority. Authority can be understood as restraining freedom, limiting efforts for change, or restricting criticism of those in power. Authority can be tyrannical and dominative. There is a fine line between authority and tyranny, but all authority involves a relationship between those in authority and those who accept authority.

In the Western world, an independent, self-sufficient person is regarded with high esteem. In leadership roles, this characteristic suggests that only one leader and only one way to lead a group is needed. A second problem in the Western world is reliance on dichotomies. In this culture, many people view the world as divided between good and evil, men and women, and soul and body. Groups of people are compared and labeled as leaders or followers, i.e. the clergy and the laity. In the Catholic perspective some parts of society are labeled as holy and others as secular. Until all aspects of the world are accepted as intersecting and intertwined, as Augustine stated in The City of God (Strothmann 7), our concepts of power, authority, and leadership will remain stagnant, unfulfilled and non-collaborative.

Another critical component of religious institutions involves confusing the authority of a person with the authority of the office held. Some Catholics consider authority in the Church as a divine right, especially in connection with the teaching office or magisterium of the Church. Priests in the Catholic Church are ordained. This means that an indelible seal or sacramental character is imposed on the recipientÕs soul. Although all Catholics are sealed by the sacraments of Baptism and Confirmation (CCC 1121), priests are also authoritatively sealed to give homage to God by the sacerdotal power to forgive sins, consecrate, preach, sanctify and take care of souls. This authority and its sacred powers are conferred on the candidates for priesthood by the bishop with the oil of sacred chrism and the laying on of hands.

Historically, as the clergy became separate from the laity in 1059, they became a distinct social class. It was assumed all power and authority resided in them and not in

the office. Pope Gregory VII further divided the clergy and laity when he split the Church from other political powers in the eleventh century. This gave Church officials more power with a corresponding loss of power for the laity. With the Church clergy able to make all powerful decisions regarding doctrine, ethics, and formation the personal consciences and authority of the laity were more eroded. Thus, laity was expected to follow the leadership of the church, obey their commands, and learn to think as they did.

LEADERSHIP

What types of leadership were accepted in the Church and where did they originate? This portion of the thesis will concentrate on leadership styles needed including models for both the laity and clergy, but especially those needed to utilize spiritual gifts. First, types of leadership illustrated in the Old Testament will be examined followed by metaphors taken from Scripture to give laity new possibilities for leadership. These metaphors will include models such as king, servant, steward, and father. Then in the New Testament the types of authority Jesus advocated will be examined.

The Old Testament reflects different styles of leadership needed, depending on whether the Israelites were wandering in the desert or were exiled in a foreign country. During the Exodus Moses and Aaron had to guide the Israelites to a new country by finding the best route, locating food, setting up times for rest as well as for traveling, and arranging a time for rituals. In the Old Testament, the Israelites asked God to establish a king as their leader. This in effect meant a monarch who was in charge of a large geographic area with dominion over everyone. During the Exile, a more prophetic type of leadership was necessary to promote hope and to set guidelines for a return to their own country, then to rebuild the temple. In the Old Testament spiritual leadership was practical, royal or prophetic.

One of the most traditional metaphors for leadership is that of a king. The image of King David as one of the most influential and dynamic leaders in the Old Testament became idealized. This model is one of governing with power over all others. It suggests only one leader with many followers expected to obey the leader.

Another Biblical image of a leader is that of a servant. A servant was the lowest of all positions yet the prophet Isaiah used the servant image to refer to Israel as a servant nation, despised by many. Even though the servant may be treated unjustly, his suffering can eventually lead to exultation. As a country, the citizens were expected to uphold justice and to build up the tribes of Jacob, so as a nation or as an individual, the faithful were expected to do the work and will of their Lord. In this sense they understood themselves as servants of the Lord.

Another metaphor is of a steward, in which a leader is expected to assist in managing, but does not have complete authority. In Biblical times, a steward would oversee a household, dispensing authority as needed. Thomas Hawkins suggests that the steward is comparable to a catalyst. The steward doesnÕt necessarily make all decisions, but he assists others to become leaders. Since power is not a static, personal possession, but is derived from the group and their interaction, the catalyst is necessary to assist the group in releasing and allowing power to function. This type of leadership was demonstrated by Ezra and Nehemiah during the rebuilding of Jerusalem.

