In the Dogmatic Constitution entitled "Lumen gentium" the whole Church is described as the Sacrament of the world’s redemption; in this sense she is God’s People, the Body of Christ and the Temple of the Holy Spirit.

Using this concept one starts from the fundamental equality of all Christians in the redeeming vocation (see also c. 208 CIC) and within this perspective the Church exists as the only existing communio of all believers on the only path to redemption.

Hence it is only within this perspective that the Church’s internal organisation is organised in a ecclesiastic hierarchy and the non-ordained believers providing a variety of services, missions and charismas.

Non-ordained people however are not characterised by being distinct from priests. A non-ordained person is not simply a "non-priest", but the person who God addresses with His Word and through the Sacraments.

The non-ordained believer is a person who through this Word becomes part of the Church and who through his participation in ecclesial and sacramental life is in communion with God. This is not however a refusal of the fundamental distinction between the non-ordained and priesthood as during the Reformation. They are categorised because of different levels of Christianity. On the contrary, priests are Christians who, although equal regards to their personal paths to personal redemption, have received from Christ through their consecration a special assignment and an authorised mission that are constitutive for Church’s entire life.

For the time being the Pauline image of the Body of Christ is referred to, with its many limbs that - according to charismas bestowed by the Holy Spirit - provide the many different services through which the Church is structured (see Rm 12; 1 Cor 12). And so priesthood too is a charisma bestowed by Christ, Lord of the Church, and by the Holy Spirit, the Church’s dispenser of life.

This is not however a gratuitous charisma, in which the grace of the Spirit, bestowed in Baptism, is rendered fruitful specifically for the creation of the Church, but rather a mission deeply rooted in the apostles’ vocation to build the Church (Eph, 4,11), implemented thanks to the power of the Spirit (see 2 Cor 5, 20; 2 Tm 1,6).

This was the reason for which the Council did not intend to place priesthood on an equal level in the doctrine concerning charismas. Hence there is the principle that the Church is a community of believers; each believer, thanks to faith and Baptism, is called to a direct relationship with God, a relationship however freely transmitted through the incarnation of grace in Jesus Christ and expressed and fulfilled in the Church’s sacramental life. The immediacy of the relationship between God and the believers is not conflicting with the mediation through the man Jesus and the ecclesial and sacramental implementation of redemption, but is historically and socially achieved in this relationship.

Each Christian, as a limb of Christ’s Body, has a special task to be carried out at the service of the entirety. The Church’s life cannot therefore be restricted to the activities of ordained priests. The service of all believers is in fact necessary for the life and edification of the Church. This does not mean at all that priesthood should be considered as one of the community’s services or as a common charisma among others.

Priesthood in fact is a personal fulfilment of the Church’s sacramental essence. This specific service does not derive from the overall gift the Holy Spirit bestows with Baptism and through a belonging to the Church and its specification within the Church’s life in general. This office originates in a personal initiative taken by Christ for His Church. The Christian, who is already baptised and a member of the Church, is empowered to render a particular service, he is called upon to fulfil it and appointed to render it. This service consists in representing and rendering topical its Head, Jesus Christ, within the Church’s general institution.

"Instruction on a number of issues concerning cooperation by the non-ordained faithful in the ministry of priests"

This intra-department document, therefore the result of various Roman departments, published on August 15^th 1997, immediately resulted in a strong reaction in Germany from the President of the Central Catholic Committee (ZdK), who spoke of "a dark day for laity".

As often happens nowadays in Germany, the press influenced the opinions of many so-called important Catholics, both non-ordained persons and priests.

Those who instead approached the study of this Instruction from a theological point of view cannot understand how this already boring and ritual "indignation" regards to anything coming from "Rome" could possible be linked to this document.