The Father image was generated from the stories of the patriarchs, but interestingly enough this image was rarely ascribed to God in the Old Testament. More will be said about the Father image in the discussion of leadership images in the New Testament.

Each model of leadership has certain disadvantages. The king model gives one person all authority. The servant model may be perceived as having too much humility and servitude. The father model could imply that laity are children, always under the fatherÕs authority and never allowed to reach their own potential. The steward model of leadership permits the most possibilities for a shared leadership. This model calls for the trust that allows for gradual development of gifts in the community. This style of leadership could most easily allow the laity to utilize their own special spiritual gifts. Moreover, this type of leadership is most congruent with the teaching of Jesus.

Jesus advocated a type of leadership new to His times. (Whitehead 12-13) He continually criticized the authority of scribes and Pharisees by noting their adherence to the letter of the Law and not the spirit of the Law. He suggested that not only was murder a serious crime, but that thinking angry thoughts and that insulting others were also crimes against the Commandments. He disobeyed their dietary laws. He challenged those laws which condemned working on the Sabbath as a grave sin even if it concerned feeding His apostles or healing the sick. He often criticized the Jewish leadersÕ desire for honors, privileges, and power. In Matthew 23, Jesus clearly described the type of leadership not acceptable to Him by referencing the hypocritical behavior of the scribes and Pharisees. He noted their obsessions about types of clothing, their behavior, and their lack of justice, mercy, and faith. He captured the essence of His own style of leadership by stating, ÒAll who exalt themselves will be humbled, and all who humble themselves will be exalted.Ó(Mt.23:12)

Christian theology of leadership, however, utilizes a New Testament metaphor for leadership, that of a father. Christians are taught to pray to God the Father, to revere Him, and to look to Him as the prime member of the Trinity and as the source of all goodness. In Luke 12:22-32, the image of Father and God are interchangeable. This image is the Father as care-giver and leader. In ancient times as well as contemporary God was perceived as a kind-hearted leader or as a harsh disciplining father, but Jesus pronounced that His followers must not call anyone else on earth Ôfather.Õ(Mt. 23:9-11) He was not suggesting that people do not have fathers or that people disobey their fathers, but that no one except God should have that title of power and prestige over others. The ultimate Master is God who leads and empowers each person.

According to JesusÕ teaching and example power and gifts do not need to follow a vertical hierarchy within the group, but can be considered in a horizontal fashion. ÒWe can picture our powers as ÔforÕ one another, instead of ÔoverÕ each other.Ó (Whitehead 115) These gifts, which come to each person from the Holy Spirit, are freely given and utilized for the good of all. In a group process Christians can assist others in finding and sharing their gifts while seeking their own. The continual disbursement of gifts enhances the power of the whole group.

These metaphors illustrate how people have tended to view leadership roles as the functions of transcendent fathers or dominant kings rather than as shared power given to leadership of the Church under different circumstances. The type of leadership Jesus suggested was revolutionary for his time and clarifies this role for our time. If clergy and laity both begin looking at different forms of leadership for different ministries and at each person utilizing spiritual gifts, the results will benefit the whole Church.

HISTORY OF AUTHORITY AND LEADERSHIP

In order to develop better models of leadership and authority for the utilization of spiritual gifts, it benefits the laity to understand how these attributes developed within the Church. Jesus did not set up a specific plan for authority and leadership in the early Church, so when the apostles established the Church, there were no guidelines for

authority, power, and leadership. Initially people treated each other as equals and shared their possessions. (Acts 2) There were disciples, but no formal ministries. Once the apostles died, the communities they left behind were mainly interested in building upon the apostlesÕ foundation. Apostolic teaching and writing continued under the apostlesÕ pseudonyms during the post-apostolic period. At this transitional time, all the levels of ministry in the Church were Òincorporated into the totality of all kinds of services which are necessary for the community.Ó (Schillebeeckx, Ministry: Leadership 13). The early Church committed itself to the task and mission of continuing the Gospel of Jesus Christ. They were more concerned with an unbroken succession in teaching than an unbroken succession of ministry. As the communities grew, leadership evolved, but was not necessarily labeled. Over most of the first three centuries communities selected their own leaders. There were no definitive titles or offices. Rather some communities were strongly influenced from the Greek and Roman styles of government while others imitated the Old Testament priesthood style of leadership.

In the early Christian writings the term hierus (priest) was originally applied to Jesus Christ and to the whole believing community. It was never used in the New Testament to refer to someone holding an office in the church. Once Christians became completely separated from Judaism in the very last quarter of the second century, hierus did begin to be used to signify officeholders in the church. This usage was strengthened by the developing understanding of the sacrificial nature of the Eucharist, and the belief that the Last Supper is a divine mystery.

When Constantine converted and advocated Christianity as the state religion, leadership took on more aspects of the secular with adherence to the Roman style of governance. In the Roman Empire, ordinate meant an appointment or ÔincorporationÕ into the government, with the senators classified as an elite group. Eventually, came the ordo et plebs, a distinction between the upper social class and a class of ordinary people. In Rome the governor gained importance and the popular assembly could express only agreement. This arrangement was followed by a strong council with one or two leaders. This style of governing influenced a similar style in the Church with the leader eventually known as the bishop.

After the third century, deacons and presbyters gained importance and were ordained, eventually leading to the clericalism which still exists in the Church. The biggest difference between clergy at that time and clergy of today was that then the ordained had to be ÒcalledÓ by a congregation and could only be ordained if a community selected them. At the Council of Chalcedon in 451, great clarity concerning ordination was achieved. Canon 6 from this Council stated, ÒÔNo one may be ÔordainedÕ priest or deacon in an absolute manner (apolymenos) É unless a local community is clearly assigned to him, whether in the city or in the country, whether in a martyrdom (burial place where a martyr was venerated) or in a monastery,Õ then Ôthe holy Council resolves that their cheirotonion (ordination or appointment) is null and void É and that they may not therefore perform functions on any occasion.ÕÓ (Schillebeeckx, Ministry: Leadership 38) A greater distinction was made between clergy and laity with the adoption of special styles of dress for the clergy. This leadership style based on the Roman style of governance persisted for many centuries.

After the sixth century, the popes came to be attached to the emperors and were forced to act as their pawns. Every step the popes took had to be negotiated with the civil authorities of several countries. During the time of Pope Nicholas II, selection of a new pope was given to the College of Cardinals. This started an erosion of the kingÕs power over the pontificate. In the eleventh century, Pope Gregory VII claimed total authority over civil governors for the papacy and the Church. Ordination was allowed without a community assignment for each priest or bishop. Priesthood was becoming a Òstate of life.Ó Leadership became detached from territory so that authority and power emanated from the office in both the church and the secular world. Bishops, like the senators, were given special privileges and could easily have become too secular, but the monastic movement called them to a higher spirituality. Still, bishops or leaders were expected to be all things to all men. James D. and Evelyn Whitehead characterized this as the coalescing of different ministries into the role of the bishop or presbyter (143) so that Church structure began to be visualized as vertical. From this viewpoint spiritual gifts and the ministry of the laity disappeared. Growth in new canon law occurred as Gregory VII asked for juridical texts to confirm his ideas. The study of texts created a legalistic system which led to the Pope as the supreme authority giving him the ability to depose kings. This process shifted papal authority from a spiritual realm of God and the Trinity, and brought a more secular hierarchy. (Congar, Power & Poverty 6)

Following the Reformation, the Catholic Church defended its position even more strongly by centralizing the authority of the church within the papacy. At the Council of Trent dogma was developed to support the doctrines of the Church. The canon of the Old and New Testaments was confirmed; the number of Sacraments was established as seven; the doctrine of transubstantiation was confirmed; the Nicene Creed was accepted as the basis of Catholic faith; clerical celibacy and monasticism were maintained; tradition was declared as important as Scripture as a source of spiritual knowledge; the sole right of the church to interpret the Bible was asserted; justification by works and faith was confirmed; and purgatory was reaffirmed. In other words, the Church asserted many of its doctrine in response to Luther and the new Protestant movement. As Church was established as the highest moral authority, the further erosion of the concept of a conscience as a personal responsibility occurred. Catholics were expected to view the Pope and Vatican as the final authority. The Vatican developed rules for fasting, the liturgy, marriage, education of seminarians, canonization of saints, and the establishment of religious orders. The Council of Trent linked the priesthood and the sacraments more closely. As a reaction to Protestant ReformersÕ criticism of the ordination of priests and their view on the priesthood of all believers, Catholic laity were distanced even more from the clergy. Because Luther taught that Papal hierarchy was not necessary, the Council of Trent reiterated the Catholic stance of a hierarchy of bishops, priests and the Pope as divine ordinance. It also Òemphasized being in the state of priesthood rather than doing the ministry.Ó (Rademacher 74) The Council of Trent set up seminaries for training young men for priesthood, which located power of ordination in the office of the bishop rather than from the ÒcallÓ of a particular community. Vatican I added to the concept of papal infallibility and authority from a top-down hierarchy. This summarizes only a few of the doctrines which the Pope and the Vatican authorized during the Council of Trent and Vatican I. In this process the laity were relegated to a position below clergy as recipients of all ministries, rather than as those involved in ministries. There was a gradual disregard for spiritual gifts with more emphasis on a passive laity.