Perhaps it is the result of a widespread trend, present for sometime now among groups of ‘insiders’, to place their understanding of religious subjects beyond all theological assessments. If any ecclesial office, that of a priest, of a deacon, of a Pastoral and fully committed helper in the care of souls and evangelisation, is considered and implemented as a real service to humankind rendered in the name of Jesus Christ, other criteria such as prestige and power, the defence of property and pressure group battles for important appointments basically appear as anti-clerical. The Instruction’s objective is concrete and restricted: it clarifies of a number of issues concerning "new forms for pastoral care provided by non-ordained people within parishes and Dioceses" (see no. 8)

This document is not an exhaustive ecclesiological statement, but one however that is based on and referred to documents from the Second Vatican Council, a number of Synods of Bishops and a few of the Popes Teachings.

The Instruction consists in two parts:

1. Theological principles (addressing the following subjects: The common priesthood of the faithful and Ministerial Priesthood; Unity and Diversity of Ministerial Functions; the Indispensability of the Ordained ministry; and the Cooperation of the Non-Ordained faithful in the Pastoral Ministry)

2. Practical Provisions.

Part One contains absolutely nothing different from the ecclesiology of the Second Vatican Council, renewed by the Holy Scriptures and Patristics. The mission shared by the entire Church is once again emphasised, as well as her participation in Christ’s priestly, regal and prophetic function. The Instruction specifically celebrates the overcoming of a vision of the Church linked above all to the clergy, also eliminating the misunderstanding – made by some – according to which cooperation of those non-ordained is only achievable by assuming tasks that, following the Catholic school of thought, can only be fulfilled by those Christians who have received their mission in the Sacrament of Holy Orders and through power bestowed by Jesus Christ through the Holy Spirit.

If the main services provided by the non-ordained could only acquire meaning if competing with ordained priesthood, this would involve admitting that the apostolate of the non-ordained is without an ecclesiological basis of its own.

What is fundamental within this context and what is presented as the prime request, is not only a Theology of the non-ordained apostolate, but also an autonomous Theology of pastoral services provided by the non-ordained provided full-time, on the basis of Baptism, Confirmation and in many cases also the Sacrament of Marriage, as well as of their mission and tasks through the Bishop.

Important preliminary work has already taken place, although conceptually and emotionally not yet accepted. However, here in Germany, the at times dramatic competition between candidates to priesthood and non-ordained theologians, parish priests/chaplains and helpers, should be overcome with the help of in-depth theological meditations on the unity and particularity of services and offices; otherwise that internal and external schism that many correctly fear.

Part Two of the Instruction extensively addresses specific individual practical problems. A theological interpretation of the text clearly indicates a degree of imbalance compared to Part One, especially in the more apologetic style of the reasoning and also due to the extremely disciplined language used. This language, less addressed at understanding than at obeying the provisions has caused a degree of perplexity also in those who have read this document without "anti-Roman sentiments". Perhaps the Instruction presupposes with excessive optimism widespread reception of the Council’s statements on the Church, the Sacrament of Holy Orders and the apostolate of non-ordained people while too naturally starting from a classification of canon laws in ecclesiological systematics. The sermon during Eucharistic celebrations could be used as an example. In practice the exhaustive systematic approach to priesthood expressed in "Lumen gentium" and the "Presbyterotum ordinis" regards to serving the Word is totally ignored.

Many also still believe that a priest’s specificity consists in the power of consecration and absolution, isolated from the overall fulfilment of the redeeming mission and the Church’s liturgy. The liturgical constitution instead states that the Eucharist represents a single act of faith in the Word and in giving thanks (Sacrosanctum concilium, no. 58). Hence it becomes clear that the priest, representing Christ, the Head of the Church (Presbyterorum ordinis, no. 2), is the Apostolic announcer of the Word and of its ‘condensation’, precisely in the Eucharistic words pronounced regards to the gifts of the bread and the wine.

The affinity between the sacramental announcement of the Word and giving thanks (eucharistein) comes from the ratio of this Sacrament. It is not motivated by an unjustified reference to the "privileges of a priestly caste" as controversially debated by public opinion.

The invective arising from the Instruction should not become entangled in individual issues – although it is true that the justness of principles must be really manifested.

This often unpleasant debate could instead provide an opportunity for a more widespread acceptance of the general ecclesiological concepts of the Second Vatican Council.

The Council is present in a general but very vague sense. I believe instead that its overall religious and theological effect on the current Church’s faith is still extremely valid today, even 33 years after its conclusion.