BIBLICAL FRAMEWORK

Besides identifying the laity, their relationship to clergy, and the issues of authority and leadership, it is important to show the Biblical framework for spiritual gifts. The following Biblical excerpts validate the long standing idea of spiritual gifts and the great variety available. These passages focus on the initial foundation laid by Jesus and the continuing theology to build upon his teaching by St. Peter and St. Paul, as the earliest church leaders, demonstrated the special gifts and talents needed to maintain a faithful community. They brought Christians into the early church by showing that each believer was called by Jesus. As apostles they were to follow Him and go out to share His good news.

According to the grace of God given to me, like a skilled master builder I laid a foundation, and someone else is building on it. Each builder must choose with care how to build on it. For no one can lay any foundation other than the one that has been laid: that foundation is Jesus Christ. (1 Corinthians 3:10-11)

Those early Christians formed small groups and gathered together in homes where everyone contributed toward the welfare of their new religion. However, they soon experienced problems which created division within the Church. The following passage was written to remind them that all are part of the one body of Christ and that all are called to God. Paul wrote to the Ephesians to remind them of their special gifts given by God and the grace they would receive. He also emphasized the love necessary for unity in the Church.

There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to the one hope of your calling, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is above all and through all and in all. But each of us was given grace according to the measure of ChristÕs gift. Therefore it is said, ÒWhen he ascended on high he made captivity itself a captive; He gave gifts to his people.Ó (Ephesians 4:4-8)

In this passage each person was given different gifts so each may each add to the ministry of the Church. Not all the gifts are equal or the same, but all are for the good of the whole Church. Just as different parts of the body contribute to the welfare of the whole body, so do the gifts of each one contribute to the welfare of the Church. Paul emphasized the love and unity necessary to mature and leave behind childlike attributes.

The gifts he gave were that some would be apostles, some prophets, some evangelist, some pastors and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ until all of us come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to maturity, to the measure of the full stature of Christ. (Ephesians 4:11-13)

Paul reiterated this discussion of different gifts when he wrote to the Corinthians and the Romans. Many of the early communities had similar problems. Sometimes the gifts caused division. Paul reminded them that there may be a variety of gifts, service and activities, but there is one Lord, Spirit and God for all.

Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit, and there are varieties of services but the same Lord and there are varieties of activities, but it is the same God who activates all of them in everyone. To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. To one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom, and to another the utterance of knowledge according to the same Spirit, to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit, to another the working of miracles to another prophecy, to another the discernment of spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. All these are activated by one and the same Spirit who allots to each one individually just as the Spirit chooses. (1 Corinthians 12:4-11)

Paul preached a similar refrain to the Romans, but emphasized that all were gifts from God and given in different measure to each person. This was not so some could glorify themselves, but to glorify God. Christians were called to do the will of God for full transformation of the community into ChristÕs body.

For by the grace given to me I say to everyone among you not to think of yourself more highly than you ought to think, but to think with sober judgment, each according to the measure of faith that God has assigned. For as in one body we have many members, and not all the members have the same function, so we, who are many, are one body in Christ, and individually we are members one of another. We have gifts that differ according to the grace given to us: prophecy in proportion to faith; ministry in ministering; the teacher, in teaching; the exhorter in exhortation; the giver in generosity; the leader in diligence; the compassionate in cheerfulness. (Romans 12:3-8)

These New Testament exhortations encouraged Christians to discover their gifts,

to fulfill their purpose for the Kingdom, and to bring fulfillment to others. Early Christians were called to develop spiritually and share their gifts, keeping in mind Jesus as the source and focus of ministry. It was God, not individual persons or the Church, who was glorified as Peter stated in the following passage:

Above all maintain constant love for one another, for love covers a multitude of sins. Be hospitable to one another without complaining. Like good stewards of the manifold grace of God serve one another with whatever gift each of you has received. Whoever speaks must do so as one speaking the very words of God; whoever serves must do so with the strength that God supplies, so that God may be glorified in all things through Jesus Christ. To him belong the glory and the power forever and ever. Amen. (1 Peter 4:3-11)

These New Testament verses about serving God and the Church along with developing gifts illustrate the authentic path for Christians. Nearly two thousand years later, the Vatican II documents expound a similar message confirming spiritual gifts and ministry. They illustrate the direction the Church expects members to take to become active participants.

VATICAN II AND PAPAL DOCUMENTS

Lumen Gentium or the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, written as part of the Vatican II Documents in 1964, contains ample instruction concerning spiritual gifts and the priesthood of all believers. This document starts the discussion of gifts with the concept of one body, and one Spirit and the sacraments as vital to the Church. When Catholics receive Baptism they are formed in the likeness of Jesus Christ. ÒFor in one Spirit, we were all baptized into one body.Ó(51) Participation in the Eucharist means breaking bread with Him and with all the members. ÒBecause the bread is one, we though many, are one body, all of us who partake of the one bread.Ó(53) ÒAlso in the building up of ChristÕs Body various members and functions have their part to play. There is only one Spirit who, according to His own richness and the needs of the ministries, gives His different gifts for the welfare of the Church.Ó(57)

Later in the document, these gifts are recognized as essential to build up the body of the Church.

It is not only through the sacraments and the ministries of the Church that the Holy Spirit sanctifies and leads the people of God and enriches it with virtues, but, Ôallotting his gifts to everyone according as He wills, (114) He distributes special graces among the faithful of every rank. By these gifts He makes them fit and ready to undertake the various tasks and offices which contribute toward the renewal and building up of the Church, according to the words of the Apostle: ÔThe manifestation of the Spirit is given to everyone for profit.Õ(115)

In the Decree on the Apostolate of the Laity (Apostolicam Actuositatem), the union of the laity with ChristÕs body at Baptism is discussed. This declaration by Pope Paul VI on November 18, 1965 also states that this union is strengthened by the Holy Spirit at Confirmation. The laity are considered as part of the priesthood of all believers who witness to Christ throughout the world. In this document the Church ties the laity to the mission of the Church which is to spread the Kingdom of God throughout the world so all people may join in His saving redemption. All are called from a passive life to a more active participation in the Church and in the world, in spiritual as well as secular activities so that everyone may have a relationship with Jesus Christ. As its name suggests, this document concentrates on the lay apostolate, which Russell Shaw states is done Òoutside the confines of the ChurchÓ (10) or in the secular world. Lay ministry is considered to be that which is done within the Church such as lectoring, cantoring, or being an extraordinary minister of the Eucharist. While this distinction is important to note, both the lay apostolate and lay ministry require discernment of spiritual gifts. Both are called forth by the Sacraments of Baptism and Confirmation. One type revitalizes the other so that ministry within the Church can be generated outside the Church on a larger scale.

Another Vatican II document, the Decree on Priestly Training (Optatum Totius) encourages priests to Òeagerly embrace the lay apostolate.Ó(6) ÒLikewise, let them be properly instructed in inspiring and fostering the apostolic activity of the laity and in promoting the various and more effective forms of the apostolate.Ó(20) The Decree on the Ministry and Life of Priests (Presbyterorum Ordinis), another Vatican II Document, unequivocally states that priests Òmust work together with lay faithfulÓ (9) and are Ònot to be separated from the People of God or from any person; but they are to be totally dedicated to the work for which the Lord has chosen them.Ó(3) According to this Vatican II document, the Decree on the BishopÕs Pastoral Office in the Church (Christus Dominus), the bishop Òshould be diligent in fostering holiness among the clerics, religious and laity according to the special vocation of each.Ó(15)

At the end of December, 1988, Pope John Paul II wrote a post-synodal apostolic exhortation titled On the Laity (Christifideles Laici), which once again clarified the role of the laity and charisms. He began by comparing the People of God to MatthewÕs parable concerning the laborers in the vineyard. (Mt. 20:1-2) He suggested that all are called as laborers to go out into the world or GodÕs vineyard to complete the mission of the Church. He also quotes St. Gregory the GreatÕs views on this parable of the laborers and the vineyard. ÒKeep watch over your life, dear people, and make sure that you are indeed the LordÕs laborers. Each person should account what he does and consider if he is laboring in the vineyard of the Lord.Ó(2) Pope John Paul II suggested that the laity should respond to the invitation of the Holy Spirit promptly and with gladness and generosity to go out into the vineyard. He felt the Gospel parable spoke with even greater urgency by repeating the invitation Òto go out into the vineyardÓ a second time.

Pope John Paul II reiterated that with Baptism, Christians are called into one body (1 Cor.12:13) and that they are to participate in the threefold offices of Christ as priest, prophet and king. Just as David was anointed King in the Old Testament, so ÒChristÓ means anointed. ÒNot only has our head been anointed but we, his body have also been anointed.Ó(14) As Peter says in 2:4-5 we are Òto be a holy priesthood to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through ChristÉyou are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, GodÕs own people, that you may declare the wonderful deeds of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light.Ó After Vatican II the Pope emphasized Òforcefully the priestly, prophetic and kingly dignity of the entire People of God in the following words: ÔHe who was born of the Virgin Mary, the carpenterÕs Son--as he was thought to be--Son of the living God (confessed by Peter), has come to make us Ôa kingdom of priests.ÕÓ(14)

As part of the priestly office, the laity are called to recognize that all have access to God through Jesus Christ. The ordained priest is not necessary as a conduit to God or Jesus, but has the duty is to prepare laity to receive and hear the word of God for them. All Christians have the ability to read and interpret Scripture with the assistance of the Holy Spirit and the Church community. As prophets, Christians are not expected to foretell the future, but to speak the Word of God. When Jesus spoke about the Kingdom of God (over 100 times), he was not referring to a place, but to the rule of the sovereign God and the response of believers.

As God the king exercises his authority in his world, and people respond to it, there the Ôkingdom of GodÕ will be experienced in many ways. There can be no one place, time event or community which is the Ôkingdom of GodÕ any more than Ôthe will of GodÕ can be tied down to any specific situation or event. ÔThe kingdom of GodÕ is God in saving action, God taking control in his world, or to use our title, Ôdivine government.Õ(Stevens 183)

Laity are called to become regents or representatives of the King and rather than passive believers. They share in ChristÕs mission by discernment, making decisions, and leading other people to a new life in Christ.

This threefold office that includes all Baptized Christians is accomplished with the aid of the Sacraments, beginning with Baptism and continuing with Confirmation. The Eucharist acts as nourishment by Jesus. In order to assist in completing this threefold office, discerning their spiritual gifts (charisms) given abundantly to them by the Holy Spirit is the responsibility of the laity. Whether these gifts are exceptional, simple, or ordinary they need to be utilized for the good of the ecclesiastical community to build up the Church and the rest of humanity. Charisms bring holiness and grace to all those who work in the vineyard and increase spiritual affinity for both those who give and those who receive. The discernment of spiritual gifts is a way to expand ChristÕs ministry in the Church and allow ChristÕs work through the laity in the world.

THEOLOGY FOR THE LAITY

A practical theology focused on the laity and their experiences will assist them in their new role in the Church rather than a systematic theology. In the early church up to the eleventh century theology developed in local communities and monasteries. The latter were centers of the academic, scholarly life of the Church. This early theology was practical, based on practical wisdom, and strengthened by Scripture interpreted by analogy. When the universities were established in the eleventh century, theology became an intellectual endeavor based on Aristotle and speculative science. Thomas Aquinas was prominent in this new type of theology-- which led to systematic theology, an abstract science. Emphasis on theology of this type needs to be redirected to enable laity to embrace a more practical theology able to permeate their whole way of life. Theology for the laity establishes connection between the secular and spiritual. Henri Nouwen expressed it well when he said, Òtheologia is not primarily a way of thinking, but a way of living.Ó (Stevens 15) Paul Stevens suggest that theology for the whole people of God is not watered down or Òputting the cookie jar on the lower shelf,Ó but rather as William Perkins says, Òa science of living blessedly forever.Ó(Stevens 15)

In order to rethink traditional theology, it is necessary to reconsider the issue of vocation and work. This section will focus on these two issues as well as how they have been viewed historically. Briefly, in contemporary culture, vocation is considered as a position in secular society and work is considered more menial and less rewarding. Historically, vocation referred to entering the priesthood or living a special spiritual way of life. It was considered a special calling from God to devote oneÕs life to the Church and to become more spiritual.

In the Old Testament the idea of call was developed in the Church by an early concept of ekklesia meaning Ôan assembly duly summoned.Õ (Stevens 83) God calls and brings a community together, just as he called Israel to be His people. ÒThe word qara means Ôcall out,Õ a summons that implies sovereignty through naming. Naming, however, in Hebrew was not merely attaching Ôa verbal handle,Õ but Ôto be called something was to be somethingÕ. When God called Israel, they ÔbecameÕ his people.Ó (Stevens 83) Some people, like the prophets, were called dramatically, but others, known as the people of God, were summoned to assist in GodÕs plan for the world. ÒIt is a call to salvation, a call to holiness and a call to service.Ó (Stevens 84)

In the New Testament, in addition to being called collectively, believers were also called individually. The rich, the poor, owners, slaves, and even tax collectors were called. Jesus used the call in selecting the twelve Apostles to follow Him and go out to spread His good Word. His call brought people to repentance, to transformation, and to the Kingdom of God.

The New Testament has numerous direct references to the Greek words, kaleo and klesis, which mean to call, or a calling, and vocation. (Stevens 85) PaulÕs letters used language to call people to salvation in Christ. This is the external call felt by people to be called from a source outside them. (Stevens 86) Some feel there is an especially strong call for ministers, pastors, or priests and a general call for all others. It is suggested the call for pastors was an inner call, to be used for the edification of the Church. In the secular world people do not refer to Òbeing calledÓ to a particular job. It is just labeled as work.

What is work and how can it be included as part of a spiritual life? Looking at the ancient Greek world will indicate how work was originally perceived, thus giving insight into todayÕs perception of work and its connection to spirituality. The ancient Greeks used slaves as their manual laborers. All other people considered contemplation and philosophizing to be their function and their station in life. Physical labor was not regarded as highly as contemplation in the ancient Greek world. Later as the Church emphasized preparing for eternity, the status of the contemplative was regarded as higher than that of others.

During the Renaissance there was a resurgence of interest in Greek philosophy, but instead of seeing contemplation as the ultimate goal, the intellect was revered. During the Reformation vocations were considered to be established by God. Martin Luther taught that all human work glorified God, but many continued to view work as worldly and vocation as spiritual.

The Industrial Revolution emphasized recompense for work. People were so isolated from the finished product that their work was disassociated from the satisfaction that comes from completing a task. Both Freud and Marx, in different ways, suggested that work gave meaning to life. Many people in the modern world have assimilated this philosophy and considered work more important than a spiritual calling. Society learned to compartmentalize work and religion by giving priority to work and disregarding spirituality.

In todayÕs society work is a defining element, but with conflicting aspects. Work is considered employment only if people receive payment. Today people must exhibit a number of skills and be able to adapt and change often. No longer is one job pursued for life. Not only have needed skills changed, but so also the workplace. With the computer and advanced communication the primary and secondary workplace can be in the home. This can lead to a stressful situation with little time away from work. There is certainly less physical work today, but in the Western world work has become more pervasive thus allowing less free time. As people age they have begun to visualize retirement as a time of not working at all. This may be an enormous fallacy from a Christian perspective. Whether in retirement or still working, all individuals are ÒÔcitizens of two citiesÕ . . . synthesizing their human, domestic, professional, social, and technical enterprises with religious values.Ó (Leckey 14)

The laity has started to see some of these new possibilities in connection with work. By the changes called for by Vatican II the laity are becoming more involved in Church life. This active participation in ministry in the Church has not, however, evolved into a concern for the daily work produced or for society as a whole. A new theology of work and spirituality based on the everyday experiences of the laity is needed.

Certainly those engaged in providing goods or services that ÔseemÕ to have less intrinsic value and durability will require an occupational conversion to view their work as holy, pleasing to God and worthy of GodÕs Ôit is goodÕ. This, of course, is precisely what a good theology of work must do. Where society does not invest meaning in a task, does not socially reinforce it, this task must be regarded as God does—as part of making GodÕs world work. Intrinsically work is good for us, good for the world and good for God. This is one of the most crucial and most neglected equipping tasks of the church. (Stevens 124)

Leckey thinks there must be more opportunity provided for dialogue and questioning by the laity so the laity can come to a truer meaning of life. If more discussion of work was encouraged inside and outside the Church, it could lead to a merging of the secular and the spiritual. The hidden dimensions of work can bring people closer to God and assist in identifying His calling for them. In Life Together Dietrich Bonhoeffer stresses the importance of work to bring people out of themselves, away from selfishness and self-centeredness. When a person does a task or becomes so involved in a cause that it becomes work for the Lord, and not just for himself or herself, or for his or her limited agenda, then the ÔitÕ or meaning of life changes into and becomes the ÔThouÕ which is God, the source of all fulfillment. (Stevens 125)

A practical theology for the laity will connect everyday experiences, work, and leisure with a lifelong development of Christian faith and practice. As individuals receive and attempt to use such a theology, they will return to a consideration of the role of spiritual gifts in the life of each and every Christian.

SPIRITUAL GIFTS, CHARISMS AND TALENT

Charisms are special gifts given to each believer by the Holy Spirit. In the New Testament the Greek word for charism means ÒfavorÓ or Ògratuitous gift.Ó According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church ÒCharisms or spiritual gifts, are special abilities given to Christians by the Holy Spirit to enable them to be powerful channels of GodÕs love and redeeming presence in the world. Whether extraordinary or ordinary, charisms are to be used in charity or service to build up the Church.Ó (CCC 2003) Spiritual gifts and charisms are used interchangeably, but talent is considered an inherited asset, coming from oneÕs parents. A talent can eventually develop into a charism, but a charism is empowered supernaturally by the Holy Spirit to be used outwardly for the good of the church.

Spiritual gifts are confusing because in Scripture different gifts are listed in different orders with different emphases. The Roman Catholic Church has organized the gifts into two categories. One category has the gifts listed in Isaiah11:2-3 as given for the sanctification of an individual. The Church has designated these as special gifts from the Holy Spirit received at Confirmation. They are: wisdom, understanding, counsel, fortitude, knowledge, piety (godliness), and fear of the Lord. These are believed to be gifts to utilize for personal transformation.

The second category is defined as charisms and to be used in service to others. Listed in Romans 12, 1 Corinthians 12, and Ephesians 4, the gifts can be given and received because of the Holy SpiritÕs involvement. However, ego or expectations of power may overtake a person who has been gifted, causing an imbalance or weakness in the Church community. It is stressed in the Catechism of the Catholic Church that all charisms be subjected to the shepherds or clergy for testing to be sure they work for the good of all. Discovering individual charisms and directing them into ministry is much more challenging than most people realize.

DISCERNMENT

The Catechism of the Catholic Church suggests that discernment of charisms is necessary and must be referred to the ChurchÕs shepherds. No charism is exempt from the scrutiny of the Church. This is done so that each spiritual gift may be aligned with other gifts to insure that the whole ministry works together. All charisms must work toward Òthe common good, be complementary, and in keeping with charity.Ó(CCC 801) Determining those charisms is especially difficult within a democratic society that tends to become embroiled in the process of decision-making and loses sight of true discernment. Thomas Hawkins notes that in a democratic society debating and voting are utilized in meetings to establish direction. Generally people are so involved in debating that they lose sight of what the goals might be. In debate convictions and positions are solidified, sides are taken, and there is less room for compromise. One side wins and all the others are to abide by this new decision. This can lead to less enthusiasm and assistance for the final decision especially on the part of the Òlosers.Ó Thus the traditional win/lose attitude characterized by using parliamentary procedure, RobertÕs Rules of Order and a democratic process negates discernment.

The major emphasis in discernment is a relationship with God: to find God and to discern GodÕs will. This is handled through a process of dialogue rather than debate. Listening to others, encouraging their input and trusting in mutuality and interdependence fosters recognition of the Holy SpiritÕs gifts of holiness and spirituality. Understanding Òthat God operates through calculated inefficiencyÓ means Òthe most unlikely member of the community may possess the critical insight everyone else needs.Ó(Hawkins 36) When people Òlet go,Ó trust God and give up personal control, GodÕs will, through the working of the Holy Spirit, has a chance to direct them.

DiscernmentÕs goal is neither bette